1967 Topps High Numbers

[Rich Klein]

One quick note on why so few Carews and Seavers was for many years it was truly not economically feasible to send those really high dollar cards to COMC because of the fee structure.

My first NSCC working for COMC the most consistent complaint I received was the cash out fees for expensive cards was way too steep. With some changes in the past couple of years, the fee structure is now competitive with just about any other selling source. There are bog posts in the COMC blog explaining all those changes.

Rich

[toppcat]

I just did an eBay canvass. This thread will show the pops in ascending order as follows: Card No. - Row - Count. The next thread will show it by row.

Rows Fronted by:

A 550 Pinson
B 557 Ferrara
C 576 NL Rookies
D 580 Colavito
E 531 7th Checklist
F 547 Red Sox Rookies
G 558 Orioles Rookies

Slit B rows (all positions known):
A
B
C
D
E
A
F
G
B
C
D
E

Slit A rows (top 5 positions known):
A
F
A
F
G

605 B 11
561 D 13
544 E 14
573 D 14
574 E 14
536 D 16
552 G 16
576 C 16
540 D 17
541 D 17
545 C 17
568 G 17
577 D 17
565 B 18
603 G 18
586 G 19
592 B 19
543 B 20
546 C 20
590 E 20
538 C 21
542 F 21
595 B 21
557 B 22
587 E 22
593 C 22
571 D 23
575 B 23
583 B 23
607 G 23
535 B 24
553 G 25
555 B 25
562 F 26
563 G 26
578 C 26
580 D 26
591 G 26
560 E 27
579 C 27
597 G 27
602 E 27
585 C 28
550 A 29
556 F 29
567 C 29
600 E 29
547 F 30
549 D 31
554 F 31
564 F 31
584 E 31
570 D 32
534 F 34
606 C 34
601 F 35
604 B 35
609 D 35
558 G 36
572 E 36
588 F 39
594 C 40
531 E 43
589 A 45
596 F 47
539 F 49
569 A 50
581 G 51
598 E 53
548 A 64
559 A 69
582 A 81
537 A 86
608 A 91
599 A 93
566 A 95
551 A 102

[toppcat]

I just did an eBay canvass. This thread will show the pops by row as follows (rows sequencing is out of order, it's sorted in ascending order per row): Card No. - Row - Count.

Rows Fronted by:

A 550 Pinson
B 557 Ferrara
C 576 NL Rookies
D 580 Colavito
E 531 7th Checklist
F 547 Red Sox Rookies
G 558 Orioles Rookies

Slit B rows (all positions known):
A
B
C
D
E
A
F
G
B
C
D
E

Slit A rows (top 5 positions known):
A
F
A
F
G

550 A 29
589 A 45
569 A 50
548 A 64
559 A 69
582 A 81
537 A 86
608 A 91
599 A 93
566 A 95
551 A 102
605 B 11
565 B 18
592 B 19
543 B 20
595 B 21
557 B 22
575 B 23
583 B 23
535 B 24
555 B 25
604 B 35
576 C 16
545 C 17
546 C 20
538 C 21
593 C 22
578 C 26
579 C 27
585 C 28
567 C 29
606 C 34
594 C 40
561 D 13
573 D 14
536 D 16
540 D 17
541 D 17
577 D 17
571 D 23
580 D 26
549 D 31
570 D 32
609 D 35
544 E 14
574 E 14
590 E 20
587 E 22
560 E 27
602 E 27
600 E 29
584 E 31
572 E 36
531 E 43
598 E 53
542 F 21
562 F 26
556 F 29
547 F 30
554 F 31
564 F 31
534 F 34
601 F 35
588 F 39
596 F 47
539 F 49
552 G 16
568 G 17
603 G 18
586 G 19
607 G 23
553 G 25
563 G 26
591 G 26
597 G 27
558 G 36
581 G 51

[Kevvyg1026]

I compiled a similar POP report a few weeks back for the 1967 Topps high numbers. The cards in row A (headed by Pinson) had an average of 71 cards each available, while those in row F headed by Rohr had 36 each. Cards in the other five rows averaged between 23 to 27.

Understanding that this POP report is only a snapshot and that other factors can influence such reports, I still find it interesting that the five rows I suspect were printed 3x each across the entire sheet have lower availability than the other two rows which I suspect were printed at a higher frequency.

[toppcat]

That A row is bizarre, like a Super Print row.

[Rich Klein]

Triple Print for Row A?

Double Print for another 11 or so

Then normal print and then one single print row:?

I know from my dealer days way back in the day that 561 Sandy Alomar was always a brutal card to get in NY.

I think the empirical evidence in this case has adjusted my thinking.

1) Triple Print Row
1) Double Print Row

4) Normal Print Rows

1) Single Print Row

Regards
Rich

[Bigdaddy]

Dave, so looking at your ebay search listed by row, I find it interesting that the first card in each row (corresponding to the first column) has the least number of cards for any given row. This could be explained by Topps frequently discarding the first column as it may have been 'dinged' or otherwise damaged by the product cutting/handling machinery.

If that were the case, then those 'column one' cards could also be considered 'short print' since fewer of them made it out of the factory than cards in the other columns.

Rich, excuse me for not following your thread, but can you explain further the difference between 'triple, double, normal and single'? I understand 'triple, double and single', but can't fit 'normal' in there.

Tom