Determining what is vintage

[wdwfan]

I've always considered Ts all the way to Goudeys in their own individual category, and I've always though of 50s-75 as vintage. However, now that I'm only collecting "vintage" I am thinking that 50s-65 should be vintage. I know everything until 73 was in series. But commons from like 66-75 (the end of what I used to consider vintage) are next to worthless. You can get them for like 10 cents apiece nowadays.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by wdwfan

I've always considered Ts all the way to Goudeys in their own individual category, and I've always though of 50s-75 as vintage. However, now that I'm only collecting "vintage" I am thinking that 50s-65 should be vintage. I know everything until 73 was in series. But commons from like 66-75 (the end of what I used to consider vintage) are next to worthless. You can get them for like 10 cents apiece nowadays.

Can you get common high number cards from 1966 and 1967 for 10 cents each?

[wdwfan]

No. I never said anywhere I could get high #s for that. I can get commons for that. High #s aren't considered commons, or at least I don't think they would be considered that.

Originally Posted by rats60

Can you get common high number cards from 1966 and 1967 for 10 cents each?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by wdwfan

No. I never said anywhere I could get high #s for that. I can get commons for that. High #s aren't considered commons, or at least I don't think they would be considered that.

They are common players. I find it odd your cutoff. I always found 1964 and 1965 much easier than 1966 and 1967. 1968-73 seemed even more plentiful. By the time you get to 1974, you can buy nice sets under 200.00 and I don't ever see much appreciation.

[wdwfan]

Yes, I put together a 1974 Topps set in probably Ex to NM condition for the most part. After I completed it, I checked to see what I could get a set for in the same condition. They were selling for $90-$110. I spent $80 to get all the cards but 3 in 2 big lots. Then I traded for the Ryan, Winfield and Aaron. So, I spent $80 and a couple of months putting it together when I could've spent $15 more and just bought it outright.

After I saw the values, I decided to break it up because I thought it just wouldn't hold value over time. I've the stars put away (for now) and am trading all the other HOFers, commons, teams, rookies, whatever for late 1950s-early 1960s stuff. That's where I think I"m going to concentrate my collection on and not so much into the early 1970s.

Originally Posted by rats60

They are common players. I find it odd your cutoff. I always found 1964 and 1965 much easier than 1966 and 1967. 1968-73 seemed even more plentiful. By the time you get to 1974, you can buy nice sets under 200.00 and I don't ever see much appreciation.

[seanofjapan]

You should compare this with other collecting hobbies.

In the coin collecting world, the Roman emperor Constantine produced a ton of debased coins of himself which survive to this day and you can buy them in bulk for a couple of bucks each.

They are kind of the coin collecting world's version of "junk wax". But they are 1700 years old.

So time is relative! 1700 years from now if our civilization still exists, 1988 Donruss cards still won't be considered vintage!

[ALR-bishop]

That one was easy If a year does not define it, what does ?

What defines it for coins ?

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by rats60

They are common players. I find it odd your cutoff. I always found 1964 and 1965 much easier than 1966 and 1967. 1968-73 seemed even more plentiful. By the time you get to 1974, you can buy nice sets under 200.00 and I don't ever see much appreciation.

The hi #'s are pretty easy on a relative basis in 1965 and yes 64 is much easier than 66 or 67 Short Prints.

70 and 72 Hi #'s are more popular than 68, 69 or 71.

But to me, a hidden scarcity in filling the 65 sets are the 284-370 series, those are always harder than the hi #'s in that year

Rich

[GasHouseGang]

I think in my own mind, I always considered something vintage that came out before I started actively collecting! Stupid? Yeah, probably. But that's the way a kid looks at things I guess. So anything before 1974 was "vintage" for me growing up.