![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
As someone who enjoys collecting "rarity" in the card world I can testify that the term is way overused. I think about it very often when I see some cards that used to be (1-3 known) have a "find" of 50 show up and then they aren't really "rare" anymore, or at a minimum, much more plentiful than previously thought. The T205 and T206 Drum finds from the last few years as well as the M101 "Everybody's" and "Mall Theater" finds made some of those cards go from single digit known to something a bit more accessible. They are still "rare" compared to most other issues but not like they once were. One thing that many owners of these, and other, "rare" antiquities don't remember is that the "supply"(rarity) side of the supply-vs-rarity scale is only half of the value equation. And I think it could even be argued it is the less important, with respect to value, side of the equation. Case in point, '52 Mantle, T206 Wags, '33 Goudey Lajoie etc...There is such great demand for those cards that their value will always be high. I would venture to guess I have hundreds of cards in my collection more rare than any of those 3 cards but very few that would garner their kind of prices in auction. Great subject.....
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
And just to add - everyone views rarity in terms of their own collecting approach - e.g. as a type collector, Leon mentioned 50 cards showing up and some might no longer consider that issue rare, though, maybe only 1 of each player showed up and so another collector would view each player's card as rare.
A perfect example of this is the E101 and E102 issues. The E101 set has twice as many cards as the E102 set. E102s were often considered to be a tougher type card then E101 (though current populations show far fewer total E101s then E102s), but because the E101 set has so many more subjects, FAR fewer cards of each E101 subject exist then E102. The market is slowly catching up with that. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rare is a term used to get the most money you can out of an item. If you look on ebay every day there are so many rare items every day that it is unbelieveable. Rare should only be given to those items that are truly low in production numbers. An original painting, some early test coinage, etc. I feel that if there is fifty of something it is not rare. Scarce perhaps, but not rare. Ebay has taken the rarity out of many items that were thought to be rare. Just an opnion. Frank
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
In the T206 realm,I think with the explosion of interest in rare backs,and rare front/back combo's,there will probably be a "re-birth" on what is considered a "rarity".
For instance,there are many Red Cobb's out there,but TedZ pointed out that there are (I hope I'm getting this right,and apologize if I'm not) something like only 4 known examples of the Red Cobb with the Sov.460 back.That would make that front/back combo extremely more rare than the Wagner,Plank,and the Magie error.But I guess it hasn't garnered that status because there are many more Red Cobb T206's out there in population without regard to "backs". I love the fact that people are really starting to recognize the front/back combo's more and more,because I think it is creating sort of a "new standard" of rarity within the T206 set,and a new respect for the difficulty of certain cards/combo's........ Sincerely,Clayton Last edited by teetwoohsix; 04-05-2010 at 01:28 AM. Reason: spelling |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
'At least a rarity scale quantifies a subjective term.'
I agree wholeheartedly. best, barry |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The four letter word "rare," has totally lost it's meaning.
Whenever I see it, I instantly equate it to the four letter word "HYPE." You can have all the surveys you want, they're just a drop in the bucket of the unknown raw cards out there. ... but they are fun to read. ![]() |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Joe - I'm sure that's true, but it stands to reason that they are representative of the greater distribution, just like a poll represents the full population. If SGC has only graded 100 cards of a particular issue and 5000 cards of another, we can safely assume the ungraded cards also exist in correlating ratios.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I beg to differ ... a poll does not represent the full population ... It only represents the ones that took the poll. How often have you looked at a poll, and passed by it? An example, this forum is active in many ways, to those in it, it almost appears like the whole Cardoholic world is here. Nothing could be further from the truth. We're just a dot in Cardoholic Collector/Investor Portfolio World. ![]() Stay well, Joe |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I really believe that it's time to list the cigarette makers of tobacco cards seperate. I know I will hear a lot of cons about it, but each brand should be on its own. Bulking these all together in a price guide is not how it should be. There is enough info out there now to have a good idea of what backs go with what players of each cigarette company.
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Long Term Effects of Economic Slowdown | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 01-06-2009 11:40 AM |
Jewish baseball history discussion | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 05-24-2008 03:57 PM |
MastroNet Lot Misrepresentation – Results of a Discussion with Doug Allen | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 31 | 02-06-2007 11:21 PM |
For Discussion: Relative Values of T206 and T205 | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 06-02-2006 09:57 AM |
The Term Pre War Card | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 04-22-2006 10:50 PM |