The 1952 Topps Mantle is Overpriced and Over-hyped

[z28jd]

That title is a quote from someone who most people here will recognize. From the May 11, 1980 issue of The Pittsburgh Press:

[cardsagain74]

Gotta love how "customers" is in quotes, along with the rest of the mocking tone of the article.

[Yoda]

Brings back a lot of memories of deals done with Mike W. And Wayne V.

[Exhibitman]

[jchcollins]

Maybe true now, as it was true then - depending on your perspective. How many desirable hobby items, money aside - are truly scarce to the point where you can't find one even if you have the cash to pony up? I'm not a prewar guy per se, but I know that most items in this realm that people on this board are going to be concerned about are prewar items. So there is that.

But that aside, there are plenty of postwar vintage cards that aren't truly rare or scarce by the factual definition of those words that still sell for big $ and have for decades now. I'm guessing Mike Wheat eventually got comfortable with that notion based on what I know of him in the hobby.

Reminds me of the article that came out I'm guessing at some point close to this one of the guy who burned his '52 Mantle in a trash bin with a bunch of other cards in protest over the MLB strike of 1981. I'm guessing if that guy lived for much longer after he did that, he lived to regret it.

[BioCRN]

89 Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr is far from rare and over-priced + over-hyped considering it's massive availability...but everyone wants one.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by BioCRN

89 Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr is far from rare and over-priced + over-hyped considering it's massive availability...but everyone wants one.

I remember when those 1985 Topps McGwire USA rookie cards were like that once.

[BioCRN]

Originally Posted by BobC

I remember when those 1985 Topps McGwire USA rookie cards were like that once.

At least they still have some value. 1983 Topps Traded Ron Kittle broke a few people in a short amount of time.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by BioCRN

At least they still have some value. 1983 Topps Traded Ron Kittle broke a few people in a short amount of time.

LOL!


You are correct sir. Right up there with the Gregg Jefferies rookie cards.

[Seven]

The card has transcended the Hobby. This we know. It represents 1950's, post World War 2, Americana. It's such an iconic image at this point, that you have people that don't know a thing about cards buying it. Like everything else, I wish it was available at the price it was in the 1980s!

[steve B]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Maybe true now, as it was true then - depending on your perspective. How many desirable hobby items, money aside - are truly scarce to the point where you can't find one even if you have the cash to pony up? I'm not a prewar guy per se, but I know that most items in this realm that people on this board are going to be concerned about are prewar items. So there is that.

But that aside, there are plenty of postwar vintage cards that aren't truly rare or scarce by the factual definition of those words that still sell for big $ and have for decades now. I'm guessing Mike Wheat eventually got comfortable with that notion based on what I know of him in the hobby.

Reminds me of the article that came out I'm guessing at some point close to this one of the guy who burned his '52 Mantle in a trash bin with a bunch of other cards in protest over the MLB strike of 1981. I'm guessing if that guy lived for much longer after he did that, he lived to regret it.

A dealer being comfortable with a card and its hype and overpricing shouldn't be a surprise, that's just how things are.

But he's not wrong, aside from the hype, that double print really doesn't have much going for it.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by steve B

A dealer being comfortable with a card and its hype and overpricing shouldn't be a surprise, that's just how things are.

But he's not wrong, aside from the hype, that double print really doesn't have much going for it.

I show the pictures of it to my wife every time it's featured prominently in a new auction catalog (so like once a week). She still doesn't remember who he is but refers to it as the card of that guy who looks like he's got some kind of intellectual deficit, so I guess aesthetically it's not his best image.

[MattyC]

I get a chuckle every time someone goes out of their way to try and slight the hobby's most widely desired postwar card. The acidic haters might as well rage against the rising and setting of the sun. If you don't like or revere it or the player, move the hell along and spend your time on whatever it is you like to collect. That said if Mantle triggers somebody and they get off on masochistically triggering themselves, I got a lot of Mantles for your eye sockets.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I get a chuckle every time someone goes out of their way to try and slight the hobby's most widely desired postwar card. The acidic haters might as well rage against the rising and setting of the sun. If you don't like or revere it or the player, move the hell along and spend your time on whatever it is you like to collect. That said if Mantle triggers somebody and they get off on masochistically triggering themselves, I got a lot of Mantles for your eye sockets.

You did read the title of the thread right? Speaking of Move the hell along.

Also, look up what overhyped means before sounding like a clueless fanboy. Sometimes those guys make me almost wonder if Mantle didn't save the Yankees a bundle by playing every position at once.

Reality is that it's a double print. By definition twice as common as all but the other two 52 High number double prints.

By your logic that being super popular means it's the GREATEST EVER...
McDonalds must make the best burgers, they've sold billions. so many they stopped putting number son the signs years ago.

[MattyC]

Keep on hating. The card will always be desirable. Yes, we all know it was a double print-- that doesn't seem to have affected its price, demand, or even scarcity in centered state. Clueless fanboy-- more like a fan of a great player who laughs at bitter trolls like you who have nothing better to do that hate on Mantle and one of the top cards in the hobby. Keep screaming, "Double print," and maybe one day that factor won't be utterly moot. You say Macdonalds, I'll say Mercedes. They're not uncommon on the street, but desirable.

[GregC]

Originally Posted by steve B

You did read the title of the thread right? Speaking of Move the hell along.

Also, look up what overhyped means before sounding like a clueless fanboy. Sometimes those guys make me almost wonder if Mantle didn't save the Yankees a bundle by playing every position at once.

Reality is that it's a double print. By definition twice as common as all but the other two 52 High number double prints.

By your logic that being super popular means it's the GREATEST EVER...
McDonalds must make the best burgers, they've sold billions. so many they stopped putting number son the signs years ago.

Keyboard tough guy alert!

[JackR]

Per Leon’s mantra that every thread deserves a card…

[jingram058]

The fact is, for whatever reason(s) it took off. Right alongside the Wagner t206. Above anything Ruth, playing days or otherwise, Cobb or whoever. It just is what it is, and it ain't coming down. Come Hell or high water.

[irv]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I get a chuckle every time someone goes out of their way to try and slight the hobby's most widely desired postwar card. The acidic haters might as well rage against the rising and setting of the sun. If you don't like or revere it or the player, move the hell along and spend your time on whatever it is you like to collect. That said if Mantle triggers somebody and they get off on masochistically triggering themselves, I got a lot of Mantles for your eye sockets.

Originally Posted by MattyC

Keep on hating. The card will always be desirable. Yes, we all know it was a double print-- that doesn't seem to have affected its price, demand, or even scarcity in centered state. Clueless fanboy-- more like a fan of a great player who laughs at bitter trolls like you who have nothing better to do that hate on Mantle and one of the top cards in the hobby. Keep screaming, "Double print," and maybe one day that factor won't be utterly moot. You say Macdonalds, I'll say Mercedes. They're not uncommon on the street, but desirable.

Well said.
I've read these before and have concluded that those who don't own one, and likely never will, are the ones who are the most negatively voiced about it.

[sb1]

Don't care much about the debate, I have and have had several 52 Topps Mantle's.

I just appreciate the story quotes from hobby personas that were real players in the day, Bill, Mike and Wayne. If you did not know them, you missed a major portion of the hobby, long before it was a business. I was fortunate to know them on a first name basis, during my heyday in collecting.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by Seven

The card has transcended the Hobby. This we know. It represents 1950's, post World War 2, Americana.

This, along with the golden age of baseball.

Even if someone doesn't find it aesthetically pleasing, you'd think it'd be tough for any collector not to appreciate the positives associated with the card (especially given how much it's helped the hobby grow).

[brian1961]

I will speak from experience. When I was 18 in 1972, and just beginning in the adult card collecting hobby, I was very privileged my dear mother helped me go to my first card show: the big Midwest Sports Collectors Convention in Troy, Michigan. I saw so many wondrous cards; it was overload to the max. I honestly don't recall if I saw a 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle there or not.

However, I did get to meet Mr. Larry Fritsch. He was a nice man and very knowledgeable about cards. He was making a name for himself as a big dealer. Well, late that year, right after Christmas in fact, I wrote a letter to Larry expressing my desire for a really nice 1952 Mickey Mantle. I'm sure I figured if anyone had one, he would. Years earlier I'd written to Bruce Yeko at Wholesale Cards, and he did not have one, but said if he did it would be $20, a whopper of a price to me. So, I waited to see what Larry Fritsch had to say.

Early in 1973, I received his return letter. He was very nice. He told me he had just one left, in mint condition, and he would sell it to me for $25. He also said he'd hold it for me until I responded. His asking price seemed very fair, by this time. I didn't have twenty-five bucks. As a high school senior, and a track runner, I had no money. By this time, my mother was a widow. Money was tight. I suppose I felt in my guts this would be my only chance to get this Mickey. I wanted it very badly. I somehow convinced my dear Mom this would be a dream card for me. I don't recall our exact conversation, but she agreed, and sent Mr. Fritsch a check.

Within ten days, a small husky brown padded package arrived. When I opened it, I was overwhelmed with how beautiful the card was. The colors were so intense. The picture registry was perfect. There wasn't a print spot to be found at all. The centering was not perfect, but most acceptable, just a tsch shy of 60-40 both ways. The condition was probably EX-MT. I was way, way more than satisfied. You can best be sure I thanked, hugged, and kissed my dear mother for her kindness and sacrifice.

I tried to take as good of care of it as I knew how. I looked at it every so often, but not all the time. Maybe I didn't want it to become routine to my eyes. Anyway, it was always, and I mean ALWAYS, a big thrill to see it. Eventually, 23 years later, married with a son, living in a very hot in the summer, and very cold in the winter, 100+ year-old upstairs apartment, I knew I had to do something to get us out of there. It was time to raise some money for a down payment on a house. So, among some of my cherished cards, the '52 Topps Mickey Mantle was consigned to a Mr. Mint Alan Rosen phone auction. After his cut, I got a little over $8,000 for that card. Sure, it was hard, but my family and I couldn't live any longer in those conditions. I wanted to add that my dearest darling did not demand I sell the '52 Topps Mantle masterpiece; it was my own decision. I loved my dear wife and son that much. They were worth it.

I cannot answer if the card is over-priced today. I was never able to replace mine. Do I miss it?

What do you think? Many a day I've missed it.

Any regrets?

No.

As far as whether the 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle is over-hyped, I would definitely say it is hyped as much as it should be. I love Mickey Mantle, and his '52 Topps was my co-favorite card of his, or at least my second favorite Mantle. My co-favorite Mantle, or favorite Mick, was a card I would not sell when deciding what to part with to raise funds for a home. I much more favored that one because I KNEW there wasn't another as nice, and KNEW I'd never be able to replace it. I'm getting off the subject; excuse me.

Again, the 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle is a mesmerizing baseball card. I love how it looks. A perfect card. The demand will very likely always be more than the supply.

---Brian Powell

[jingram058]

That is an awesome and interesting post that Brian wrote. No one could sum it up any better. I truly feel bad that he sold that card. And I know first hand about how gut wrenching sick it feels to have to sell something like that. Money got tight for me, and I sold some great cards for basically peanuts. I vowed then and there I would never do it again. I would rather shove a shopping cart of trash bags around, with my cards in them, than ever do that again.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by brian1961

However, I did get to meet Mr. Larry Fritsch. He was a nice man and very knowledgeable about cards.

I first bought from Fritsch's company just a year ago. It was a $10 vintage card, and it arrived with a small price list of other cards and a surprise complimentary junk wax pack. There may have been a small note there too.

Remember thinking....this is exactly how you do business. For the $1 it cost to do those extras with a new customer, it could lead someone to order plenty more from there.

Sounds like other experiences were just as good 50 years ago!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Brian, great story. I was collecting cards in the early 70s but it never occurred to me to try to acquire anything other than the current ones.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Well, guys, I was born in the early 70s. Do I own a '52 Mantle? Nope. Would I like to someday? You betcha. I love the way it looks and have always admired it, irrespective of its value. From my vantage point, it is a very desirable baseball card in a set I happen to like.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[pokerplyr80]

Couldn't agree more Matt. Every time a thread like this comes up the haters come out. The card's iconic status hasn't changed in the 40+ years since this article was published, and it won't be changing any time soon.

And as Matt said if you think they're too common, try to find a centered example with decent eye appeal.

These are my two favorite cards in my collection.

[profholt82]

Now that's a great pic, Jesse. As great as the 52T Mantle is, I've always preferred the 51B. As a kid in the 80s, new to card collecting, it was all about the 52T, I'd see pictures of it, and I remember a feature story on it in Beckett. My uncle complained that he had one as a kid, but my grandma threw it out when he left for college. Haha, who hasn't heard a similar story? Beyond the T206 Wagner, I dont know that there's a more ubiquitous card when people think of the hobby.

But all of that said, I didn't even know about the 51B until years after I got into collecting when I found out it was his true rookie. People had always said the 52 was his rookie, and I had never questioned it. But when I first saw that 51B, I fell in love. What an amazing looking card. I think it looks so much better than the 52. Don't get me wrong, the 52T is an amazing card, and a cornerstone card for the hobby, but it will always be second fiddle to his 51B rookie to me. It's one of my all time favorite cards in the entire hobby.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I am not at all a hater, but it has always surprised me that in a hobby so consumed with rookie cards, a second year Card has achieved the stature it has.

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Couldn't agree more Matt. Every time a thread like this comes up the haters come out. The card's iconic status hasn't changed in the 40+ years since this article was published, and it won't be changing any time soon.

And as Matt said if you think they're too common, try to find a centered example with decent eye appeal.

These are my two favorite cards in my collection.

Thanks, Jesse. And I agree. You hang a lantern on a great point. To many guys who collect, there are certain cards we love— and then there are centered examples of those cards. This is true whether it is a Goudey Ruth, e121 Ruth, m101 Ruth, e90-1 Jackson, d304 Cobb, or a 51-69 Bowman/Topps Mantle.

In the case of the 51B, anyone who thinks that card is common is speciously assuming the buyer wants ANY copy. But try finding a copy that is centered and focused. Entirely different ballgame. So many examples of that card are plagued by focus and registration issues, in addition to horrific centering.

In the case of the 1952 Topps Mantle, finding "a" copy is not hard. Finding one with centering like the one pictured below? Very hard. Most 1952 Mantles are very poorly centered. There was even that find a few years back of 5 copies, including one that graded out an 8.5— not one of them centered. Bottom line, certain cards centered are extremely rare, no matter the data of the "gen pop." That is precisely why the market evolved and there is now a massive premium for eye appeal and centering on certain cards.

PS: Jesse, glad to see my old 51B is loved and has stayed in one place all those years. I remember what seems like ages and ages ago, when I got that card at a Lew Lipset auction.

[Exhibitman]

When I was considering a 1952 Topps Mantle I had a lot of thoughts apart from the aesthetics of the card itself (FWIW, I think the card is really nice looking in the full border around the logo box version, but I understand that others may find the Flexichrome work to be lacking). What it boiled down to for me is: One of a handful of iconic players, Yankees dynasty, high # card from the most important postwar set, with what is now a fifty-year history of value behind it. With all that I don't see how the card is undesirable. We can debate price points but the overall premise of the OP amounts to picking an argument over the existence of gravity.

[npa589]

Thank you so much for this - but now you have me intrigued enough to ask - what is your favorite Mantle?

Originally Posted by brian1961

I will speak from experience. When I was 18 in 1972, and just beginning in the adult card collecting hobby, I was very privileged my dear mother helped me go to my first card show: the big Midwest Sports Collectors Convention in Troy, Michigan. I saw so many wondrous cards; it was overload to the max. I honestly don't recall if I saw a 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle there or not.

However, I did get to meet Mr. Larry Fritsch. He was a nice man and very knowledgeable about cards. He was making a name for himself as a big dealer. Well, late that year, right after Christmas in fact, I wrote a letter to Larry expressing my desire for a really nice 1952 Mickey Mantle. I'm sure I figured if anyone had one, he would. Years earlier I'd written to Bruce Yeko at Wholesale Cards, and he did not have one, but said if he did it would be $20, a whopper of a price to me. So, I waited to see what Larry Fritsch had to say.

Early in 1973, I received his return letter. He was very nice. He told me he had just one left, in mint condition, and he would sell it to me for $25. He also said he'd hold it for me until I responded. His asking price seemed very fair, by this time. I didn't have twenty-five bucks. As a high school senior, and a track runner, I had no money. By this time, my mother was a widow. Money was tight. I suppose I felt in my guts this would be my only chance to get this Mickey. I wanted it very badly. I somehow convinced my dear Mom this would be a dream card for me. I don't recall our exact conversation, but she agreed, and sent Mr. Fritsch a check.

Within ten days, a small husky brown padded package arrived. When I opened it, I was overwhelmed with how beautiful the card was. The colors were so intense. The picture registry was perfect. There wasn't a print spot to be found at all. The centering was not perfect, but most acceptable, just a tsch shy of 60-40 both ways. The condition was probably EX-MT. I was way, way more than satisfied. You can best be sure I thanked, hugged, and kissed my dear mother for her kindness and sacrifice.

I tried to take as good of care of it as I knew how. I looked at it every so often, but not all the time. Maybe I didn't want it to become routine to my eyes. Anyway, it was always, and I mean ALWAYS, a big thrill to see it. Eventually, 23 years later, married with a son, living in a very hot in the summer, and very cold in the winter, 100+ year-old upstairs apartment, I knew I had to do something to get us out of there. It was time to raise some money for a down payment on a house. So, among some of my cherished cards, the '52 Topps Mickey Mantle was consigned to a Mr. Mint Alan Rosen phone auction. After his cut, I got a little over $8,000 for that card. Sure, it was hard, but my family and I couldn't live any longer in those conditions. I wanted to add that my dearest darling did not demand I sell the '52 Topps Mantle masterpiece; it was my own decision. I loved my dear wife and son that much. They were worth it.

I cannot answer if the card is over-priced today. I was never able to replace mine. Do I miss it?

What do you think? Many a day I've missed it.

Any regrets?

No.

As far as whether the 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle is over-hyped, I would definitely say it is hyped as much as it should be. I love Mickey Mantle, and his '52 Topps was my co-favorite card of his, or at least my second favorite Mantle. My co-favorite Mantle, or favorite Mick, was a card I would not sell when deciding what to part with to raise funds for a home. I much more favored that one because I KNEW there wasn't another as nice, and KNEW I'd never be able to replace it. I'm getting off the subject; excuse me.

Again, the 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle is a mesmerizing baseball card. I love how it looks. A perfect card. The demand will very likely always be more than the supply.

---Brian Powell

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I am not at all a hater, but it has always surprised me that in a hobby so consumed with rookie cards, a second year Card has achieved the stature it has.

Being the most iconic card of one of the most iconic sets of all time certainly helps. While unusual it's not the only example. I remember a thread from a few years back in this very subject, second year cards worth more than rookies. Most other examples were due to the popularity of the issue or condition sensitivity (Thurman Munson).

And yes Matt that 51 Mantle won't be going anywhere anytime soon. I do personally feel the card is undervalued and have considered adding another. Even if I do, I will keep this one too.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Being the most iconic card of one of the most iconic sets of all time certainly helps. While unusual it's not the only example. I remember a thread from a few years back in this very subject, second year cards worth more than rookies. Most other examples were due to the popularity of the issue or condition sensitivity (Thurman Munson).

And yes Matt that 51 Mantle won't be going anywhere anytime soon. I do personally feel the card is undervalued and have considered adding another. Even if I do, I will keep this one too.

Right, but compare it to the 52T Mays, also a second year card and while of course popular, not remotely in the same price class as Mantle. Not a high number, but Mantle being a double print makes up for a lot of that. I think it's hard to explain objectively. It's just one of those things.

[pokerplyr80]

True, I have no idea when it started, but at some point collectors decided that was the card to have. I'm sure similar arguments could be made about the t206 Wagner. He has cards issued earlier, and others that are more rare.

They're so iconic that many not in the hobby have heard of them. Perhaps similar to that stamp with the upside down air plane. I have never collected stamps and probably never will, but I've heard of that one. And if I was only going to buy one, that's the one I'd want.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Go for it.

Inverted Jenny
Nature of rarity Invert error
No. in existence 100
Face value 24 US¢
Estimated value US $1,593,000

[Jetsfan]

I’d personally take one, so much so that I’d even be happy with one centered 60/40

Adam

[pokerplyr80]

Well in this case it's the one I'd want but can't afford.

A better comparison may be the Star 101 and 86 Fleer Jordan. Not quite the same because of how the star cards were issued, but it came first and is much more rare. The Fleer is much more popular and is also referred to as a rookie card.

But whatever the reasons, the 52 Mantle has cemented its place in the hobby. I love mine, and it will always be the centerpiece of my collection.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The third year Jordan Fleer card is definitely overpriced and overhyped.

[Republicaninmass]

Cant beat even a low grade Mick

[MattyC]

Gotta shout out Ted whenever he posts that signed Mick! God that is an awesome piece bro well done yet again.

[Republicaninmass]

Much appreciated...it will appreciate

[profholt82]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

The third year Jordan Fleer card is definitely overpriced and overhyped.

That I agree with. It's because there hadn't been a major mass produced NBA set for a number of years prior to the 86 Fleer, so it became a big deal. But it's as if collectors just pretend that the Star sets don't exist. I recall back when Beckett began putting out the basketball guide in the early 90s that the Star sets were always listed. So I'm not sure why that brand has become so forgotten nowadays. But yeah, multiple years of Jordans came out in Star before that 86 Fleer set.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by profholt82

That I agree with. It's because there hadn't been a major mass produced NBA set for a number of years prior to the 86 Fleer, so it became a big deal. But it's as if collectors just pretend that the Star sets don't exist. I recall back when Beckett began putting out the basketball guide in the early 90s that the Star sets were always listed. So I'm not sure why that brand has become so forgotten nowadays. But yeah, multiple years of Jordans came out in Star before that 86 Fleer set.

In Mantle's case though the rookie card is cheaper. The '84 Star Jordan sells for at least twice what the '86 Fleer goes for in the same condition.

[profholt82]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

In Mantle's case though the rookie card is cheaper. The '84 Star Jordan sells for at least twice what the '86 Fleer goes for in the same condition.

I know about the discrepancy between the 52 and 51, but didnt realize it was the same with the Jordans. Interesting. Well, based on rarity and the fact that it's a true rookie, I think the Star should be worth more. It's just that the 86 Fleer has become the iconic card by comparison, didnt realize it was worth less.

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

True, I have no idea when it started, but at some point collectors decided that was the card to have...

There was a copy which sold at auction for $3,000 around 1980. It was a mainstream news story which greatly increased the popularity of baseball card collecting.

This was a tremendous amount of amount of money for a card which was (at that point) less than 30 years old. It sent many people scrambling to find their childhood collection, visions of dollar signs dancing in their minds.

The hobby took a meteoric rise throughout the 80s, with this card being top-of-mind for many new collectors. That "first impression" has proven to be quite a lasting one.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by Eric72

There was a copy which sold at auction for $3,000 around 1980. It was a mainstream news story which greatly increased the popularity of baseball card collecting.

This was a tremendous amount of amount of money for a card which was (at that point) less than 30 years old. It sent many people scrambling to find their childhood collection, visions of dollar signs dancing in their minds.

The hobby took a meteoric rise throughout the 80s, with this card being top-of-mind for many new collectors. That "first impression" has proven to be quite a lasting one.

The interesting thing is $3000 adjusted for inflation in 2022, would be a touch over $10,500, which nowadays, cannot even afford you a 1952 Mantle, even in its worst condition.

[brian1961]

Friends, I hunted and hunted for this little hobby relic. My dear son loaded up the return letter I received from Larry Fritsch in answer to my inquiry if he had a really nice 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle available for sale. Though the letter does not specifically state "1952 Topps", trust me, that was the card. I saved it as a souvenir. Sure wish I had that virtually incomparable Mantle back, but my wife and I are happily living in a nice house. My son is married now, but he kindly helped me get this letter on here for those of you who might be amused.

--- Brian Powell

[Peter_Spaeth]

What a great document.

[Exhibitman]

$25 in 1973...if my father had bought 10 of them...