@olb31 said:
In my opinion Randy has definite growth potential on all cards. Many Griffey cards are going to go up, but there will be a limit on the Upper Deck. 30,000 PSa 9's make the 9 practically worthless in my book. It's 10 or bust.
OPC Randy Johnson has about 50 PSA 10's. SHould be selling for multiples of the Griffey upper deck, so should the Johnson tffany.
Yup. Already missed the run up on Griffey Upper Deck. It could fall just as hard...and has started to already. Hence why I would be worried. I would guess(pure guess not advice) that the Griffey Upper Deck PSA 10 settles in the $1,200 range two years from now. Still up from pre covid since the market is strong as a whole and did have a revival.
The iconic status is already priced in. It is only its iconic status that keeps it from falling back to the $700 level where the price is a little more plausible(yet still inflated a little high even there).
The Griffey hype was warranted in his Seattle time and that drove his Upper Deck card. History won't feel that hype too much in the future. He disappointed too much after Seattle.
The Griffey Upper Deck grows on trees. I saw a few in my backyard this morning.
Do you look at any Johnson Tiffany cards? 100 pop in PSA 10 for the base set card.
Just like ndleo said " Almost 35 years since Griffey and Johnson were rookies. I think their positions in the hobby are set."
I predict that If you bump this thread in 10 years his 89 UD rookie will still be the key card from that era, just like Mantle's 52 Topps. For the last 40 years I have heard how the 52 Topps Mantle is overvalued and that his 51 Bowman was his true rookie and would eventually catch the 52 Topps but the reality is 40 years latter the 52 Topps is still the king.
So grab those PSA 9's that you say are growing on trees as collectors will always be interested in buying the PSA 9's in hopes they can someday crack and sub and get a PSA 10.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
@woodstock2 said:
My RJ preference is the 1989 Fleer Marlboro Ad on Scoreboard card. The challenge with these is inconsistent slab labeling and antecdotal pop numbers. I know it is a love it or hate it card but RJ's rarest RC is likely one of its 13+ versions.
@Cakes said:
Just like ndleo said " Almost 35 years since Griffey and Johnson were rookies. I think their positions in the hobby are set."
I predict that If you bump this thread in 10 years his 89 UD rookie will still be the key card from that era, just like Mantle's 52 Topps. For the last 40 years I have heard how the 52 Topps Mantle is overvalued and that his 51 Bowman was his true rookie and would eventually catch the 52 Topps but the reality is 40 years latter the 52 Topps is still the king.
So grab those PSA 9's that you say are growing on trees as collectors will always be interested in buying the PSA 9's in hopes they can someday crack and sub and get a PSA 10.
Excellent post. Card values are primarily influenced by the players popularity, then if it's a scarce card as well, the price really goes up.
RJ's cards are a fine investment, but his position is established, people just don't want his cards as much as Jr's.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
et card.> @Cakes said:
Just like ndleo said " Almost 35 years since Griffey and Johnson were rookies. I think their positions in the hobby are set."
I predict that If you bump this thread in 10 years his 89 UD rookie will still be the key card from that era, just like Mantle's 52 Topps. For the last 40 years I have heard how the 52 Topps Mantle is overvalued and that his 51 Bowman was his true rookie and would eventually catch the 52 Topps but the reality is 40 years latter the 52 Topps is still the king.
So grab those PSA 9's that you say are growing on trees as collectors will always be interested in buying the PSA 9's in hopes they can someday crack and sub and get a PSA 10.
52 Mantles don't grow on trees.
Griffey isn't Mantle
Thanks, but I will wait to buy those Griffey Upper Deck's...they have more room to fall.
Instead of waiting for the inevitable of the Upper Deck Griffey to come back down in price, I just gathered a few seeds from the tree and planted them. I'll have a bundle in a year.
i bought a 1975 opc ryan for $500 about 8 months ago. pop is 24, only 12 9's. my guess is that within 5 years this card will be more valuable than the psa 10 upper deck griffey.
et card.> @Cakes said:
Just like ndleo said " Almost 35 years since Griffey and Johnson were rookies. I think their positions in the hobby are set."
I predict that If you bump this thread in 10 years his 89 UD rookie will still be the key card from that era, just like Mantle's 52 Topps. For the last 40 years I have heard how the 52 Topps Mantle is overvalued and that his 51 Bowman was his true rookie and would eventually catch the 52 Topps but the reality is 40 years latter the 52 Topps is still the king.
So grab those PSA 9's that you say are growing on trees as collectors will always be interested in buying the PSA 9's in hopes they can someday crack and sub and get a PSA 10.
52 Mantles don't grow on trees.
Griffey isn't Mantle
Thanks, but I will wait to buy those Griffey Upper Deck's...they have more room to fall.
It's not a comparison on players, it's a comparison on the cards. Mantle's 52 Topps is generally regarded as the most iconic card in the Baseball card hobby. Ken Griffey Juniors 89 UD card is also generally considered an iconic card. It will always be the key card from that era.
It's similar to thinking the Nolan Ryan card would loose steam or a similar iconic card.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
Cakes - it’s fruitless to continue this thread. No matter all of the market data and facts (RJ 1989 UD PSA 10 Pop 25% greater than Griffey), this has become a personal grudge against Griffey. You can slam 1989 UD Griffey all you want, but to say the RJ will come close to it is a joke. The title of this thread should be “I have a lot of RJ rookies and need them to go up”.
@olb31 said:
i bought a 1975 opc ryan for $500 about 8 months ago. pop is 24, only 12 9's. my guess is that within 5 years this card will be more valuable than the psa 10 upper deck griffey.
Well, the Griffey card will still be iconic, but what is there to make that Ryan stand out from any other Ryan card. Griffey, like a number of players, has card values that are higher than his relative ability as a player, but not much higher. The one that is much higher than any reasonable assessment of Griffey (the player)'s worth is the 1989 Upper Deck. I assume a random 1998 card of his sells for what a mid-career high level HoFer sells for, say a 1992 Ripken. Haven't checked because I don't care enough. But the random card of a HoFer, no matter how beloved like Ryan, just won't have the same cachet. There is just no reason for a surge in price for an off-brand mid-career card of Ryan. But you can't tell the story of collecting in the '80s, especially the late '80s, without mentioning the Jordan and the Griffey.
If you're too young to remember, I, and those of us who were there with me, can't possibly explain what it was like to see 1989 Upper Deck in the stores, and the one card everyone wanted was Griffey. And sure, Jerome Walton in the high numbers and Kevin Maas the next year were chased after for a while, but it was always the number one card. It was just different.
The RJ Upper Deck rookie faces a similar uphill battle as Griffey. Even though Unit may be undervalued, the sheer amount of Upper Deck cards will be an uphill battle. In the end, it may just be a case where Johnson upper deck loses less value than the Griffey Upper Deck.
@Cakes The 'iconicness' of the Upper Deck Griffey loses most of its luster for the future generations for two reasons that don't plague the '52 Mantle.
1) The sheer massive number of Upper Deck Griffey's available. That cannot be understated. Even if 10's are kept down, because there are sevens that don't look any different than 10's(which is not the case for previous era's where 9' and 10's have a stark difference to 6's and 7's). The card grows on trees.
2)The Upper Deck card hype is going to lose its luster since its hype was only felt by the people who were collecting at that time. That hype of the Super Prospect, and the new 'premium' card, will diminish as time goes on as those had to be felt at the time to understand them.
It is actually the opposite with the '52 Mantle as it did not come out with hype surrounding it. Its hype grew after its release, and it grew into a legend, a legend that continues to reverberate through each new generation of collectors.
The '52 Mantle is Paul Bunyon.
In time, the Griffey collectors will be gone. The new collectors who never saw him play will put Griffey into the historical collecting category where Griffey now competes with Brett, Schmidt, Aaron, Mays, Mantle, Robinson, Cobb, Wagner, Ruth etc... And there are a LOT of Upper Deck Griffey rookies to go around for a demand that will diminish...too many to go around.
I have nothing against Griffey or his cards. Just looking at some stark realities.
There are easily one million 1989 Upper Deck Griffey RC's in existence, and unlike previous generation of cards, 99% of them were pulled and kept securely. So while they may not get a technical 9 or 10, they look very nice at first glance without magnification and in hand. Although nearly 30,000 have gotten a technical 9 just from PSA. I never looked at SGC or BGS.
You aren’t presenting any stark realities. None of your points about the 1989 UD Ken Griffey Jr RC are any brilliant insight. This is one of the most well known and researched cards in the hobby. There is a book written about this card. Everyone on this board knows EVERYTHING about this card.
I will take my own advice and move on from this thread.
@ndleo said:
Cakes - it’s fruitless to continue this thread. No matter all of the market data and facts (RJ 1989 UD PSA 10 Pop 25% greater than Griffey), this has become a personal grudge against Griffey. You can slam 1989 UD Griffey all you want, but to say the RJ will come close to it is a joke. The title of this thread should be “I have a lot of RJ rookies and need them to go up”.
i have some and i have a lot of nice griffey's. i just find it interesting that so many people put so much money into a particular card or player that doesn't make total sense to me.
1) Trout. i have no beef with him. seems like a good guy and a great player. but his cards are extremely overpriced.
2) randy was better than ken. ken's cards are overpriced based on supply
i just like knowing what other people think about the situations. iMHO people buy what they are told to buy or what they should buy. Griffey and Trout are fine purchases but maybe/probably not as good of purchases as one should/could make.
this thread has zero to do with what cards I own. And i don't own even one Trout. I do own several $1,000 plus griffey's.
Wow, this thread is off the rails. Way too much emphasis put on pop reports and career stats trying to justify value or undervalue. Nostalgia, charisma, likability is not measured in pop reports or stats.
@sayheywyo said:
Wow, this thread is off the rails. Way too much emphasis put on pop reports and career stats trying to justify value or undervalue. Nostalgia, charisma, likability is not measured in pop reports or stats.
I agree with this. If stats were the only thing that mattered I wouldn't care to have a 1984 Donruss Mattingly. Still, if I was forced to reduce my collection to only 10 cards that one would be in there along with 1989 UD Griffey and (a beat up) 1986 Fleer Jordan. I don't think I will get rich on any of these but they still mean a lot to me because these were the cards I treasured most as a kid.
@ndleo said:
You aren’t presenting any stark realities. None of your points about the 1989 UD Ken Griffey Jr RC are any brilliant insight. This is one of the most well known and researched cards in the hobby. There is a book written about this card. Everyone on this board knows EVERYTHING about this card.
I will take my own advice and move on from this thread.
Nothing brilliant needed. The sheer volume of Upper Deck Griffey's around is staggering...and they are almost all in presentable condition.
If you count all the unopened and the non graded Griffey's(still plenty sitting in top loaders), there are more Upper Deck Griffey RC than there are of every playing days Mantle cards(Topps/Bowman) combined.
And that is just one of Griffey's Rookie Cards from that year.
@sayheywyo said:
Wow, this thread is off the rails. Way too much emphasis put on pop reports and career stats trying to justify value or undervalue. Nostalgia, charisma, likability is not measured in pop reports or stats.
I agree with this. If stats were the only thing that mattered I wouldn't care to have a 1984 Donruss Mattingly. Still, if I was forced to reduce my collection to only 10 cards that one would be in there along with 1989 UD Griffey and (a beat up) 1986 Fleer Jordan. I don't think I will get rich on any of these but they still mean a lot to me because these were the cards I treasured most as a kid.
And that(the people knowing the card from when being a kid) is currently the only thing keeping that card so high when knowing there are 2 million of them in existence in presentable condition.
That will come pass in the not too distant future and there are just too many around to withstand even a sliver of a drop in demand.
@ndleo said:
Cakes - it’s fruitless to continue this thread. No matter all of the market data and facts (RJ 1989 UD PSA 10 Pop 25% greater than Griffey), this has become a personal grudge against Griffey. You can slam 1989 UD Griffey all you want, but to say the RJ will come close to it is a joke. The title of this thread should be “I have a lot of RJ rookies and need them to go up”.
i have some and i have a lot of nice griffey's. i just find it interesting that so many people put so much money into a particular card or player that doesn't make total sense to me.
1) Trout. i have no beef with him. seems like a good guy and a great player. but his cards are extremely overpriced.
2) randy was better than ken. ken's cards are overpriced based on supply
i just like knowing what other people think about the situations. iMHO people buy what they are told to buy or what they should buy. Griffey and Trout are fine purchases but maybe/probably not as good of purchases as one should/could make.
this thread has zero to do with what cards I own. And i don't own even one Trout. I do own several $1,000 plus griffey's.
How did a 75 Ryan get brought up? Clearly I was speaking of his Iconic Rookie card.
ndleo, I agree it's not worth the energy. Like you said the market and the people have spoken in volumes over the last 30 years but I guess some folks just want what they want, regardless of reality.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
@sayheywyo said:
Wow, this thread is off the rails. Way too much emphasis put on pop reports and career stats trying to justify value or undervalue. Nostalgia, charisma, likability is not measured in pop reports or stats.
I agree with this. If stats were the only thing that mattered I wouldn't care to have a 1984 Donruss Mattingly. Still, if I was forced to reduce my collection to only 10 cards that one would be in there along with 1989 UD Griffey and (a beat up) 1986 Fleer Jordan. I don't think I will get rich on any of these but they still mean a lot to me because these were the cards I treasured most as a kid.
1984 Donruss Mattingly was just as popular a card back in its day as the Griffey Upper Deck RC was. I would even say it was more popular being it was a New York player(and he was viewed by many as best hitter) and it was deemed more scarce compared to the other companies. The prices it grabbed back then in its prime were second to none for newer cards.
But look at the staggering difference:
There have only been 10,791 total 1984 Donruss Mattingly cards graded.
316 10's
3,259 9's
There are 30,000 PSA 9's alone for the Griffey Upper Deck. That number is still hard to believe seeing it.
It was thought back then that the Upper Deck Griffey was a premium product and far tougher to get than Topps, Fleer, and Donruss. There are 2 million of them.
Mattingly card's could take a little hit in time when his fans are no longer collecting(like the Griffey)...however, Mattingly also has some HOF support and that would be a boon to that card. Not to mention it is a far tougher card to obtain.
Those rumors of Upper Deck printing sheets of the Griffey card alone. I don't know if that is true...but when you see 30,000 PSA 9's...and all the unopened and non graded still heavily out there. One has to think.
Upper Deck certainly made more of those cards than everyone thought back then.
Supply has to be taken into consideration, when spending upwards $2,000 for a card. I would much rather have the 1984 Donruss Mattingly than the upper deck griffey jr for $2,000. Not that Mattingly was better, but that the card is just as iconic and in much lower supply.
I truly believe, much like Trout, they have been both over hyped. (this goes for their cards too). People bought in and way overpaid and now try to defend their positions. Heck I have blown money on Chad Henne, Josh Freeman, Mark Reynolds, Troy T, Dan Uggla. Probably lost 5k on those purchases.
I kind of look at card investing like stock investing. There are several angles to look at:
1) Popularity
2) Supply
3) Demand
4) Stats
and many more. And I know there are people who just collect cards and don't care about $$$ (to an extent), but when you start spending $2,000 or more for a card, I think one should do their homework a little. Unless $$$ is no object to you.
SO for Trout, he is a one of kind phenom. For Griffey it's about popularity. For Randy, no one liked him. For Mattingly it's about popularity. For Tommy john, no one knows him or average player. Interesting to me.
The Mattingly rookie is not just as iconic, it was the key card for roughly 5 years. Griffey Juniors 89 UD has been the key card for the last 34 years.
You should probably wait until the afternoon to smoke.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
@Cakes said:
The Mattingly rookie is not just as iconic, it was the key card for roughly 5 years. Griffey Juniors 89 UD has been the key card for the last 34 years.
You should probably wait until the afternoon to smoke.
What completely baffles me is what's going on with the Randy Johnson Fleer Glossy!?!?
Looking at eBay, I see that PSA has graded a LOT of the regular cards as Glossy. REALLY? Pretty easy to tell the difference if you bother to look at the back.
You can buy one right now (no, not mine) for $250.00 on febay. With all the regular cards incorrectly graded, there's less than 150 PSA 10's.
Regarding the UD Griffey card, let's forget about PSA 9's and "presentable" cards in top loaders. You're not going to get a 10! Out of almost 100,000 submissions, less than 4,100 10's have been graded and the percentage will not be getting better.
If you bought 100 boxes at $2-300.00 a box you might get 4 PSA 10's. This is a card that investors have bought in quantity. They might pick up a Randy Johnson or two, but they have 10 or more Griffey's. If I had the money, this is what I would do too.
Bottom line here is people just don't like Johnson and they LOVE Griffey.
He's the #1 card in the best (first "premium") set, and he's the face of the hobby.
I think I'm going to buy that Fleer Glossy RJ. Yeppers I did. I love it when I convince myself to buy a card!!!!! 😁
I do have 2 ungraded Fleer Glossy Griffeys that look pretty good. I'll be sending those in sometime in the future, and no, the Griffey should not be 10X the price (or more) of my Johnson. 😁
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@JoeBanzai said:
What completely baffles me is what's going on with the Randy Johnson Fleer Glossy!?!?
Looking at eBay, I see that PSA has graded a LOT of the regular cards as Glossy. REALLY? Pretty easy to tell the difference if you bother to look at the back.
You can buy one right now (no, not mine) for $250.00 on febay. With all the regular cards incorrectly graded, there's less than 150 PSA 10's.
Regarding the UD Griffey card, let's forget about PSA 9's and "presentable" cards in top loaders. You're not going to get a 10! Out of almost 100,000 submissions, less than 4,100 10's have been graded and the percentage will not be getting better.
If you bought 100 boxes at $2-300.00 a box you might get 4 PSA 10's. This is a card that investors have bought in quantity. They might pick up a Randy Johnson or two, but they have 10 or more Griffey's. If I had the money, this is what I would do too.
Bottom line here is people just don't like Johnson and they LOVE Griffey.
He's the #1 card in the best (first "premium") set, and he's the face of the hobby.
I think I'm going to buy that Fleer Glossy RJ. Yeppers I did. I love it when I convince myself to buy a card!!!!! 😁
I do have 2 ungraded Fleer Glossy Griffeys that look pretty good. I'll be sending those in sometime in the future, and no, the Griffey should not be 10X the price (or more) of my Johnson. 😁
Joe, can't ignore 30,000 9's. If they are holding back 10's, then that just means there are thousands of 9's as good as the 10's. Either way, collectors will feel the hurt down the road when the demand drops even a little.
True, investors could be helping prop that '10' number up. Those investors could diminish too especially if they see a fall coming even more.
Even so, 4,000 10's is still a boatload. Compare that to the 300 10's for the 1984 Donruss Mattingly.
You would put $2,000 into a ten right now knowing it was $650 before covid and the pop is 4,000 tens and 30,000 9's?
Its not like it is a card that is gaining steam that was 'unnoticed' like other cards in the hobby that have risen...and those type of cards all have low pops. Low as in the hundreds in total populations and no high grades(as those are typically older cards).
I see it settling at $1,200 in two years. It might stay there for a long time while other cards rise going forward from there. Or rise nominally with the tide.
Demand can always change. There is nothing pointing to changing upward for Griffey.
Supply remains constant or goes up, unless a fire takes out the supply or something.
@olb31 I find it funny that people downplay supply. There is a reason why HOF RC's from junk wax are worth peanuts. Reason is supply. Every collectors that wants one already has those cards.
There are currently no collectors alive that saw Ruth, Cobb, and Honus Wagner play and those cards are still level or on the rise while many other segments of the hobby(including the Griffey UD) have been receding back toward pre covid prices, because those cards are on a different level of historic and they are far, far, far more rare.
What happens when the Griffey market loses the collectors who buy his cards because they watched him play or they always wanted that Upper Deck card because of the hype they experienced with it, and there are two million examples of his RC to choose from, including 30,000 PSA 9's and 4,000 PSA 10's, and now there has to be new buyers to support the price it is at?
The older players(cards) have already lost that aspect, the aspect of losing buyers who "saw them play" or "experienced that time." Those cards are bought for their historic value and rarity. People do like rare stuff. It's not as exciting to own a card that a million other people also own. That is just reality of human nature.
The griffey market has not lost that group of buyers...yet.
Griffey cards will then be competing with rare cards of Ruth, Cobb, Wagner etc for the money from a generation that never saw any of them play or never experienced the desire to own an Upper Deck Griffey.
I showed eleven early 20 year old males a picture of the Upper Deck Griffey and a picture of Babe Ruth caramel card, and cropped their names off. I asked them to tell me who each person was. None of them were card collectors but all were sports enthusiasts to some degree(whether as players or fans).
Only two of the eleven told me correctly that the image was Ken Griffey
Every one of the eleven told me the image was Babe Ruth
So fast forward 20 years, assuming the country is in a similar place to where it is now, and when these kids have extra disposable income where they can buy expensive collectibles or invest in art etc.
Why would they put their money into a player they never heard of while the market is flooded with his cards, instead of a player(s) where they may have heard of or players where the card is considered historic, antique, and is rare?
Investors won't be able to hold back the tide in a flooded market of Griffey cards with less buyers. Investors at that time simply won't consider such a common card as an investment
Even if the rarer historic cards experience a drop too, it won't be as severe because there won't be 50,000 sellers trying to get rid of the same card at the same time.
Yes, ignore 9's they aren't germane to the discussion. They are ignored in the marketplace unless there are virtually no 10's in the card.
I'm not interested in speculating on the Griffey. I don't own an UD Griffey and doubt that I ever will. I will say that I doubt that his cards are going to drop as much as you say, unless the entire hobby hits a slump.
To be honest, I wouldn't spend $2,000.00 on a Griffey and I said so in my post, I would buy the Topps Tiffany Johnson before the UD Griffey. In fact, I wouldn't buy the Johnson either too rich for my blood.
I am not a wealthy person. There are obviously some here who are. I simply can't/won't spend that kind of money on a baseball card.
I'm definitely a small fish in a little pond.
I am pretty excited about the Fleer Glossy Johnson I just bought though. Seems to me to be just what you guys are referring to, great player with a limited supply of 10's.
I was also looking for thoughts on that card, not looking for an endless Griffey/supply/demand debate.😁
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
Comments
Yup. Already missed the run up on Griffey Upper Deck. It could fall just as hard...and has started to already. Hence why I would be worried. I would guess(pure guess not advice) that the Griffey Upper Deck PSA 10 settles in the $1,200 range two years from now. Still up from pre covid since the market is strong as a whole and did have a revival.
The iconic status is already priced in. It is only its iconic status that keeps it from falling back to the $700 level where the price is a little more plausible(yet still inflated a little high even there).
The Griffey hype was warranted in his Seattle time and that drove his Upper Deck card. History won't feel that hype too much in the future. He disappointed too much after Seattle.
The Griffey Upper Deck grows on trees. I saw a few in my backyard this morning.
Do you look at any Johnson Tiffany cards? 100 pop in PSA 10 for the base set card.
Just like ndleo said " Almost 35 years since Griffey and Johnson were rookies. I think their positions in the hobby are set."
I predict that If you bump this thread in 10 years his 89 UD rookie will still be the key card from that era, just like Mantle's 52 Topps. For the last 40 years I have heard how the 52 Topps Mantle is overvalued and that his 51 Bowman was his true rookie and would eventually catch the 52 Topps but the reality is 40 years latter the 52 Topps is still the king.
So grab those PSA 9's that you say are growing on trees as collectors will always be interested in buying the PSA 9's in hopes they can someday crack and sub and get a PSA 10.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
I have several of these also.
Excellent post. Card values are primarily influenced by the players popularity, then if it's a scarce card as well, the price really goes up.
RJ's cards are a fine investment, but his position is established, people just don't want his cards as much as Jr's.
52 Mantles don't grow on trees.
Griffey isn't Mantle
Thanks, but I will wait to buy those Griffey Upper Deck's...they have more room to fall.
Instead of waiting for the inevitable of the Upper Deck Griffey to come back down in price, I just gathered a few seeds from the tree and planted them. I'll have a bundle in a year.
i bought a 1975 opc ryan for $500 about 8 months ago. pop is 24, only 12 9's. my guess is that within 5 years this card will be more valuable than the psa 10 upper deck griffey.
as far as randy goes. $1,000 for his opc psa 10 feels like a huge value compared to $2000 for the griffey. pop 50 against pop 4100
It's not a comparison on players, it's a comparison on the cards. Mantle's 52 Topps is generally regarded as the most iconic card in the Baseball card hobby. Ken Griffey Juniors 89 UD card is also generally considered an iconic card. It will always be the key card from that era.
It's similar to thinking the Nolan Ryan card would loose steam or a similar iconic card.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
Cakes - it’s fruitless to continue this thread. No matter all of the market data and facts (RJ 1989 UD PSA 10 Pop 25% greater than Griffey), this has become a personal grudge against Griffey. You can slam 1989 UD Griffey all you want, but to say the RJ will come close to it is a joke. The title of this thread should be “I have a lot of RJ rookies and need them to go up”.
Well, the Griffey card will still be iconic, but what is there to make that Ryan stand out from any other Ryan card. Griffey, like a number of players, has card values that are higher than his relative ability as a player, but not much higher. The one that is much higher than any reasonable assessment of Griffey (the player)'s worth is the 1989 Upper Deck. I assume a random 1998 card of his sells for what a mid-career high level HoFer sells for, say a 1992 Ripken. Haven't checked because I don't care enough. But the random card of a HoFer, no matter how beloved like Ryan, just won't have the same cachet. There is just no reason for a surge in price for an off-brand mid-career card of Ryan. But you can't tell the story of collecting in the '80s, especially the late '80s, without mentioning the Jordan and the Griffey.
If you're too young to remember, I, and those of us who were there with me, can't possibly explain what it was like to see 1989 Upper Deck in the stores, and the one card everyone wanted was Griffey. And sure, Jerome Walton in the high numbers and Kevin Maas the next year were chased after for a while, but it was always the number one card. It was just different.
The RJ Upper Deck rookie faces a similar uphill battle as Griffey. Even though Unit may be undervalued, the sheer amount of Upper Deck cards will be an uphill battle. In the end, it may just be a case where Johnson upper deck loses less value than the Griffey Upper Deck.
@Cakes The 'iconicness' of the Upper Deck Griffey loses most of its luster for the future generations for two reasons that don't plague the '52 Mantle.
1) The sheer massive number of Upper Deck Griffey's available. That cannot be understated. Even if 10's are kept down, because there are sevens that don't look any different than 10's(which is not the case for previous era's where 9' and 10's have a stark difference to 6's and 7's). The card grows on trees.
2)The Upper Deck card hype is going to lose its luster since its hype was only felt by the people who were collecting at that time. That hype of the Super Prospect, and the new 'premium' card, will diminish as time goes on as those had to be felt at the time to understand them.
It is actually the opposite with the '52 Mantle as it did not come out with hype surrounding it. Its hype grew after its release, and it grew into a legend, a legend that continues to reverberate through each new generation of collectors.
The '52 Mantle is Paul Bunyon.
In time, the Griffey collectors will be gone. The new collectors who never saw him play will put Griffey into the historical collecting category where Griffey now competes with Brett, Schmidt, Aaron, Mays, Mantle, Robinson, Cobb, Wagner, Ruth etc... And there are a LOT of Upper Deck Griffey rookies to go around for a demand that will diminish...too many to go around.
I have nothing against Griffey or his cards. Just looking at some stark realities.
There are easily one million 1989 Upper Deck Griffey RC's in existence, and unlike previous generation of cards, 99% of them were pulled and kept securely. So while they may not get a technical 9 or 10, they look very nice at first glance without magnification and in hand. Although nearly 30,000 have gotten a technical 9 just from PSA. I never looked at SGC or BGS.
There could be up to 1.5 or 2 million.
Yeah we get it. You hate Ken Griffey Jr.
Not at all.
For context, PSA has graded thousands more 1989 Upper Deck Griffey cards than every 1950's Mickey Mantle Topps and Bowman cards combined.
And there is still a large supply of unopened packs and factory sets of 1989 Upper Deck left.
Not hate, just some stark realities.
You aren’t presenting any stark realities. None of your points about the 1989 UD Ken Griffey Jr RC are any brilliant insight. This is one of the most well known and researched cards in the hobby. There is a book written about this card. Everyone on this board knows EVERYTHING about this card.
I will take my own advice and move on from this thread.
i have some and i have a lot of nice griffey's. i just find it interesting that so many people put so much money into a particular card or player that doesn't make total sense to me.
1) Trout. i have no beef with him. seems like a good guy and a great player. but his cards are extremely overpriced.
2) randy was better than ken. ken's cards are overpriced based on supply
i just like knowing what other people think about the situations. iMHO people buy what they are told to buy or what they should buy. Griffey and Trout are fine purchases but maybe/probably not as good of purchases as one should/could make.
this thread has zero to do with what cards I own. And i don't own even one Trout. I do own several $1,000 plus griffey's.
the supply is just too many. very few cards have been graded 30,000 much less have 30,000 psa 9's.
Wow, this thread is off the rails. Way too much emphasis put on pop reports and career stats trying to justify value or undervalue. Nostalgia, charisma, likability is not measured in pop reports or stats.
I agree with this. If stats were the only thing that mattered I wouldn't care to have a 1984 Donruss Mattingly. Still, if I was forced to reduce my collection to only 10 cards that one would be in there along with 1989 UD Griffey and (a beat up) 1986 Fleer Jordan. I don't think I will get rich on any of these but they still mean a lot to me because these were the cards I treasured most as a kid.
Nothing brilliant needed. The sheer volume of Upper Deck Griffey's around is staggering...and they are almost all in presentable condition.
If you count all the unopened and the non graded Griffey's(still plenty sitting in top loaders), there are more Upper Deck Griffey RC than there are of every playing days Mantle cards(Topps/Bowman) combined.
And that is just one of Griffey's Rookie Cards from that year.
And that(the people knowing the card from when being a kid) is currently the only thing keeping that card so high when knowing there are 2 million of them in existence in presentable condition.
That will come pass in the not too distant future and there are just too many around to withstand even a sliver of a drop in demand.
Baseball cards and print runs aside, Griffey >>> Mantle as a baseball player.
How did a 75 Ryan get brought up? Clearly I was speaking of his Iconic Rookie card.
ndleo, I agree it's not worth the energy. Like you said the market and the people have spoken in volumes over the last 30 years but I guess some folks just want what they want, regardless of reality.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
1984 Donruss Mattingly was just as popular a card back in its day as the Griffey Upper Deck RC was. I would even say it was more popular being it was a New York player(and he was viewed by many as best hitter) and it was deemed more scarce compared to the other companies. The prices it grabbed back then in its prime were second to none for newer cards.
But look at the staggering difference:
There have only been 10,791 total 1984 Donruss Mattingly cards graded.
316 10's
3,259 9's
There are 30,000 PSA 9's alone for the Griffey Upper Deck. That number is still hard to believe seeing it.
It was thought back then that the Upper Deck Griffey was a premium product and far tougher to get than Topps, Fleer, and Donruss. There are 2 million of them.
Mattingly card's could take a little hit in time when his fans are no longer collecting(like the Griffey)...however, Mattingly also has some HOF support and that would be a boon to that card. Not to mention it is a far tougher card to obtain.
Those rumors of Upper Deck printing sheets of the Griffey card alone. I don't know if that is true...but when you see 30,000 PSA 9's...and all the unopened and non graded still heavily out there. One has to think.
Upper Deck certainly made more of those cards than everyone thought back then.
Supply has to be taken into consideration, when spending upwards $2,000 for a card. I would much rather have the 1984 Donruss Mattingly than the upper deck griffey jr for $2,000. Not that Mattingly was better, but that the card is just as iconic and in much lower supply.
I truly believe, much like Trout, they have been both over hyped. (this goes for their cards too). People bought in and way overpaid and now try to defend their positions. Heck I have blown money on Chad Henne, Josh Freeman, Mark Reynolds, Troy T, Dan Uggla. Probably lost 5k on those purchases.
I kind of look at card investing like stock investing. There are several angles to look at:
1) Popularity
2) Supply
3) Demand
4) Stats
and many more. And I know there are people who just collect cards and don't care about $$$ (to an extent), but when you start spending $2,000 or more for a card, I think one should do their homework a little. Unless $$$ is no object to you.
SO for Trout, he is a one of kind phenom. For Griffey it's about popularity. For Randy, no one liked him. For Mattingly it's about popularity. For Tommy john, no one knows him or average player. Interesting to me.
The Mattingly rookie is not just as iconic, it was the key card for roughly 5 years. Griffey Juniors 89 UD has been the key card for the last 34 years.
You should probably wait until the afternoon to smoke.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
and 2 million strong
I will give props to Upper Deck. They lived up to their premium card hype and made a premium card. They all survived in high grade.
What completely baffles me is what's going on with the Randy Johnson Fleer Glossy!?!?
Looking at eBay, I see that PSA has graded a LOT of the regular cards as Glossy. REALLY? Pretty easy to tell the difference if you bother to look at the back.
You can buy one right now (no, not mine) for $250.00 on febay. With all the regular cards incorrectly graded, there's less than 150 PSA 10's.
Regarding the UD Griffey card, let's forget about PSA 9's and "presentable" cards in top loaders. You're not going to get a 10! Out of almost 100,000 submissions, less than 4,100 10's have been graded and the percentage will not be getting better.
If you bought 100 boxes at $2-300.00 a box you might get 4 PSA 10's. This is a card that investors have bought in quantity. They might pick up a Randy Johnson or two, but they have 10 or more Griffey's. If I had the money, this is what I would do too.
Bottom line here is people just don't like Johnson and they LOVE Griffey.
He's the #1 card in the best (first "premium") set, and he's the face of the hobby.
I think I'm going to buy that Fleer Glossy RJ. Yeppers I did. I love it when I convince myself to buy a card!!!!! 😁
I do have 2 ungraded Fleer Glossy Griffeys that look pretty good. I'll be sending those in sometime in the future, and no, the Griffey should not be 10X the price (or more) of my Johnson. 😁
Joe, can't ignore 30,000 9's. If they are holding back 10's, then that just means there are thousands of 9's as good as the 10's. Either way, collectors will feel the hurt down the road when the demand drops even a little.
True, investors could be helping prop that '10' number up. Those investors could diminish too especially if they see a fall coming even more.
Even so, 4,000 10's is still a boatload. Compare that to the 300 10's for the 1984 Donruss Mattingly.
You would put $2,000 into a ten right now knowing it was $650 before covid and the pop is 4,000 tens and 30,000 9's?
Its not like it is a card that is gaining steam that was 'unnoticed' like other cards in the hobby that have risen...and those type of cards all have low pops. Low as in the hundreds in total populations and no high grades(as those are typically older cards).
I see it settling at $1,200 in two years. It might stay there for a long time while other cards rise going forward from there. Or rise nominally with the tide.
Demand can always change. There is nothing pointing to changing upward for Griffey.
Supply remains constant or goes up, unless a fire takes out the supply or something.
@olb31 I find it funny that people downplay supply. There is a reason why HOF RC's from junk wax are worth peanuts. Reason is supply. Every collectors that wants one already has those cards.
There are currently no collectors alive that saw Ruth, Cobb, and Honus Wagner play and those cards are still level or on the rise while many other segments of the hobby(including the Griffey UD) have been receding back toward pre covid prices, because those cards are on a different level of historic and they are far, far, far more rare.
What happens when the Griffey market loses the collectors who buy his cards because they watched him play or they always wanted that Upper Deck card because of the hype they experienced with it, and there are two million examples of his RC to choose from, including 30,000 PSA 9's and 4,000 PSA 10's, and now there has to be new buyers to support the price it is at?
The older players(cards) have already lost that aspect, the aspect of losing buyers who "saw them play" or "experienced that time." Those cards are bought for their historic value and rarity. People do like rare stuff. It's not as exciting to own a card that a million other people also own. That is just reality of human nature.
The griffey market has not lost that group of buyers...yet.
Griffey cards will then be competing with rare cards of Ruth, Cobb, Wagner etc for the money from a generation that never saw any of them play or never experienced the desire to own an Upper Deck Griffey.
I showed eleven early 20 year old males a picture of the Upper Deck Griffey and a picture of Babe Ruth caramel card, and cropped their names off. I asked them to tell me who each person was. None of them were card collectors but all were sports enthusiasts to some degree(whether as players or fans).
Only two of the eleven told me correctly that the image was Ken Griffey
Every one of the eleven told me the image was Babe Ruth
So fast forward 20 years, assuming the country is in a similar place to where it is now, and when these kids have extra disposable income where they can buy expensive collectibles or invest in art etc.
Why would they put their money into a player they never heard of while the market is flooded with his cards, instead of a player(s) where they may have heard of or players where the card is considered historic, antique, and is rare?
Investors won't be able to hold back the tide in a flooded market of Griffey cards with less buyers. Investors at that time simply won't consider such a common card as an investment
Even if the rarer historic cards experience a drop too, it won't be as severe because there won't be 50,000 sellers trying to get rid of the same card at the same time.
Yes, ignore 9's they aren't germane to the discussion. They are ignored in the marketplace unless there are virtually no 10's in the card.
I'm not interested in speculating on the Griffey. I don't own an UD Griffey and doubt that I ever will. I will say that I doubt that his cards are going to drop as much as you say, unless the entire hobby hits a slump.
To be honest, I wouldn't spend $2,000.00 on a Griffey and I said so in my post, I would buy the Topps Tiffany Johnson before the UD Griffey. In fact, I wouldn't buy the Johnson either too rich for my blood.
I am not a wealthy person. There are obviously some here who are. I simply can't/won't spend that kind of money on a baseball card.
I'm definitely a small fish in a little pond.
I am pretty excited about the Fleer Glossy Johnson I just bought though. Seems to me to be just what you guys are referring to, great player with a limited supply of 10's.
I was also looking for thoughts on that card, not looking for an endless Griffey/supply/demand debate.😁