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

[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

[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.

[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.

[pokerplyr80]

I'd say go for it. You can always add back the cards you miss later. Picked this up a while back and definitely don't regret it.

[gregndodgers]

Sell your cards! You can go back later and buy some of the cards again; the ones you really like, but a 42 Mantle is hard to find and going up price!

[jchcollins]

My answer to the question would be "no", but that would be a bit tongue-in-cheek even out of the gate. My collection sold at high retail right now might be able to be traded for the worst looking Authentic '52 Mantle you can imagine...but not much more. It's not something I would seriously entertain.

Besides a better answer to the Mantle question being "I was born at least 20 years too late", right now I would be in no mood to trade many cards that I enjoy for one. Traditionally, I get spooked with too much $ being tied up in just any one card, and try to avoid situations where I would be placing all of my dopamine (if not dollar...) value in only one or a few cards.

I'm in my late 40's; enjoy working on postwar player runs and selected sets, and as someone who has never seriously done much with prewar cards - I think my next big endeavor (in terms of $ anyway...) will be going after a prewar Chicago Cubs collection.

The day may come when I want to consolidate down and turn thousands of cards into much fewer - but honestly I don't know what that would feel like, and I have even less of an idea what it would look like. Ask me if I'm still around on these boards 25 years from now...

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by sb1

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

Oh yes. Damn solid purchase.

[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