|
Unmarked Checklists
For many years I wondered why unmarked checklists do not demand a hugh price. There must be a high percentage written on. And a percentage used solely in bicycle spokes. Thoughts?
|
Because checklists suck and no one wants to have to buy them?
But seriously, yeah, I remember hearing about an "unmarked checklist premium" years ago for exactly the reasons you mention, but it doesn't seem to have panned out that way. |
Proud to show off the $20k gem mint psa 10 checklist. Look at the names. So beautiful
|
Part of the reason is that for most series, the checklists were double or triple printed. So there are just so many of them. Many don't even show players.
But yes, ones in high grade are needed for registry sets, but aside from the '56/'57 checklists, there isn't a lot of pizzazz. |
Probably because most of us as kids considered them 'junk' cards. Even the ones with stars or HOF'ers on them are hard to get excited about. And if you add in the fact that Topps usually double printed most of them (having them issued in both the current and preceding series), that the rarity of the unmarked versions is somewhat mitigated by the glut of the cards in existence.
For me, the only one I care about is the rare 1963 Fleer checklist. That's a beauty to get your hands on. |
While checklists from 1961-1972 are seemingly inexpensive due to the previously mentioned fact that most are double printed, there are a few higher series checklist cards that are priced similarly to other common cards from the higher series they appear in.
However, the market for checklist cards from 1973-1975 does not compare to commons from their respective sets as they do from 1961-1972. An unmarked checklist in NM shape from these 3 years will set you back $10-15 each. From 1976 on, checklist card prices parallel common prices. |
I was not aware they were double or triple printed. That could make uo for the marked, straight to garbage, or spokes. Just figured with nop one wanting them in the early days, set builders have to have them. And that would drive a high price. (No-I am not sitting on a hoard.)
|
'57 Checklists, especially the 3/4 and 4/5 are insanely expensive these days.
Grade for grade they might be more expensive than any card in the set other than the Mick. |
"For me, the only one I care about is the rare 1963 Fleer checklist. That's a beauty to get your hands on."
_________ I agree about the desirability of the '63 Fleer checklist, but the grail of unmarked baseball checklists seems to be the 1957 Topps series 4/5. |
As a 10 year old in 1960, I and all the kids in the neighborhood kept our cards by team NOT by number.
We looked at a checklist card and found a player none of us had in our team sets and wondered who he was and why he was so rare. His name on the checklist was W.S. Composite. Pronounced by us as "Compo zeet" Initials instead of a first name much like J.C. Martin of the White Sox who is also in the set. Makes sense, no? We were all looking for the card, but no luck. One night at dinner I was telling my father about it and showed him his name on the checklist card right under all the World Series cards. He laughed and told me the card was the World Series Composite. Composite, a word none of us 10 Y.O.'s had ever heard before. Turns out of course, all of us had the card in our "odd"pile! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I found one in a baseball card store a few years ago that looked beautiful. The owner had just bought a collection of cards and I was seemingly the first to dig through the box. Without a doubt in my mind, I knew the next person to see it would buy that sucker right up, so I negotiated for it and some other things, and got a good bargain. I was thrilled!!! It now sits in a PSA 7 holder. Then a while later, I used one of the ebay 15% coupons to pick up a second one.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
That should disqualify me from owning one :o |
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:07 PM. |