Another lame thread defining “vintage”

[Harliduck]

I totally see your point. I graduated high school in 1988...the card world changed twice in my youth...1981 when the competition came (felt different) and when 89 Upper Deck came out (again, felt different). Much like a lot of people (especially members here), I quit after 1990, disillusioned by the mass produced Costco case era, only to come back to the hobby driven by online accessibility to collect Postwar. So a break of vintage to 1988 completely sounds reasonable. I guess the only problem is the values from that era make it really tough to get excited. 1988 Topps may be the most boring set ever made. I know that shouldn't matter, but I think the lack of excitement for many reasons of that era of cards change the narrative.


I also collect classic cars. My wheelhouse is 1955-1974, known as the muscle car era and although I have several cars that considered "muscle", I also have several small sports cars that aren't...and the era is very popular. "Vintage" or "Classic" in the car world is a rolling 25 years (popular thought and most states recognize for licensing) BUT...not too many 80's cars are considered "classic" to most collectors BUT that thought changes every day.

At card shows I have noticed a HUGE shift to 80's and 90's mass produced rookies that are high end graded gathering a lot of momentum, popularity, and value. Same with cars...just weird to think any car from 1990 is a classic...lol.

[ALR-bishop]

I have never cared much how it is defined or understood why it matters. With the exception of 1923 Fleer all my sets are from 1948 forward. At this point in my collecting all I need to know is the year of issue and the manufacturer to know if I have any interest.

I do hang on tight to my 2011 Standard Catalog since it was the last one with post 1980 listings