OT but front page worthy Jordan card ebay

[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!

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

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

Only because NY state forced them to by declaring a card pack to be a lottery.

And many get around the "odds" by having it be the overall odds, or just saying the odds of the non- numbered cards.

[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.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Yeah who said anything favorable about short prints or skip numbering? Different -- not trying to create value -- not superior.

But I still don't see why intentionally making a few green copies of a card makes it so desirable.

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

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.

As someone who works full-time in the hobby and has collected everything, I've noticed a sense of arrogance among some vintage collectors who often mock and demean the modern side of the hobby. It's particularly troublesome because most "shiny card" collectors are very respectful of vintage. Fortunately, I'm seeing less of this arrogance as the years go on.

[orly57]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

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.

I’ve watched kids in card shops and card shows rip open a pack, flip through the cards, and throw away the entire contents of the pack just because there was no autographed, diamond encrusted, jersey card with MLB logo on it. It appears to me that these hidden inserts have become the entire hobby, and base cards are just pack-filler. I think this difference alone is enough to put the Goudey comparison to rest. One sleezy gum company completely left a card out of a set 85 years ago. No one here is saying that’s ok, but I don’t see how it relates to the current state of modern cards. Those kids bought more packs in efforts to complete their sets, not in search of a 1/1 card that they hoped would pay for college. At worse, they ended up with a duplicate and a fresh piece of gum. The motivations of the collectors were far different, irrespective of the motivation of the card company, which is always money.

I think this Jordan card is particularly annoying to the vintage collector because there doesn’t seem to be anything really special about the card other than rarity. It’s not a rookie, or even an early Jordan card. It’s not from an all-time set. It’s not autographed. It’s not some spectacular image. It’s just a card that a company printed 10 of. That’s it. You can’t blame a collector for imagining all of the amazing cards they could buy with that money, and being stunned that someone would spend it on this rare, if unspectacular Jordan card. I’m sure that vintage guys grumble when an LBJ rookie sells for crazy money, but they will usually conceed that a 1/1 LBJ rookie is a special card. This Jordan just leaves some heads scratching.

[Hxcmilkshake]

Originally Posted by orly57

I’ve watched kids in card shops and card shows rip open a pack, flip through the cards, and throw away the entire contents of the pack just because there was no autographed, diamond encrusted, jersey card with MLB logo on it. It appears to me that these hidden inserts have become the entire hobby, and base cards are just pack-filler. I think this difference alone is enough to put the Goudey comparison to rest. One sleezy gum company completely left a card out of a set 85 years ago. No one here is saying that’s ok, but I don’t see how it relates to the current state of modern cards. Those kids bought more packs in efforts to complete their sets, not in search of a 1/1 card that they hoped would pay for college. At worse, they ended up with a duplicate and a fresh piece of gum. The motivations of the collectors were far different, irrespective of the motivation of the card company, which is always money.



I think this Jordan card is particularly annoying to the vintage collector because there doesn’t seem to be anything really special about the card other than rarity. It’s not a rookie, or even an early Jordan card. It’s not from an all-time set. It’s not autographed. It’s not some spectacular image. It’s just a card that a company printed 10 of. That’s it. You can’t blame a collector for imagining all of the amazing cards they could buy with that money, and being stunned that someone would spend it on this rare, if unspectacular Jordan card. I’m sure that vintage guys grumble when an LBJ rookie sells for crazy money, but they will usually conceed that a 1/1 LBJ rookie is a special card. This Jordan just leaves some heads scratching.

Idk. PMG green has turned out to be a Holy Grail set. It sometimes works that way in cards.

More crazy to me is $1000 for a Vlad Jr auto card . Could be in a semi star/common box like his dad in 5 yrs!!!


Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Yastrzemski Sports]

I’d like to find that common box. Vlad sr didn’t have a major league rookie auto but his rookie Refractor rarely sells under $300.

Originally Posted by Hxcmilkshake

Idk. PMG green has turned out to be a Holy Grail set. It sometimes works that way in cards.

More crazy to me is $1000 for a Vlad Jr auto card . Could be in a semi star/common box like his dad in 5 yrs!!!


Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by orly57

I’ve watched kids in card shops and card shows rip open a pack, flip through the cards, and throw away the entire contents of the pack just because there was no autographed, diamond encrusted, jersey card with MLB logo on it. It appears to me that these hidden inserts have become the entire hobby, and base cards are just pack-filler. I think this difference alone is enough to put the Goudey comparison to rest. One sleezy gum company completely left a card out of a set 85 years ago. No one here is saying that’s ok, but I don’t see how it relates to the current state of modern cards. Those kids bought more packs in efforts to complete their sets, not in search of a 1/1 card that they hoped would pay for college. At worse, they ended up with a duplicate and a fresh piece of gum. The motivations of the collectors were far different, irrespective of the motivation of the card company, which is always money.

I think this Jordan card is particularly annoying to the vintage collector because there doesn’t seem to be anything really special about the card other than rarity. It’s not a rookie, or even an early Jordan card. It’s not from an all-time set. It’s not autographed. It’s not some spectacular image. It’s just a card that a company printed 10 of. That’s it. You can’t blame a collector for imagining all of the amazing cards they could buy with that money, and being stunned that someone would spend it on this rare, if unspectacular Jordan card. I’m sure that vintage guys grumble when an LBJ rookie sells for crazy money, but they will usually conceed that a 1/1 LBJ rookie is a special card. This Jordan just leaves some heads scratching.

Don't forget it's also altered.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Don't forget it's also altered.

It's the only altered one. Talk about rare!

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by orly57

It’s not from an all-time set.

Most of your post was spot on, but this one is not. To modern collectors, the Precious Metal Gems set definitely qualifies.

Previous sales:
Jordan Red /90 PSA AUTH: $21,500 sold by BBCE in 2016
Barkley Red /90 PSA 8: $3,250 sold by PWCC in 2018
Kobe Championship /50 PSA 7: $3400 by PWCC in 2017
Glenn Robinson Green /10 PSA 7: sold for $950 in 2017 and $1400 in 2018
Sean Elliott Green /10 PSA 8: sold for $1000 in 2017
Ron Mercer Green /10 PSA 7: sold for $600 twice
Kevin Willis Red /90 raw: sold for $200 on COMC
Grant Hill Red /90 raw: sold for $600 on COMC
Voshon Leonard Red /90 raw: sold for $120 on COMC
Antoine Walker Red /90 raw: sold for $210 on COMC
Jermaine O'Neal Red /90 raw: sold for $150 on COMC

As you can see, even the /90 red versions are highly sought after for common players. And the condition sensitivity isn't near as important due to the rarity. If you don't buy the card when it comes up for auction, no guarantee it comes around again.

[orly57]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Most of your post was spot on, but this one is not. To modern collectors, the Precious Metal Gems set definitely qualifies.

Previous sales:
Jordan Red /90 PSA AUTH: $21,500 sold by BBCE in 2016
Barkley Red /90 PSA 8: $3,250 sold by PWCC in 2018
Kobe Championship /50 PSA 7: $3400 by PWCC in 2017
Glenn Robinson Green /10 PSA 7: sold for $950 in 2017 and $1400 in 2018
Sean Elliott Green /10 PSA 8: sold for $1000 in 2017
Ron Mercer Green /10 PSA 7: sold for $600 twice
Kevin Willis Red /90 raw: sold for $200 on COMC
Grant Hill Red /90 raw: sold for $600 on COMC
Voshon Leonard Red /90 raw: sold for $120 on COMC
Antoine Walker Red /90 raw: sold for $210 on COMC
Jermaine O'Neal Red /90 raw: sold for $150 on COMC

As you can see, even the /90 red versions are highly sought after for common players. And the condition sensitivity isn't near as important due to the rarity. If you don't buy the card when it comes up for auction, no guarantee it comes around again.

Yeah, I may have spoken out of school on that particular line, since I don’t know modern cards. I appreciate the comment.