NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
T206s on Ebay
Pre-WWII Cards
Post WWII Cards
Vintage Memorabilia
Babe Ruth Cards
Ty Cobb Cards
Lou Gehrig Cards
Mickey Mantle Cards
Goudey Cards
Bowman Cards
T205s on Ebay
Tobacco "T" Cards
Caramel "E" Cards
Vintage Baseball Postcards
Football Cards on Ebay
Exhibit Cards
Strip Cards
Baking Cards
Sporting News
Playball Cards on Ebay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-24-2017, 01:22 PM
vintagetoppsguy's Avatar
vintagetoppsguy vintagetoppsguy is offline
D@v!d J@m3s
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Richmond, TX
Posts: 5,108
Default Determining what is vintage

Ten years ago, if you asked us post-war collectors, "What is considered vintage?" most of us would probably agree anything produced before 1979.

Well, ten years later, do the parameters change? Do we expand it by 10 years and now consider 1989 Topps to be vintage? After all, 1989 Topps are now 29 years old. Yeah, yeah, I know that they were mass produced and there are still cases and cases sitting in warehouses. But do we let that (mass production) determine what is considered "vintage?"

When I started collecting in 1986, a card that was 29 years old (1957 Topps) would be considered vintage. So all these years later, why doesn't the same criteria apply to us collectors? In another 10 years, when the 1989 Topps are 39 years old, will they be considered vintage then?

I guess the point is, why do we allow production runs to determine what is vintage (because that's really what it boils down to if you think about it)? At what point will 1989 Topps (or fill in any other year) be considered vintage?

Thoughts?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-24-2017, 01:40 PM
pawpawdiv9's Avatar
pawpawdiv9 pawpawdiv9 is offline
Chr!$ M!ll!c@n
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: GA
Posts: 2,126
Default

my opinon-
tobacco-ish cards = vintage
something like the goudeys and before = prewar
era 50's-70's = postwar
the donruss/late 80's-90-ish yrs = modern
new shiny stuff = ??? Y2K/test-tubers generation

**like how this N54 boards pretty sums it all up in each sections
__________________
MY COLLECTION 1magicschoolbus.imgur.com
BUY: HoF RC's & pre-war
WANT: PSA '33 RUTH GOUDEY (2-3 range)
NEED: (low-end) PSA 49 Bowman Satchel Paige
Successful Transactions with: Bestdj77(Chris), 39special(Steve), BPencil, Arcadecrazy, BeatlesGuy, Cammb(Tony), Mantlefan2010(Jonathan), Stlcards(Dan), Sean C, nkesterke09(Nicholas), Darwinbulldog(Glenn) & Ebay users: phil8ball, begsu1013, kmas55, Peter Spaeth, bigfish, Greg Nazareth, PhillipAbbott79, DanB, Iowadoc
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-24-2017, 02:08 PM
Bestdj777 Bestdj777 is offline
Chris
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,297
Default

I was just thinking about this today as I flipped through 1987 Topps cards to sort out stars. It's hard not to consider 30 year old cards vintage. But, I think I'll decide the vintage category into good vintage and bad vintage.
__________________
Mantle Master Set: 425/425 (complete!!!)
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-24-2017, 02:34 PM
rats60's Avatar
rats60 rats60 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,663
Default

I have never considered late 70s as vintage. My cut off would be 1973, the last set with high numbers, 1974 cards being issued as a single series. 80s cards are not and will never be vintage in my mind.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-24-2017, 02:48 PM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is online now
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,749
Default

To me modern starts with multiple manufacturers in 1981. For quite some time I cut off my own collection at the Brett rookie in 1975 -- should have kept it that way!!
__________________
Stuff trumps all. Even tainted stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-24-2017, 02:48 PM
smellthegum smellthegum is offline
Dave Waugh
member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 75
Default

Vintage is anything older than I am!
__________________
In progress
----------------------------------
1952 Topps low EX- EX/MT 293/310

Looking for
----------------------------------
2 Runnels, 70, 79, 164, 174, 181, 241, 243 Doby, 251,
261 Mays, 270, 278, 281, 285, 287, 293, 300 in PSA 5-6
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-24-2017, 03:53 PM
pokerplyr80's Avatar
pokerplyr80 pokerplyr80 is offline
je.sse @rnot
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: California
Posts: 3,164
Default

I'd put the cutoff in the 1970-75 range. It will be quite a while before junk era cards will be considered vintage in my opinion. I see your point about production numbers, but to me vintage is more than just a certain number of years old. There has to be some element of desirability and rarity.
__________________
Successful transactions with peter spaeth, don's cards, vwtdi, wolf441, 111gecko, Clydewally, Jim, SPMIDD, MattyC, jmb, botn, E107collector, begsu1013, and a few others.

http://www.collectorfocus.com/collection/pokerplyr80
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-24-2017, 06:10 PM
Rookiemonster's Avatar
Rookiemonster Rookiemonster is offline
Dustin
Dustin Mar.ino
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,352
Default

When I was a kid ( 1990s) I was talking to a old time dealer. It was in Garfield NJ his name was Bob he had a mustache and was always smoking( yes in the card show ). I ask him what he thought and he said most people thought 1969 and back was vintage. He also told me that 1969 Topps WAS OVER PRODUCED. So I always just kept 1969 as the cut off for vintage. But I do agree that the 80s should be vintage in today’s world.
__________________
Just a collector that likes to talk and read about the Hobby. 🤓👍🏼
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-24-2017, 07:56 PM
silvor silvor is offline
member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 140
Default

I just got back into collecting again this year, so FWIW... I guess I always figured "vintage" was 1980 (or a case could be made for 1979).

Mostly because there was just one company, AND we never considered the cards worth much money. That is until the price guides came out and were around (at least in my circles) in the early 80's.

But, 1973 really makes more sense because at least some of the cards were more rare.

Last edited by silvor; 12-24-2017 at 07:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-25-2017, 02:53 AM
drcy's Avatar
drcy drcy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,466
Default

Your definition will depend on your age
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-25-2017, 08:50 AM
1952boyntoncollector 1952boyntoncollector is offline
ja.ke liebe.rman
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: http://www.psacard.com/PSASetRegistry/alltimeset.aspx?s=175000&ac=1
Posts: 4,402
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rats60 View Post
I have never considered late 70s as vintage. My cut off would be 1973, the last set with high numbers, 1974 cards being issued as a single series. 80s cards are not and will never be vintage in my mind.
i agree with this. These arent cars...they are cards! Vintage age will keep getting older and older. What was 30 years to be vintage will now be 40 years+. in 10 years..vintage will be 50 years etc.

maybe a new category for the 80s will develop...but wont be vintage

which makes me wonder....if there is 80s music and 90s music...what will the music be called in the 00s and 10s...we just call it 2000s and 2010s? That doesnt sound as good as the 20s and 30s..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-25-2017, 10:17 AM
nolemmings's Avatar
nolemmings nolemmings is offline
Todd Schultz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 2,678
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rats60 View Post
I have never considered late 70s as vintage. My cut off would be 1973, the last set with high numbers, 1974 cards being issued as a single series. 80s cards are not and will never be vintage in my mind.
I would agree, although I would use 1972, as this was the last set with true high numbers, the 1973's being printed as a single series also, and issued that way in parts of the country.
__________________
No sooner had I hit the streets
When I met the fools that a young fool meets
All in search of truth and bound for glory
And listening to our own heartbeats
We stood around the drum
Though it's fainter now, the older I've become
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-25-2017, 01:48 PM
Chuck9788 Chuck9788 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 172
Default

I've always felt that the Topps 1985 set is final "vintage" year.

The 1985 set included the last player/manager card (Pete Rose), a farewell to Yogi Berra and great HOF veterans (Ryan, Carlton, Fingers, Reggie Jackson). Gary Carter as an Expo, I could go on forever. Anyway, it was the final set that had the "vintage feel". It also passed the torch to the next talented/bad behavior generation (Gooden, McGwire, Clemens, etc..).

Anything after 1989 can not be accepted as vintage anytime soon.

Last edited by Chuck9788; 12-25-2017 at 01:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-25-2017, 02:26 PM
mrmopar mrmopar is offline
Curt
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 933
Default

When I was a kid and was buying "old" cards, they were from the 50s and 60s. It was rare that I would stumble upon a T card or a Goudey era card, but I had a couple. It is funny to think that I thought those 1950s Topps cards seemed so old at the time when in fact they were no more than 25 years old. At 10 years of age though, 25 years is a very long time.

If I were that same kid now, using the same standard, I might be buying 1993 Topps cards, amazed at how old they are.

Unless the hobby changes significantly with regard to how cards are made it will probably always be hard for anyone who bought cards older than about 1993 to consider UV coated cards to ever be "vintage".

And final food for thought, those fairly commonly seen T-206 cards are well over a Century old now.
__________________
Looking for: 1974 TCMA Billy Loes Autograph Card, Unique Steve Garvey items, select Dodgers Postcards & Team Issue photos
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-26-2017, 08:33 PM
Volod Volod is offline
Steve
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NEOH
Posts: 782
Default Vintage is just a year's worth of grapes

Seems like just a semantic quibble to me. Vintage is a subjective measure, as it is with wines, so it doesn't necessarily refer to value, just age. Sort of like a number of vintage card collectors.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-27-2017, 12:13 AM
Jwkeen Jwkeen is offline
member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 52
Default

Vintage by definition means classic, important, quality and of enduring interest. I guess you have to determine what that means to you.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-27-2017, 12:16 AM
Jwkeen Jwkeen is offline
member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 52
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuck9788 View Post
I've always felt that the Topps 1985 set is final "vintage" year.

The 1985 set included the last player/manager card (Pete Rose), a farewell to Yogi Berra and great HOF veterans (Ryan, Carlton, Fingers, Reggie Jackson). Gary Carter as an Expo, I could go on forever. Anyway, it was the final set that had the "vintage feel". It also passed the torch to the next talented/bad behavior generation (Gooden, McGwire, Clemens, etc..).

Anything after 1989 can not be accepted as vintage anytime soon.
I believe Pete Rose actually had a separate player and manager card in the 86 and 87 sets as well.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-27-2017, 06:18 AM
bauce's Avatar
bauce bauce is offline
Яоь
member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Hillsborough, NJ
Posts: 66
Default

For me, anything made after the Topps monopoly has ended will be the end of the Vintage Era and the beginning of the Era Of Gluttony.
__________________
Pre-war novice collector

Looking for one card for each of the following (SGC only):
e94 Blome's Chocolates
e98 Old Put Cigar
e99 Bishop & Co.
e100 Bishop & Co.
e104 Nadja
e105 Mello-Mint
e107 Breisch Williams

Successful transactions:
aconte, brianp-beme, Luke

Last edited by bauce; 12-27-2017 at 06:18 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-28-2017, 01:30 PM
jchcollins's Avatar
jchcollins jchcollins is offline
John
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 1,203
Default

I would agree with others who have said it largely depends on your age, when you started collecting, and what other associations or memories you have with the hobby. I started collecting out of packs at age 9 in 1986. Within a year or so I had discovered the world of "old" cards through shops, shows, and antique malls (we didn't use the word "vintage" back then...) and I remember considering 1970's cards fairly new because they weren't much older than I was. I thought of 1950's cards (especially issues like '55 Bowman, '55 Topps, '56 Topps) as "old" because of the coloring and size and how cool they were. But a 1973 Topps card? Probably not so much.

These days my children play sometimes with a bunch of my old leftover '86 Topps commons, and I don't know if they have any clue how old those cards are. They do know they aren't particularly valuable, LOL.
__________________
T206, T212. HOF postwar singles. All types of vintage Cubs...
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-28-2017, 04:42 PM
JollyElm's Avatar
JollyElm JollyElm is offline
D@rrΣn Hu.ghΣs
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,998
Default

It's funny, I think the term 'vintage' is a moving target for most of us. When I was little in the summer of '73, my brother came home from his friend's house and showed us all of these crazy old cards he got. In hindsight they were 1966 Topps, as I always remember one of them was Tom Tresh, whose name I giggled at. In other words, these ancient relics of the past were only 7 years old!! We considered them sooooooooooooo frickin' old.

For me, I guess I go with around 1973-1975 and older as being vintage. It just saddens me that cards from the 80's are considered vintage in some circles. Yowza.
__________________
Check out my bucket(s). Virtually everything is available for trade:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706
http://s1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee404/JollyElm/
http://s1036.photobucket.com/user/elmjack44/library/

“I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.”
Casey Stengel
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-06-2018, 05:12 AM
toledo_mudhen's Avatar
toledo_mudhen toledo_mudhen is offline
Lonnie Nagel
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: South Texas (on the beach)
Posts: 574
Default

I would suggest that in 2090 - the mass produced stuff from 1990 will still be sitting around in warehouses and will still not be considered "vintage" by most collectors (if we still have any collectors by then).

For me "vintage" runs from 1945 thru 1980 (I just really like the 1980 Topps set). Prior to 1945 is in a category all it's own -"PreWar"

Prewar takes a special kind of collector - typically with higher budgets than most of us (in order to complete sets anyway)
__________________
Lonnie Nagel

Creator of SetBilder
Vintage Sports Card Software
www.SetBilder.com
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-06-2018, 02:58 PM
MCoxon MCoxon is offline
Mike
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rats60 View Post
I have never considered late 70s as vintage. My cut off would be 1973, the last set with high numbers, 1974 cards being issued as a single series. 80s cards are not and will never be vintage in my mind.
This - series issue ended in 1973. After that more hobbyists and buying sets complete vs assembling

Last edited by MCoxon; 01-06-2018 at 02:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-06-2018, 09:08 PM
vintagebaseballcardguy's Avatar
vintagebaseballcardguy vintagebaseballcardguy is offline
R0b3rt Ch!ld3rs
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,922
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by toledo_mudhen View Post
I would suggest that in 2090 - the mass produced stuff from 1990 will still be sitting around in warehouses and will still not be considered "vintage" by most collectors (if we still have any collectors by then).

For me "vintage" runs from 1945 thru 1980 (I just really like the 1980 Topps set). Prior to 1945 is in a category all it's own -"PreWar"

Prewar takes a special kind of collector - typically with higher budgets than most of us (in order to complete sets anyway)
To the last part of your post: I was always a postwar (1950s and 1960s) baseball collector but got restless and gave prewar a try or two. It just isn't for me. Now, I am collecting 1960s football and having a blast! I still think postwar baseball is cool, too.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-06-2018, 09:56 PM
RedsFan1941 RedsFan1941 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 955
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MCoxon View Post
This - series issue ended in 1973. After that more hobbyists and buying sets complete vs assembling
+1
__________________
R0nnie L3hman
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-07-2018, 07:55 AM
clydepepper's Avatar
clydepepper clydepepper is offline
Raymond 'Robbie' Culpepper
Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Columbus, GA
Posts: 5,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smellthegum View Post
Vintage is anything older than I am!


Yup - There you go
__________________
.
"A life is not important except in the impact it has on others lives" - Jackie Robinson


MY BIG CONCERNS ABOUT AMERICA:

Internally- We spend too much time assuring our rights without learning the responsibilities that should accompany them.
Externally - No matter how much we claim to take the higher moral ground, we have neither respected nor attempted to understand other cultures.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-08-2018, 02:53 PM
HRBAKER's Avatar
HRBAKER HRBAKER is offline
Jeff
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 5,016
Default

To me the modern era started with double knit uniforms, so pre-72ish or so.
__________________
Check out my aging Sell/Trade Album on my Profile page

HOF Type Collector + Philly A's, E/M/W cards, M101-6, Exhibits, Postcards, 30's Premiums & HOF Photos

"Assembling an unfocused collection for nearly 40 years."
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-08-2018, 03:14 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,085
Default

I like the division on the board, pre war, post war , and post 1980. I hate the word vintage almost as much as the word poppage
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-08-2018, 03:48 PM
HRBAKER's Avatar
HRBAKER HRBAKER is offline
Jeff
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 5,016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
I like the division on the board, pre war, post war , and post 1980. I hate the word vintage almost as much as the word poppage
I hear you but nothing is worse than poppage.
__________________
Check out my aging Sell/Trade Album on my Profile page

HOF Type Collector + Philly A's, E/M/W cards, M101-6, Exhibits, Postcards, 30's Premiums & HOF Photos

"Assembling an unfocused collection for nearly 40 years."
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-08-2018, 07:24 PM
homerunderby homerunderby is offline
member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 35
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRBAKER View Post
I hear you but nothing is worse than poppage.
It's an interesting question, when I started collecting (and was aware of the organized hobby) was probably about 1980, and vintage was 1960. Do kids today think 1998 is vintage?

I guess it reminds me how much I've aged and how different this hobby to me than it was back then. Finding "old" cards back then was exotic, now you can get pretty much any Topps card throughout their history online.

I remember I met a kid who had 1970-71 cards, I gave up just about anything to get those exotic cards.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-08-2018, 07:46 PM
vintagebaseballcardguy's Avatar
vintagebaseballcardguy vintagebaseballcardguy is offline
R0b3rt Ch!ld3rs
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,922
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by homerunderby View Post
It's an interesting question, when I started collecting (and was aware of the organized hobby) was probably about 1980, and vintage was 1960. Do kids today think 1998 is vintage?

I guess it reminds me how much I've aged and how different this hobby to me than it was back then. Finding "old" cards back then was exotic, now you can get pretty much any Topps card throughout their history online.

I remember I met a kid who had 1970-71 cards, I gave up just about anything to get those exotic cards.
When my girls hear me talk about the 90s, they look at me like I am dead. It is all relative.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 01-08-2018, 08:42 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,085
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRBAKER View Post
I hear you but nothing is worse than poppage.
I will concede you this point Jeff. I did say almost

Last edited by ALR-bishop; 01-08-2018 at 08:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-09-2018, 09:21 AM
Volod Volod is offline
Steve
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NEOH
Posts: 782
Default A grape by any other name

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
I like the division on the board, pre war, post war , and post 1980. I hate the word vintage almost as much as the word poppage
Two different categories of neologisms, but I agree that vintage should only be applied to wines.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-09-2018, 11:04 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,085
Default

I also hate it when I have to go to a dictionary to find out what someone here is talking about
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-09-2018, 04:19 PM
wdwfan wdwfan is offline
Hughes
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 895
Default

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.
__________________
I love to trade/buy/sell vintage cards. Will trade any cards I list FS/FT for any of my needs. Also, I charge exact shipping on top of my asking prices.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-09-2018, 05:35 PM
rats60's Avatar
rats60 rats60 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wdwfan View Post
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?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-09-2018, 11:02 PM
wdwfan wdwfan is offline
Hughes
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 895
Default

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rats60 View Post
Can you get common high number cards from 1966 and 1967 for 10 cents each?
__________________
I love to trade/buy/sell vintage cards. Will trade any cards I list FS/FT for any of my needs. Also, I charge exact shipping on top of my asking prices.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-10-2018, 08:45 AM
rats60's Avatar
rats60 rats60 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wdwfan View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-10-2018, 11:32 AM
Volod Volod is offline
Steve
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NEOH
Posts: 782
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
I also hate it when I have to go to a dictionary to find out what someone here is talking about
My bad, Al - I should have just opined that vintage had always been perfectly happy as just a noun and should never have been misappropriated for use as an adjective in our hobby.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-10-2018, 05:59 PM
wdwfan wdwfan is offline
Hughes
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 895
Default

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rats60 View Post
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.
__________________
I love to trade/buy/sell vintage cards. Will trade any cards I list FS/FT for any of my needs. Also, I charge exact shipping on top of my asking prices.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-10-2018, 09:32 PM
seanofjapan's Avatar
seanofjapan seanofjapan is offline
Sean McGinty
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Japan
Posts: 190
Default

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!
__________________
My blog about collecting cards in Japan: https://baseballcardsinjapan.blogspot.jp/

Last edited by seanofjapan; 01-10-2018 at 09:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 01-10-2018, 09:50 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,085
Default

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

What defines it for coins ?
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01-11-2018, 02:14 PM
Rich Klein Rich Klein is offline
Rich Klein
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Plano Tx
Posts: 3,626
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rookiemonster View Post
When I was a kid ( 1990s) I was talking to a old time dealer. It was in Garfield NJ his name was Bob he had a mustache and was always smoking( yes in the card show ). I ask him what he thought and he said most people thought 1969 and back was vintage. He also told me that 1969 Topps WAS OVER PRODUCED. So I always just kept 1969 as the cut off for vintage. But I do agree that the 80s should be vintage in today’s world.
BTW -- The Garfield show is still going strong to this day.

I can picture Bob now --- yep in those days some people smoked IN the card show. Such a different world.

I probably saw you at some of those local Garfield shows when I would come up to visit

Rich
__________________
Look for our show listings in the Net 54 Calendar section
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 01-11-2018, 02:16 PM
Rich Klein Rich Klein is offline
Rich Klein
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Plano Tx
Posts: 3,626
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rats60 View Post
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
__________________
Look for our show listings in the Net 54 Calendar section
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01-11-2018, 05:09 PM
GasHouseGang's Avatar
GasHouseGang GasHouseGang is offline
David M.
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: S. California
Posts: 1,371
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 01-20-2018, 06:04 PM
homerunderby homerunderby is offline
member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 35
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Klein View Post
BTW -- The Garfield show is still going strong to this day.

I can picture Bob now --- yep in those days some people smoked IN the card show. Such a different world.

I probably saw you at some of those local Garfield shows when I would come up to visit

Rich
I go to the Garfield show occasionally, probably 4-6x a year. Still every other weekend. There used to be 2-3 shows just in North NJ every weekend (and each day of the weekend), now Garfield is pretty much alone. There are a couple over towards Edison too, and of course the White Plains show, a small NYC show and monthly LI shows. But that's pretty much it.

Part of me misses all the activity, but the other part likes that I can get the cards I couldn't afford then for less than they were 25-30 years ago.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 01-20-2018, 06:10 PM
Rookiemonster's Avatar
Rookiemonster Rookiemonster is offline
Dustin
Dustin Mar.ino
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,352
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Klein View Post
BTW -- The Garfield show is still going strong to this day.

I can picture Bob now --- yep in those days some people smoked IN the card show. Such a different world.

I probably saw you at some of those local Garfield shows when I would come up to visit

Rich
Lol I know it’s still my favorite show. We probably did at least cross paths as I always attend that show. There was two other bobs is I remember. One that was under the stairs . The other was bob with the big beard that sold packs and boxes. I the the beard retired and I see him there from time to time. He was my absolute favorite person to buy Packs from and probably still is.
__________________
Just a collector that likes to talk and read about the Hobby. 🤓👍🏼
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 01-20-2018, 08:45 PM
lowpopper's Avatar
lowpopper lowpopper is online now
Greg C
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: LONG ISLAND, NY
Posts: 195
Default Vintage

The term should absolutely change as the years progress. 50 years from now, will you not call 88 donruss vintage?

1991 Topps was the last year of the soft, pulpy paper stock. So at some point, I believe this will be the accepted cut off year.

As for right now, I consider 85 and back to be vintage. 86 and forward is modern to me because of the drops in set value.
__________________
EBAY STORE: ROOKIE-PARADE
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Determining autographs on signed bats t206wagner Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 2 09-23-2017 03:51 PM
Need help determining year and some players on two postcards btcarfagno Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 9 10-25-2016 07:54 PM
Determining Value?? Archive Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 1 01-19-2008 05:27 AM
Why isn't Rarity the No.1 factor in determining a card's value? Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 14 07-06-2006 07:59 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:37 PM.


ebay GSB