1979 value of 1967 Topps Brooks Robinson

[zljones]

I have obtained some old "Sports Card Americana" price guides by James G. Beckett from between 1979-1995. I have been doing my own personal research on the history of baseball card valuation, and I came across something puzzling, the 1967 Topps Brooks Robinson card had an HBV of $50 making it the most valuable 1960s card back in the 1979 issue #1 of "Sports Card Americana." It far surpassed any 60s Mickey Mantle cards which were only worth about $25-$30 back in 79.
My question is to anyone that collected back in the late 70s, why was the 1967 Topps Brooks Robinson so sought after in 1979 above all other 1960-1969 Topps cards? He was retired by 1977 and made the HOF in 1983 so I am puzzled about why this card was so hot in 1979?

[toppcat]

It was thought at the time the Brooks card was severely short printed and being in an already difficult high number series (67's are one of the tougher ones) it skewed the price. The card is NOT short printed though and while I am not certain of the current price, it would be well off the premium it used to carry.

[zljones]

Originally Posted by toppcat

It was thought at the time the Brooks card was severely short printed and being in an already difficult high number series (67's are one of the tougher ones) it skewed the price. The card is NOT short printed though and while I am not certain of the current price, it would be well off the premium it used to carry.

Excellent thanks Dave for that piece of info it helps with my personal research on old values. The HBV nowadays for that card is $250, so I got confused thanks for clearing that up

[ALR-bishop]

Like Dave, I can remember reading about the supposed scarcity of the card and I think that drove many sales of the card at higher prices for some time. Sort of like the Bass boys cornering the market in silver

[zljones]

Yea I also noticed that the 1957 Topps Sandy Koufax card was a big deal back then as well, nowadays it does not seem to have any major significance over the other 50s card.

[GasHouseGang]

Another card from back then that was "hot" was the 1966 Gaylord Perry. It is a high number and is short printed but I think it was being sold for more back then than it is now. I remember seeing it at one of the Nationals for several hundred dollars back in the early 1980's.

[steve B]

Back then there was also a bigger fluctuation between retirement and HOF election. As the player approached retirement there was a bit of a surge as people gathered rookies and other cards thought to be particularly difficult. Then a drop off after retirement, usually about 3 years of decline. Then 2 years of sizeable increase anticipating election. The more likely someone was to be a first year electee, the bigger the runup. Especially if they were well liked. Then a predictable dropoff about a year after election once the publicity died down.

There were similar price bumps around landmark events, 400HR, 3000 hits.

I was never organized enough, but a HS friend made some decent money buying particular cards in bulk during the lulls,and selling during the upswing.

Todays publicity makes stuff like that much harder, the landmarks are expected and anticipated for years, and HOF election doesn't carry quite the impact it once did.

For bigger fun, try to track regional pricing, another aspect of the pricing that's greatly diminished.

Steve B

[vintagechris]

I recently read in an old SCD about the Brooks Robinson card. The SCD was from 1979 or 1980. I forget what exactly it said, but everyone thought it was rare and there were buy ads for $25 each.

To me it seems like there was just more assumed scarcity for issues. One writer wrote every issue about how he couldn't find any 1935 National Chicle FB cards.

There for awhile, 1980 Topps Super cards were considered rare as well. I got a chuckle out of that one.

[sox1903wschamp]

That 67 Brooks was hyped severely in 79 and 80. And because of the hype, they were coming out of the woodwork. I was at a show in St.Louis in April of 1980 and they had "instant auctions" for walk in material and this card was auctioned several times that weekend. I was thinking it can't be that scarce.....

Other over valued cards at the time relative to the rest of the set was the 72 Carew and Garvey and the 70 Bench. The woodwork has taken care of bringing the values down relative to cards in those respective sets.

[zljones]

Originally Posted by sox1903wschamp

That 67 Brooks was hyped severely in 79 and 80. And because of the hype, they were coming out of the woodwork. I was at a show in St.Louis in April of 1980 and they had "instant auctions" for walk in material and this card was auctioned several times that weekend. I was thinking it can't be that scarce.....

Other over valued cards at the time relative to the rest of the set was the 72 Carew and Garvey and the 70 Bench. The woodwork has taken care of bringing the values down relative to cards in those respective sets.

Thanks for that detailed account. That helps my understanding greatly.

[Mark70Z]

To me the internet changed a whole lot about collecting. I was a Brooksie collector back then (still am...) and everything you purchased was through personal contacts and ads in magazines. As it was stated it was thought that the '67 card was hard to find and it drove up the price. Now you can view this particular card, in all variety of conditions, daily.

[U240robert]

I agree with the above, I collected back then and remember clearly the '67 Robinson being very expensive, for the times.
I also remember how valuable the Garvey Rookie, Carew/Garvey '72 Topps high numbers were. On the flip side, it wasn't until the late 1980's before Nolan Ryans cards really took off. In the 70's his cards were normal star/to above common prices.
I still have the very first Beckett/Eckes Price guide- one of my favorite reads when I was a kid. The book nearly doubled in size in one year !

[zljones]

Originally Posted by U240robert

I agree with the above, I collected back then and remember clearly the '67 Robinson being very expensive, for the times.
I also remember how valuable the Garvey Rookie, Carew/Garvey '72 Topps high numbers were. On the flip side, it wasn't until the late 1980's before Nolan Ryans cards really took off. In the 70's his cards were normal star/to above common prices.
I still have the very first Beckett/Eckes Price guide- one of my favorite reads when I was a kid. The book nearly doubled in size in one year !

I have the first and second issue and yes it totally exploded from 1 year to the next. I have the third one too from 1981 and the prices fell pretty bad because of the early 80s recession.

[parkerj33]

As an 11 yr old kid in 1979 who happened to obtain a 72 collection from a neighbor, i was delighted at the perceived rarity of the 72 carew and garvey. they were super hot, and the 67 brooks had legendary status, along with the 70 bench. I don't recall anything else from the 60s/70s being in that ballpark. I am glad now that they are not so legendary as i can add them to my collection reasonably....almost as cheaply as they were back in early 80s. especially considering what passed for mt back then was anything psa7 or above today.

[zljones]

Yes according to my old price guides I have the 70 Bench was the most valuable 70s card. I also noticed there was a demand for the 57 topps sandy Koufax.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by zljones

Yes according to my old price guides I have the 70 Bench was the most valuable 70s card. I also noticed there was a demand for the 57 topps sandy Koufax.

The 1970 Bench was thought of as quite valuable even in 1970 by us kids. Even with the Mets winning and having all their cards in the 70 set, on Long Island the card everybody wanted was Bench. I even remember my father talking about it at the time. I have to think now there was some kind of news story about it but I can't say for sure.

[Rich Klein]

was Card Collectors Company had a warehouse fire and for whatever reason a ton of the 70 Benches were destroyed in that fire (or water damaged). While other cards may have had similar issues, the Bench was the most in demand of those cards

As for the SCD article on Brooksie, iIRC Gary Sawatski and his then partner in the business Duane Scrhoen (sic) had sorted 5,000 or more 67's without finding ONE of those cards.

You do have to remember that in 1979 Bench was among the leading superstars in the game and Brooks had just retired and was beloved.

Plus, both players were World Series heroes in the days when being a World Series hero may have been the only 90 percent of the country saw you play

So, those cards being tougher cards in tough series were thus being not only sought after by collectors but also being kept by both advance and not so advanced collectors

Growing up in NY, we had tons of baseball to watch in the 70's on free TV and the games of the week as well. But if you grew up in a city like LA, I believe the only Dodgers games televised were Sunday road games and all the National games. And in cities without major league teams, probably less games to see as well.

Rich

[jchcollins]

Sorry again to resurrect an old thread, but I do that from time to time...

This was intriguing to me, as I recently picked up my first '67 high number - which turned out to be #600 Brooks Robinson. (Mine is o/c and has a rough cut but otherwise nice...an SGC 5.5).

I knew there was a story behind this card and perceived scarcity before I decided to go after the '67 set, but did not know the details...interesting. Makes me think of my own childhood in the 80's and which older cards had "legendary" status. When I first started collecting it was anything older than about 1985...for some reason I remember the '85 Pete Rose regular issue card having that status among my friends - guessing due to all of the hype around him finally breaking Cobb's record.

Anyhow just interesting to see that even when a card was not particularly "old" (the '67 Robinson was all of 12 in 1979) what rarity and perceived difficulty to obtain can do for it. Even if it wasn't true for the Robinson card in the end - it's this kind of stuff about the hobby that I have always found fascinating.

[darkhorse9]

I can absolutely confirm that the Brooks Robinson card was the key card in that set. At that time the full set was selling for about $70, however. I know that because that's what I paid for my set.

[rats60]

As a kid, we could not find 1967 High Numbers. Brooks Robinson was the biggest star in the series coming off the 1966 World Series championship. He was the key card in the set until rookie cards took off. There was a time when the multiplayer rookie cards were disliked, so Seavers and Carews were not chased after. I bought mine as commons.

The same for Bench. He was the key card in the 1970 set. That was his first MVP year and the Big Red Machine was hot. Today we chase rookie cards and star cards are almost an afterthought. When these cards were released and in the decade after, star cards were what people chased after. Today set collecting is not popular, so despite the relative rarity, the demand is low.

[toppcat]

The 70 Bench was the hottest card among my collecting group of friends on Long Island in 1970-everybody wanted that card. It's certainly possible a bunch got singed in the now infamous CCC fire of 1973 (imagine what some cards/sets values would be like if it never happened!) but I recall it always in demand from the minute it came out. In fact, his AS card that year was hot too because Topps saved the regular card for the high numbers.

[mrmopar]

I also remember the 72 Garvey used to be much more expensive than his rookie. I don't recall how high it got (maybe $50-60 or more?) but that has evened out over time now.