Selling 80% of your collection for ‘52 Mantle - would you?

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Well, I found my answer: yes, I would trade a big chunk of my collection for this:

That is a great card and I would trade a chunk of my collection for it but no where near 80 % of my collection

[dukeman2685]

I didn't have to move 80%, but I did move a significant part of my collection for this. Never thought I'd get to add this to my collection being a large Braves fan and HOF signed RC collector. This has been sitting as my #1 wantlist card for years now. Very pleased to have been able to add it. I had the discussion with my wife when I saw it made available and she wouldn't let me just buy it. I had to move collection items for it and I made the decision quickly. This signed 1952 Topps Eddie Mathews has found a new home for a long time.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

Selling 80% of your collection for ‘52 Mantle - would you?

What, sell 80% of (even just) the Baseball part of my collection which I've lovingly put together over the last 45 years to acquire a card in which I have no interest? Are you crazy?

I love my Baseball cards from the Topps to the Post to the Shirriff/Salada and the Old London and the Kellogg's! I'd have to be crazy myself to consider doing such a thing.

[steve B]

As someone who has collected for a long time, but never really had enough budget or discipline for the higher value cards, these threads are always slightly painful.

The first 52 Mantle I saw was one Halls had paid something like 1000 for. a record at the time if i recall it right. Very nice, but maybe only a 7 today. I could have had a decent one for 500, Goudey Ruths for 100, etc. My social life would have taken a hit for months, and nobody had any idea just what was coming.

Now I'm still in the same spot. Doing much better, but those cards are still out of reach.

But would I swap 80 % of my collection for a 52 Mantle? If it was 80% of the bulk I totally would. I have a lot of cards....
80% of the value? It might be tough to get to the price of a Mantle, and I like the cards I'd have to let go more than that.

[Brent G.]

While perhaps not to this scale, most of us face these decisions from time to time — "What can I sell to get this thing that I want?". I sold a lot of smaller items this year to get into bigger pieces and am now at the point that I don't want to sell anything else. Will I feel that way for the next 12 months? History says probably not, that there's always something else that'll catch my eye.

If I was going to sell 80% for one item, it'd be a 1984-85 Star Michael Jordan #101. I think it still has a ton of room for growth in the worldwide market.

[The Detroit Collector]

For me it would need to be a once in a lifetime opportunity to buy the card. Meaning, the card has to be extremely rare and my only shot at ever owning it would be sell 80% of the collection.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

What, sell 80% of (even just) the Baseball part of my collection which I've lovingly put together over the last 45 years to acquire a card in which I have no interest? Are you crazy?

I love my Baseball cards from the Topps to the Post to the Shirriff/Salada and the Old London and the Kellogg's! I'd have to be crazy myself to consider doing such a thing.

I think the question is whether you’d sell 80% of your collection for a holy grail. The 52 Mantle was an example.

For me, I might do it just to painlessly sell 80% of the bulk of my collection. Unfortunately, I don’t have any holy grail worth that much.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by calvindog

I think the question is whether you’d sell 80% of your collection for a holy grail. The 52 Mantle was an example.

Still no. I wouldn't have bought the cards in my collection if they didn't provide me with delight and satisfaction on an everyday basis. One card wouldn't do the trick. And if as implied it was a high value card, I'd bury it away in some "safe" place and probably not look at it again. And then after thirty years (if I live that long), I might forget where I'd put it or even that I own it.

Originally Posted by Brent G.

If I was going to sell 80% for one item, it'd be a 1984-85 Star Michael Jordan #101. I think it still has a ton of room for growth in the worldwide market.

"Growth" you could only realize if you sold it. In the meantime do you like the card and the set that much? Or would you just bury it away somewhere?

[raulus]

Originally Posted by calvindog

I think the question is whether you’d sell 80% of your collection for a holy grail. The 52 Mantle was an example.

I'll agree with balticfox that a 311 Mantle doesn't tickle my fancy, so no trade there.

Is there something else that would entice me to make that trade? I honestly don't think there is. It could just be that I've already managed to pick up a lot of my grail cards, so that limits the population of remaining unfound grails for me to quest for. But of the handful of personal grails that are left out there, I don't see myself trading anything that I really care about to get them. If I did find one of those remaining grails, I'd be happy to part with a big chunk of cash to get it, but not anything serious in my existing collection.

I suppose the one exception is if I'm on the cusp of cashing out, and I had the option to instead trade for a single, easily-marketable piece that was more valuable than my collection. I'd go ahead and make that trade, just because it makes it so much easier to cash out. Plus I could live with winning the trade.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by dukeman2685

I didn't have to move 80%, but I did move a significant part of my collection for this. Never thought I'd get to add this to my collection being a large Braves fan and HOF signed RC collector. This has been sitting as my #1 wantlist card for years now. Very pleased to have been able to add it. I had the discussion with my wife when I saw it made available and she wouldn't let me just buy it. I had to move collection items for it and I made the decision quickly. This signed 1952 Topps Eddie Mathews has found a new home for a long time.

Awesome card!!!

[Eric72]

Sure, I would do it. I've been thinking about downsizing my collection lately. I have a (relatively low-value) portion of my collection that's sentimental. Trading the rest for a single card sounds appealing.

A '52 Mantle is on the short list of cards I'd do this for.

[ValKehl]

[QUOTE=calvindog;2544025]I think the question is whether you’d sell 80% of your collection for a holy grail. The 52 Mantle was an example.
/QUOTE]

Jeff, this is debatable, as the title of this thread is, "Selling 80% of your collection for ‘52 Mantle - would you?" And, the OP's last sentence is, "I’d love to hear your stories and/or your advice… sell most of your PC to add the hobby’s most iconic card?"

My answer to this specific question is, NO, not in a hundred years, not in a thousand years, and not in a million years!

[calvindog]

[QUOTE=ValKehl;2544145]

Originally Posted by calvindog

I think the question is whether you’d sell 80% of your collection for a holy grail. The 52 Mantle was an example.
/QUOTE]

Jeff, this is debatable, as the title of this thread is, "Selling 80% of your collection for ‘52 Mantle - would you?" And, the OP's last sentence is, "I’d love to hear your stories and/or your advice… sell most of your PC to add the hobby’s most iconic card?"

My answer to this specific question is, NO, not in a hundred years, not in a thousand years, and not in a million years!

Same.

[Cmvorce]

The title of this thread got me thinking, and I ended up posting in B/S/T trying to do just that. Wish me luck.

[packs]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

Still no. I wouldn't have bought the cards in my collection if they didn't provide me with delight and satisfaction on an everyday basis. One card wouldn't do the trick. And if as implied it was a high value card, I'd bury it away in some "safe" place and probably not look at it again. And then after thirty years (if I live that long), I might forget where I'd put it or even that I own it.



"Growth" you could only realize if you sold it. In the meantime do you like the card and the set that much? Or would you just bury it away somewhere?

While I understand the sentiment this seems like a strange way to view your collection. I don’t know how long you’ve been collecting but I’ve been collecting since I was 8 or 10 years old. My budget and my tastes and interests have only inflated since then. I have cards I bought when I was 10 but I’ve also sold a ton of them to acquire larger and more expensive cards I couldn’t afford. When I was younger I had to settle for a lot of examples and buy only the one I could afford at the time. Selling and trading up has only enhanced my collection.

[Seven]

I primarily collect Mantle, but I've grown fond of many of the vintage cards in my collection that don't fall under his umbrella. My goal when I originally got into vintage as a kid, through my Father, was to have a Mantle from every year of his career.

When I realized that the 1952 Topps was out of reach (at least for now) I shifted my focus to collecting other issues of his, that didn't fall under the Topps /Bowman umbrella. The Red Heart Dog Food, and Berk Ross issues from 54 and 52 respectively have really grown on me.

I think as I get older, and I become more wealthy, I will parts with some bits and pieces of my collection to afford #311. However that's not happening anytime soon, and I think it's more of a goal when I get closer to retirement.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

I’d love to hear your stories and/or your advice… sell most of your PC to add the hobby’s most iconic card?

I would sell most of my PC to add the hobby's most iconic card, the t206 Honus Wagner, to my collection. I would never sell any of my PC to buy a 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle.

[Johnny630]

Even though I'd love to own what has always been my grail card, a nice Centered 1952 Topps Mantle in a PSA 7 or 8. I would not sell 80% of my collection to obtain it. For this reason...when the time comes to sell it is much easier to sell multiple cards that are in the $5,000-$10,000 or under than it is one single multi hundred thousand dollar card.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Even though I'd love to own what has always been my grail card, a nice Centered 1952 Topps Mantle in a PSA 7 or 8. I would not sell 80% of my collection to obtain it. For this reason...when the time comes to sell it is much easier to sell multiple cards that are in the $5,000-$10,000 or under than it is one single multi hundred thousand dollar card.

Probably no right or wrong answer here but I would tend to think it’s the opposite.

[Rhotchkiss]

"Selling 80% of your collection for ‘52 Mantle - would you?"

YES, and I would buy the best-looking, highest grade you could get for 80% of your collection.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

I am toying with an idea of liquidating a large % of my collection to try and build enough of a kitty to buy my first ‘52 Mantle.

Even with that, the best I can probably afford would be a reasonably decent eye appeal 1.5….

Have other Net54ers ever done anything like this? Happy you did? Or filled with post transaction regret??

I’d love to hear your stories and/or your advice… sell most of your PC to add the hobby’s most iconic card?

Thx all

Jeff

No. There are some cards I would trade or sell most of my collection for, but the '52 Topps Mantle is not among them.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by packs

While I understand the sentiment this seems like a strange way to view your collection.

Huh?! What's strange about acquiring only what you like and therefore not wanting to part with it? Granted, a very small part of my collection (<3%) may consist of cards that I now regard as peripheral to my interests but overall I take real delight in what's in my binders.

Originally Posted by packs

I don’t know how long you’ve been collecting but I’ve been collecting since I was 8 or 10 years old.... I have cards I bought when I was 10....

I collected cards as a kid between the ages of seven and thirteen but I paid only five cents a pack at the time or won them in flinging games. Those cards got scattered with the wind before I even finished ninth grade.

I've been re-amassing the cards from my childhood (and now many more) since 1979. But like I say, I've bought only those I wanted. As individual cards these were all generally affordable decades ago although of course I couldn't afford too many all at once. The main problem in those early days was finding the cards I wanted so I could only buy what was available in three card shops. (That's still the case for Post cards in nice condition.)

I've written up my card collecting story here:

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=353515

For me the thought of trading even a minor part of my card collection for a single card is bizarre.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

Huh?! What's strange about acquiring only what you like and therefore not wanting to part with it? Granted, a very small part of my collection (<3%) may consist of cards that I now regard as peripheral to my interests but overall I take real delight in what's in my binders.



I collected cards as a kid between the ages of seven and thirteen but I paid only five cents a pack at the time or won them in flinging games. Those cards got scattered with the wind before I even finished ninth grade.

I've been re-amassing the cards from my childhood (and now many more) since 1979. But like I say, I've bought only those I wanted. As individual cards these were all generally affordable decades ago although of course I couldn't afford too many all at once. The main problem in those early days was finding the cards I wanted so I could only buy what was available in three card shops. (That's still the case for Post cards in nice condition.)

I've written up my card collecting story here:

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=353515

For me the thought of trading even a minor part of my card collection for a single card is bizarre.

I suspect the big difference in approach here is whether collectors are focused on quantity or quality. Some of us want one of everything (or most everything), and we’re less focused on having the nicest copy. Others would rather have a handful of really nice pieces. Particularly if that means that we get to own a piece that had been a lifelong dream.

Not sure there’s one right way to collect, so we’re all welcome to figure it out for ourselves. And sometimes our priorities can change over time as well.

[brunswickreeves]

Sell (or trade) your card(s) for a 52 Topps Mantle? Yes, I attest it’s absolutely worth it emotionally and financially. The bigger obstacle than getting there is the desire and pursuit to continually upgrade to better versions. To each their own, all approaches (many or few/one card) makes us a stronger collecting community.

[JJ McGraw]

No, definitely not for Mantle or really any one player.And I say that growing up in the 1960’s , he was definitely a hero and a card we all wanted.( and one I NEVER put in my spokes). He does have a place of honor with other signed ball/card combos, but I find the Cracker Jacks far more interesting and appealing on every level. No offense to the Mick.

[JohnP0621]

I considered doing this several times. I had a boat load of T206 HOFers Including all 4 Cobbs in a PSA 4 Grade and other Great cards. I decided not trade my cards for the 52 Topps Mantle since I felt that the Mantle Price Range was way too high for me to purchase a Nice example and paying todays prices didnt make sense to me. Instead I sold a lot of my cards and traded some to pick up 2 Beautiful PSA 4 1933 Goudey Ruths and a 33 Gehrig and a Beautiful PSA 4 -52 Bowman Mantle and still had a lot of money left over and still kept one of my Cobbs . I may not have the 52 Topps Mantle but I am glad with the cards that I ended up getting .
I would have Loved getting a 52 Topps Mantle but I missed the Boat when they were reasonably priced. I SOLD and traded a Lot of cards over the last several years ( approx 400 ) but I dont miss them at all. I narrowed my collection to around 150 Cards that I really wanted and was able to do a Lot of things with the extra Money , A Nice 2 Week Vacation to Italy, Some House improvements , Daughters wedding Etc , Etc. Etc . Thats my Story but like everyone else said, Do what you like and whats best for you. .Its a Great Hobby and everyone has a different way of collecting.

BEST Regards
John P

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by mrreality68

I have sold my entire collection of good but assorted non focused cards. It was a diverse collection of vintage cards from CJ cards, to T206, t205, m101-4/5 , Felix Mendelssohn etc for 1 card.

I was tired of missing out on some of the rarer or higher bucket list cards I wanted because it was all tied up in my total collection. And I could not raise funds to get the dream cards/bucket list I wanted.

Made the choice and sold, traded etc and worked my way up to purchasing my Rookie Ruth. Then had only 1 and since then slowly building up my collection with more focused to the cards I really wanted. Takes lonelier but I find this approach is perfect for me.

"Takes lonelier"

Well put. You have very few nice cards now to keep you company. I hope you and young Ruth are still getting along.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[stutor]

I would love to swap my 522 t206 set for a Wagner (and make up the difference with other cards or cash). I know that sounds ridiculous at first, but my set has a lot of rarity/value. The thought being that the other guy might have two Wagners or the means to acquire another. I honestly think my set of 522 is one of the best out there…so the other guy could take what I already have, add a different Wagner, and have the best 523 or 524 😀. I floated the idea a little and realized no one was interested. I guess most Wagner owners really care more about the prestige of the Wagner itself (and less about the possibility of owning the best 524 set). Nothing wrong with that. I’ll just have to enjoy the set sans Wagner and keep upgrading whenever possible.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by stutor

I would love to swap my 522 t206 set for a Wagner (and make up the difference with other cards or cash). I know that sounds ridiculous at first, but my set has a lot of rarity/value. The thought being that the other guy might have two Wagners or the means to acquire another. I honestly think my set of 522 is one of the best out there…so the other guy could take what I already have, add a different Wagner, and have the best 523 or 524 😀. I floated the idea a little and realized no one was interested. I guess most Wagner owners really care more about the prestige of the Wagner itself (and less about the possibility of owning the best 524 set). Nothing wrong with that. I’ll just have to enjoy the set sans Wagner and keep upgrading whenever possible.

Question concerning the Wagner, while I'm not super familiar with Deadball era Tobacco/Candy cards, I know there's a handful of them that look similar to the t206. I'm curious, do you have any of those in your collection?

[stutor]

Originally Posted by Seven

Question concerning the Wagner, while I'm not super familiar with Deadball era Tobacco/Candy cards, I know there's a handful of them that look similar to the t206. I'm curious, do you have any of those in your collection?

I have a W600 Wagner. It’s a far stretch from a t206 Wagner. But that’s my choice to fill the empty spot. I think most people would prefer a 1910 tip top Wagner as their replacement card.

[sb1]

I traded a T206 Set(520), a T205 set(no Hoblitzell no stats or Cycle Matty) and a very nice T207 set plus, a T206 Plank, an E107 Delehanty, M110 Cobb and Mathewson and a little more for one card a few years ago.

It was probably 20% of my collection value wise, maybe less. Really don't miss it. maybe the Plank as it was my last one...

[sb1]

Originally Posted by stutor

I have a W600 Wagner. It’s a far stretch from a t206 Wagner. But that’s my choice to fill the empty spot. I think most people would prefer a 1910 tip top Wagner as their replacement card.

Very nice Sonny! If you ever need to rehome it I am interested.

To the poster asking about options there are several...E90-2 is popular, I opted to keep a Rose Postcard as well once my Wagner was gone.

[brunswickreeves]

To the Wagner portrait question above, there are actually many amazing card versions of the infamous Carl Horner photo of Honus Wagner. Only three color versions exist of Wagner’s original facing orientation: 1909 T206, 1910 Top Top Bread, and 1910 W-UNC (my avatar, as pictured below).

[MR RAREBACK]

Sounds like it's your dream card so go for it.
It may be out of reach if you wait to long
alot of my dream cards are out of reach now

[sb1]

Other Wagners.

Rose PC

and

Uncatalogued

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

I am toying with an idea of liquidating a large % of my collection to try and build enough of a kitty to buy my first ‘52 Mantle.

Even with that, the best I can probably afford would be a reasonably decent eye appeal 1.5….

Have other Net54ers ever done anything like this? Happy you did? Or filled with post transaction regret??

I’d love to hear your stories and/or your advice… sell most of your PC to add the hobby’s most iconic card?

Thx all

Jeff

I would never trade my collection for any card. I am very thankful for what I have.

Plus, 52 Topps Mantle are overrated

[Seven]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

I would never trade my collection for any card. I am very thankful for what I have.

Plus, 52 Topps Mantle are overrated

I think that's a really subjective take. To me, I think the 52 Topps Mantle is perfectly rated. It's one of the cards I want the most as a collector. I'm sure other people feel that way as well. Cards aren't like comparing the career of the athlete.

[Casey2296]

-
Not a 52 Mantle but I would consider trading the bottom 80% of my collection for a 1914 Texas Tommy Joe Jackson.
-

[refz]

No, I’d rather have the 1951 bowman mantle. Plus I wouldn’t have to dump 80% of my collection to get one.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by sb1

I traded a T206 Set(520), a T205 set(no Hoblitzell no stats or Cycle Matty) and a very nice T207 set plus, a T206 Plank, an E107 Delehanty, M110 Cobb and Mathewson and a little more for one card a few years ago.

It was probably 20% of my collection value wise, maybe less. Really don't miss it. maybe the Plank as it was my last one...

What was the one card you bought?

[sb1]

Originally Posted by calvindog

What was the one card you bought?

A wise old counselor, asking a question you already know the answer to...

[MR RAREBACK]

Originally Posted by sb1

A wise old counselor, asking a question you already know the answer to...

Wow

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by sb1

A wise old counselor, asking a question you already know the answer to...

Oh yes. Damn solid purchase.

[Epps]

Beautiful card Scott! You made another big trade long ago if memory serves right?

It would be difficult due to how long it’s taken to chase some of the tougher cards, but I would trade 80% for a T210 Joe Jackson.

[Mark17]

I can easily understand the iconic status of the Wagner and Plank, which are beautiful key cards in a set that has been hugely popular for well over 100 years. Not only are they in very short supply, but they feature two of the most prominent stars of their day. And, they are beautiful cards - the T206 portraits are the best likenesses in the set, generally.

To me. the "iconic" status of the 1952 Topps Mantle is somewhat manufactured. I think it is popular partly because everybody else thinks it's iconic. There might be a Berra-ism there somewhere. For starters, it's popularity and value mostly dates back to the Card Prices Update days, and the advent of the "rookie card craze," when the hobby suddenly decided the first appearance on a card, like the first edition of a book, was deserving of elevated status.

The 1952 Topps Mantle was designated a RC at first, although it was not a true rookie card. It was a high number, but also a double-print and therefore not scarce. It also, to my mind anyway, is not an attractive card, like the 1953 or 1954 Bowman, or 1961, 1964-1966, and 1968 Topps cards.

Mantle himself is iconic, no doubt. But the 1952 Topps edition, originally pitched as a RC, is not a rookie card, it is not scarce due to double-printing, and its attractiveness is personal taste, but not universally appreciated.

What I'm saying is, I think a big part of this card's popularity is psychological. People covet it because others covet it.

[sb1]

"People covet it because others covet it."

This is the impetus behind every collectible's value. Many, many times a more available item may well bring more than a scarcer item of the same genre, only because everyone has to have one.

The old adage "supply and demand" is fine for commodities in every day life but in the collectible world it's "demand" is the winner.

My lowly Mantle for a card pic.

[kailes2872]

I have thought about consolidating the collection to a few high end cards (I refuse to use the term grail).

However, unless it would be very clean in BST, a $250k collection might net 180-200k after fees in an AH or selling to a dealer. Then, after fees/BP, that 180k to 200k turns into a 150k -170k card. So, If I am going to sell, then it makes more sense to put the 180k - 200k into equities in the financial market versus giving away even more juice to get the card. Even with appreciation of a big card that exceeds the appreciation of the entire collection, it would take several years to get back to even.

My calculations could be off, but this has what has kept me status quo versus consolidating.

[The Detroit Collector]

Originally Posted by sb1

A wise old counselor, asking a question you already know the answer to...

When I made my original post in this thread, this was the kind I had in mind. Amazing

[Seven]

Originally Posted by Mark17

To me. the "iconic" status of the 1952 Topps Mantle is somewhat manufactured. I think it is popular partly because everybody else thinks it's iconic. There might be a Berra-ism there somewhere. For starters, it's popularity and value mostly dates back to the Card Prices Update days, and the advent of the "rookie card craze," when the hobby suddenly decided the first appearance on a card, like the first edition of a book, was deserving of elevated status.

The 1952 Topps Mantle was designated a RC at first, although it was not a true rookie card. It was a high number, but also a double-print and therefore not scarce. It also, to my mind anyway, is not an attractive card, like the 1953 or 1954 Bowman, or 1961, 1964-1966, and 1968 Topps cards.

Mantle himself is iconic, no doubt. But the 1952 Topps edition, originally pitched as a RC, is not a rookie card, it is not scarce due to double-printing, and its attractiveness is personal taste, but not universally appreciated.

What I'm saying is, I think a big part of this card's popularity is psychological. People covet it because others covet it.

I agree with many of the points outlined, I also think that it's such a notable card because one of the largest groups with the most disposable incomes, The Baby Boomer Generation, idolized Mantle as a kid. Mantle was/is worshipped and some of that worship got passed down to their kids, as they had them and introduced them to the Hobby.

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

I would never trade my collection for any card. I am very thankful for what I have.

That says it all for me right there.

Originally Posted by parkplace33

Plus, 52 Topps Mantle are overrated

Originally Posted by Mark17

To me the "iconic" status of the 1952 Topps Mantle is somewhat manufactured. I think it is popular partly because everybody else thinks it's iconic. There might be a Berra-ism there somewhere. For starters, it's popularity and value mostly dates back to the Card Prices Update days, and the advent of the "rookie card craze," when the hobby suddenly decided the first appearance on a card, like the first edition of a book, was deserving of elevated status.

The 1952 Topps Mantle was designated a RC at first, although it was not a true rookie card. It was a high number, but also a double-print and therefore not scarce. It also, to my mind anyway, is not an attractive card, like the 1953 or 1954 Bowman, or 1961, 1964-1966, and 1968 Topps cards.

Mantle himself is iconic, no doubt. But the 1952 Topps edition, originally pitched as a RC, is not a rookie card, it is not scarce due to double-printing, and its attractiveness is personal taste, but not universally appreciated.

What I'm saying is, I think a big part of this card's popularity is psychological. People covet it because others covet it.

Yes! I fully agree.