OT but front page worthy Jordan card ebay

[MattyC]

Or, through the design of many variations, they are creating a layered and engaging collecting endeavor— for those who like to chase and assemble sets (i.e., Topps Heritage).

To try and say collecting ad backs or color runs of PreWar is somehow intrinsically superior to doing the same with modern is flat out wrong.

[PowderedH2O]

I collect mostly vintage, but I grab new stuff here and there. The NBA doesn't have 150 years of history. It started in the 1940's, and there were only three major sets issued before 1969. What early rare cards is the basketball collector supposed to chase once they have completed the Big 3? For a person with deep pockets, where do you go? The 1970's? Easy to complete. 1980's? If you jumped in early, those aren't that difficult either. These rare inserts are the only truly tough cards out there. The investor here is thinking that extreme rarity combined with a sure thing like Michael Jordan is this generation's T206 Wagner... except that 320,000,000 Americans know who Michael Jordan is, and probably less than 5 million know who Honus Wagner is.

Not my cup of tea, but if someone has the cash and they want to sink that kind of money into the hobby, by all means do it!

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Or, through the design of many variations, they are creating a layered and engaging collecting endeavor— for those who like to chase and assemble sets (i.e., Topps Heritage).

To try and say collecting ad backs or color runs of PreWar is somehow intrinsically superior to doing the same with modern is flat out wrong.

A layered and engaging collecting endeavor? That’s rich.

Yes, modern brands are manufacturing rarity for the sole purpose of creating “a layered and engaging experience” for the collecting purists like yourself who simply value the cards with no regard to value.

Do you honestly believe that?

I’m not even saying it’s better or worse than vintage back runs it color runs. Those are your words. But let’s call it what it is. The marketing objectives of 1930s Goudey and 2019 Topps are very different.

[Snapolit1]

People can collect whatever they want. Years ago I had friends loading up on limited edition Thomas Kincaid paintings. Made them happy. Today they ain't worth diddly squat. Does that make them stupid? No. If they spent their kids college money on them believing it was a good investment, does that make them smart. Uh, no.

I enjoy buying modern cards. Two or three times a year I buy a big ass box of a new release and enjoying going through them. Usually at the card store there are bunch of "kids" (i.e., guys in their 30s) ripping open boxes and flinging cards into a garbage can trying to find one or two special added relic or autograph cards. Don't strike me as "collectors" as the term is used on this board.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

A layered and engaging collecting endeavor? That’s rich.

Yes, modern brands are manufacturing rarity for the sole purpose of creating “a layered and engaging experience” for the collecting purists like yourself who simply value the cards with no regard to value.

Do you honestly believe that?

I’m not even saying it’s better or worse than vintage back runs it color runs. Those are your words. But let’s call it what it is. The marketing objectives of 1930s Goudey and 2019 Topps are very different.

When I was a kid collecting Topps I never had trouble "engaging" when there were only base cards, not multiple levels of inserts, parallels, what have you.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

When I was a kid collecting Topps I never had trouble "engaging" when there were only base cards, not multiple levels of inserts, parallels, what have you.

Well you know as well as I know that the kids of today are nothing like the kids of yesterday and the day before. As a kid ripping packs open the cards had relatively no value at that time it was only the older cards that had any value. We ripped packs to try to complete the set and to collect our favorite team and players.

The lottery mentality started in the late 80s early 90s and now it has been taken to the nth degree just like the kids of today. The hobby is now a hobby for adults for the most part!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Well you know as well as I know that the kids of today are nothing like the kids of yesterday and the day before. As a kid ripping packs open the cards had relatively no value at that time it was only the older cards that had any value. We ripped packs to try to complete the set and to collect our favorite team and players.

The lottery mentality started in the late 80s early 90s and now it has been taken to the nth degree just like the kids of today. The hobby is now a hobby for adults for the most part!

And that's my point. I don't think with due respect to Matt that the point of all the million inserts and parallels is to make collecting more interesting, it's about artificially creating and chasing value. Collecting was plenty interesting with your 598 or whatever card base set.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Collecting was plenty interesting with your 598 or whatever card base set.

How many television channels did you have? How about video games? The internet?
Sure, Topps produces way too many different sets (actually they have to in their contract with the MLB), but your childhood was a lot different than the kids growing up today. One set of 600 cards is boring, and a sure way to kill off the collecting vibe.
But they do make sets like Opening Day for just this reason; inexpensive ways for kids to collect. In the past year, I've donated 10,000 cards (sports/nonsports) from the 80s to 2018 to my wife's school kids, and they're thrilled with them. They're from a rural area and probably can't afford them, and it's a good way for me to clean out the clutter from the one or two collections I buy a year.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by swarmee

How many television channels did you have? How about video games? The internet?
Sure, Topps produces way too many different sets (actually they have to in their contract with the MLB), but your childhood was a lot different than the kids growing up today. One set of 600 cards is boring, and a sure way to kill off the collecting vibe.
But they do make sets like Opening Day for just this reason; inexpensive ways for kids to collect. In the past year, I've donated 10,000 cards (sports/nonsports) from the 80s to 2018 to my wife's school kids, and they're thrilled with them. They're from a rural area and probably can't afford them, and it's a good way for me to clean out the clutter from the one or two collections I buy a year.

Sometimes less is more. As for TV, more channels meaning more and more time spent in front of it (and of course the omnipresent devices) is not in my opinion a good thing at all. Kids growing up today are way too tech dependent for the most part. Every day I see groups of them but instead of engaging with each other each and every one of them is staring into their device. It's absurd.

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

When I was a kid collecting Topps I never had trouble "engaging" when there were only base cards, not multiple levels of inserts, parallels, what have you.

I agree 100% with this. Personally, I loved collecting when it was simpler. But in the past year I bought a couple boxes of Topps Heritage, and it was awesome. I thought the cards were beautiful. I didn’t get any “hits” though, and that wasn’t my primary motivation. But my belief is that Topps’ bullseye consumer is not me, the passive collector, but the dudes Steve describes who are breaking cases to try to hit it big. The sponsored case breaks at the National are not a celebration of set building.

[Orioles1954]

There are a lot of neat and affordable products in the $40-50 range that feature several retired players. These sets usually deliver close to a set, an autograph and/or a relic card per, parallels, etc. While base set collecting is clearly dying, I've seen an uptick in player collecting, prospecting, insert set collecting, etc. There are several new ways to collect and that's awesome. I'm also witnessing a lot of diversity in these collectors. Several are STARTING as late teenagers and young professionals. I've personally witnessed an uptick in female buyers and people of color. These folks have an appreciation for the past and could definitely dabble in vintage in the future.

[mark evans]

Another difference, although this is pure speculation, is that the new rarities are more likely to depreciate in value than the old rarities. There are a zillion different Jordan cards. How meaningful will these green cards be 50 years from now? Not so many Lajoies, although the old cards could take a hit as well once the baby boomers move on.

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

A layered and engaging collecting endeavor? That’s rich.

Yes, modern brands are manufacturing rarity for the sole purpose of creating “a layered and engaging experience” for the collecting purists like yourself who simply value the cards with no regard to value.

Do you honestly believe that?

I’m not even saying it’s better or worse than vintage back runs it color runs. Those are your words. But let’s call it what it is. The marketing objectives of 1930s Goudey and 2019 Topps are very different.

What’s “rich” is your post claiming a “huge difference,” when all you did was highlight a similarity: companies trying to make cards that will sell. And your beloved Mr. Goudey targeting kids’ 1930’s pennies is somehow supposed to put the cards you like on some pedestal? Your alleged target audience for the two is different, yet the underlying motivation is by your own words a similarity. That said, the children I know who enjoy opening packs would seem to explode your exclusive middle aged men theory. There can be more than one target audience. You even admitted you opened Heritage in just the manner I am referencing.

Your posts above are both presumptuous and reductive; Topps certainly knows that while indeed there are buyers out there looking for an eBay flip, there are also collectors of all ages who do enjoy hunting for myriad variations— knowing full well that the Heritage Throwback semi-star they pulled yet desired for their set won’t be worth a dime down the line. Point being that it is highly presumptuous to claim you know why everyone is buying (for a “Lotto” ticket). The set design in that respect is layered and designed to engage the collector beyond the base cards; much in the same way some video games are layered to engage the player in multiple tasks, for example.

What is the endgame here? You want everyone to collect Gehringer or mid grade t206’s or whatever you collect? Sorry, but people are going to have different tastes no matter how hard some try and slight what they like. And — gasp— some of us will take home an e90-1 Shoeless and a Bryce Harper or Kershaw.

Last time I checked, all the cards in the hobby weren’t pitted against each other in some absurd battle; the collectors of them shouldn’t be either.

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by MattyC

What’s “rich” is your post claiming a “huge difference,” when all you did was highlight a similarity: companies trying to make cards that will sell. And your beloved Mr. Goudey targeting kids’ 1930’s pennies is somehow supposed to put the cards you like on some pedestal? Your alleged target audience for the two is different, yet the underlying motivation is by your own words a similarity. That said, the children I know who enjoy opening packs would seem to explode your exclusive middle aged men theory. There can be more than one target audience. You even admitted you opened Heritage in just the manner I am referencing.

Your posts above are both presumptuous and reductive; Topps certainly knows that while indeed there are buyers out there looking for an eBay flip, there are also collectors of all ages who do enjoy hunting for myriad variations— knowing full well that the Heritage Throwback semi-star they pulled yet desired for their set won’t be worth a dime down the line. Point being that it is highly presumptuous to claim you know why everyone is buying (for a “Lotto” ticket). The set design in that respect is layered and designed to engage the collector beyond the base cards; much in the same way some video games are layered to engage the player in multiple tasks, for example.

What is the endgame here? You want everyone to collect Gehringer or mid grade t206’s or whatever you collect? Sorry, but people are going to have different tastes no matter how hard some try and slight what they like.

Endgame?

I don’t have one. I don’t give two sh*ts what other people collect. In fact, I would MUCH rather the big money go into modern than vintage. I’d rather not compete with the well-heeled fellow who has $600k to spend on a Purple Raspberry Platinum Refractor Jordan.

My argument is that the comparison between the manufactured scarcity of Goudey and 2019 Topps has different underlying drivers. Yes, both efforts are about selling more cards, but one was about driving kids to try complete a set (in vein); the other is about selling the promise of an instantly valuable “hit.” I’m saying this based on factual observations without assigning any value judgement. I’m not criticizing Topps or their consumers.

And yet your precious sensibilities are still offended.

We get it, Matty. You love your Aaron Judges and Gregg Jeffries just as much as your mid-grade centered Mantles. The purity of collecting is heavenly. It warms the heart. You feel like you must be the holy defender of all things modern.

But if you believe that Topps’ manufactured scarcity is only driven by a desire to make set collecting more “layered” and “fun,” you’re believing in a fiction on par with a Rambo sequel.

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

But if you believe that Topps’ manufactured scarcity is only driven by a desire to make set collecting more “layered” and “fun,” you’re believing in a fiction on par with a Rambo sequel.

From Peck & Snyder to Old Judge to ATC to Goudey and Topps/Bowman the common denominator is marketing and money.. Otherwise, why bother? Modern is growing and pre-war is shrinking. Collectors should be hoping that the modern hobby continues to surge.

[Bored5000]

i am mostly a vintage collector, but I still don't get the stance on here that vintage manufactured rarities were somehow pure and good and honest, while the same thing in the modern hobby is horrible.

Modern collectors know what the deal is in that the chances are extremely slim of hitting a big money chase card. Collectors 80-90 years ago did not realize they were getting scammed into continually buying product in a near futile attempt to complete the set.

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by Bored5000

i am mostly a vintage collector, but I still don't get the stance on here that vintage manufactured rarities were somehow pure and good and honest, while the same thing in the modern hobby is horrible.

Modern collectors know what the deal is in that the chances are extremely slim of hitting a big money chase card. Collectors 80-90 years ago did not realize they were getting scammed into continually buying product in a near futile attempt to complete the set.

Absolutely correct. The 1933 Goudey set is a prime example of a gum manufacturer scamming their customers. At least modern companies give odds!

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by Bored5000

i am mostly a vintage collector, but I still don't get the stance on here that vintage manufactured rarities were somehow pure and good and honest, while the same thing in the modern hobby is horrible.

Modern collectors know what the deal is in that the chances are extremely slim of hitting a big money chase card. Collectors 80-90 years ago did not realize they were getting scammed into continually buying product in a near futile attempt to complete the set.

Oh I agree with you. I think what Goudey did was downright deceitful. At least Topps has the odds of finding hits on their box, much like the odds you see when playing McDonald’s Monopoly or a scratch-off.

The problem with this site is some folks try to make statements and other dudes read into them and assign value judgements to them. I don’t remember anyone arguing that one was good and honest and one was horrible. My personal argument was that they were motivated by different underlying dynamics, and therefore, not directly comparable.