Has the Junk card era ended? If so, when?

OhioLawyerF5 · #1 03-25-2025, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balticfox

If so, that was just as true in 1948, 1952, 1960, 1970 and 1980 as it was in 1990. Therefore the junk wax era would have started way back when Baseball cards first started being packaged with bubble gum. While that could well be the case, that's not typically the way the "junk wax" term is used.

Not really. There were "only" about 250,000 of each card produced back then. During the junk wax era, there were several million. That's significant. Remember, the term junk wax wasn't used during the era. Everyone thought the cards would pay for their kid's college. The difference between the eras is that quantities of 50s cards went down as people's collections disappeared, while everyone kept their 80s cards, and so much was made that more keeps getting opened to this very day.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that the term junk wax isn't used to refer to the wax, but it always has. It's literally in the name.

Balticfox · #2 03-26-2025, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

I'm not sure where you get the idea that the term junk wax isn't used to refer to the wax, but it always has. It's literally in the name.

Because it's not really in the name. The term is used for cards that came out long after card companies stopped using wax wrappers. The derivation of the term is therefore far from clear.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

Remember, the term junk wax wasn't used during the era.

Precisely! And I've always thought that all the 1990's gimmicks - e.g. chase cards, parallel sets, autographed cards, jersey cards, manufactured scarcities - were what ended up spawning the term "junk". Gimmicky=junky.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

Meh, I love baseball cards and I love baseball.

And I just collect Barry Larkin.

Now that I find really tough to understand. If you love both baseball and baseball cards, how can you limit yourself to just a single player? Surely you must like some sets/subsets a lot more than others so how can you not be tempted to get all those cards anyway?

OhioLawyerF5 · #3 03-27-2025, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balticfox

Precisely! And I've always thought that all the 1990's gimmicks - e.g. chase cards, parallel sets, autographed cards, jersey cards, manufactured scarcities - were what ended up spawning the term "junk". Gimmicky=junky.

Yeah, term junk wax definitely does not refer to the scarce inserts and parallels of the 90s. I have never heard it used that way. It refers to a period in the mid 80s through early 90s, just prior to the era of inserts and parallels. Sets like 1993 Finest and others began the destruction of the junk wax era. I think you have gotten some bad info about the term, as it's used in the hobby.

Quote:

Now that I find really tough to understand. If you love both baseball and baseball cards, how can you limit yourself to just a single player? Surely you must like some sets/subsets a lot more than others so how can you not be tempted to get all those cards anyway?

You clearly misunderstood what I was saying. The quote you cited was a statement I made concerning rare 90s inserts. OF THOSE, I only collect Larkin. I used the term "only" to compare to the likes of Griffey and Jeter, referring to his prices "only" being thousands rather than hundreds of thousands.

But I collect cards of all eras. From 19th century and other pre-war cards, through the golden era of the 50s and 60s, to rare 90s cards, up through modern rookies and stars of my team.

I definitely don't only colllect Larkin, and wasn't implying such. But in the rare and expensive 90s cards, I only buy Larkins. For an admitted pedant, it's odd how you would remove a sentence entirely from its context to make it mean something entirely different from what was said.

Balticfox · #4 03-27-2025, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

I think you have gotten some bad info about the term, as it's used in the hobby.

I didn't get any bad info since I didn't get any hard info at all prior to starting this thread.That's why I started this thread. Whether I'm getting any good info now remains to be seen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

You clearly misunderstood what I was saying. The quote you cited was a statement I made concerning rare 90s inserts. OF THOSE, I only collect Larkin. I used the term "only" to compare to the likes of Griffey and Jeter, referring to his prices "only" being thousands rather than hundreds of thousands.

I definitely don't only collect Larkin, and wasn't implying such. But in the rare and expensive 90s cards, I only buy Larkins. For an admitted pedant, it's odd how you would remove a sentence entirely from its context to make it mean something entirely different from what was said.

I didn't take your post out of context. I thought you were saying exactly that Barry Larkin's are the only chase cards you collect from the 1990's. But I can't understand why you as a baseball fan and baseball card enthusiast would be collecting only the Larkin card from insert sets. Sure, I understand that you might not be able to either afford or stomach paying the truly inflated prices the Derek Jeter and Ken Griffey Jr. cards command, but why do you not go after the other players in subsets you find really attractive? And are there any master sets or even base sets at all from the 1990's that you're trying to complete?

OhioLawyerF5 · #5 03-27-2025, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balticfox

I didn't get any bad info since I didn't get any hard info at all prior to starting this thread.That's why I started this thread. Whether I'm getting any good info now remains to be seen.

I didn't take your post out of context. I thought you were saying exactly that Barry Larkin's are the only chase cards you collect from the 1990's. But I can't understand why you as a baseball fan and baseball card enthusiast would be collecting only the Larkin card from insert sets. Sure, I understand that you might not be able to either afford or stomach paying the truly inflated prices the Derek Jeter and Ken Griffey Jr. cards command, but why do you not go after the other players in subsets you find really attractive? And are there any master sets or even base sets at all from the 1990's that you're trying to complete?

You seriously can't understand why I would choose only one player from a set to collect? I'm a baseball fan who loves the Reds. I'm a Reds fan who loves baseball cards. Collecting Reds players from all eras makes perfect sense for my collection. I truly have no idea why you can't comprehend that. I'm pretty sure you are just being intentionally obtuse just to mess with me at this point.

KJA · #6 03-27-2025, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

You seriously can't understand why I would choose only one player from a set to collect? I'm a baseball fan who loves the Reds. I'm a Reds fan who loves baseball cards. Collecting Reds players from all eras makes perfect sense for my collection. I truly have no idea why you can't comprehend that. I'm pretty sure you are just being intentionally obtuse just to mess with me at this point.

I'm the same, except add Eric Davis and Chris Sabo to Larkin

Balticfox · #7 03-27-2025, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

You seriously can't understand why I would choose only one player from a set to collect?

That's something any set builder such as myself finds difficult to understand. Just one player from all those cards? Oh come on!

Admittedly the plethora of parallel sets, subsets, insert sets, unique Jersey cards, manufactured scarcities e.g. xx/12, etc. (junk?) that has cropped up since the early 1990's has made it difficult for us set builders to decide precisely how to define any set we embark upon collecting. I struggle with it myself. But this plethora has also made the decision absolutely necessary.

OhioLawyerF5 · #8 03-28-2025, 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balticfox

That's something any set builder such as myself finds difficult to understand. Just one player from all those cards? Oh come on!

Admittedly the plethora of parallel sets, subsets, insert sets, unique Jersey cards, manufactured scarcities e.g. xx/12, etc. (junk?) that has cropped up since the early 1990's has made it difficult for us set builders to decide precisely how to define any set we embark upon collecting. I struggle with it myself. But this plethora has also made the decision absolutely necessary.

Yep. That's why as a team collector, I have to make decisions. Since Larkin is a hall of famer, he is in nearly every set. So having an example from every set, even the extremely rare ones, is preferable to trying to complete just a few sets (as completing all sets is impossible). As a baseball card fan, doing it the way I do means I get to have cool cards from more sets, and enjoy nearly everything the era has to offer.

But there is a set collector mentality in me somewhere. I am obsessed with completing the "rainbows" of all the parallel sets of Larkin in the 90s. Some of which are so rare they take a lifetime to complete. If you don't collect 90s, it is hard to comprehend just how scarce this stuff is. Some Larkin cards have literally never had a public sale. So completing the rainbow is often much bigger a task than nearly all set building.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
ENDED Vin Scully Chicago National 2017 VIP Promo card ENDED	LuckyLarry	Net54 Baseball Live $1 Auctions - Ending Sundays 8pm CST	0	09-30-2024 06:50 PM
ENDED 1920 W519 strip card Guy Morton (Shoeless Joe teammate) ENDED	LuckyLarry	Net54 Baseball Live $1 Auctions - Ending Sundays 8pm CST	2	09-15-2024 08:00 PM
ENDED 1951 Bowman football card interesting blue print sheet mark ENDED	LuckyLarry	Net54 Baseball Live $1 Auctions - Ending Sundays 8pm CST	6	07-21-2024 02:48 PM
Junk wax and not so junk wax and factory sets for sale!	curch	1980 & Newer Sports Cards B/S/T	1	04-26-2018 04:48 AM
Ended Ended ..1969 Topps Rollie Finger rookie card not graded	Leerob538	Live Auctions - Only 2-3 open, per member, at once.	2	10-13-2011 11:53 AM