Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

1968 OPC hockey unopened wax pack PSA 7

Was watching this item along with some other rare unopened hockey packs in this auction. Pretty decent hammer! Pretty rare pack.

Comments

  • coinspackscoinspacks Posts: 1,026 ✭✭✭✭

    They all fetched decent pricing .

    I thought the 1958 was the bargain

  • @coinspacks said:
    They all fetched decent pricing .

    I thought the 1958 was the bargain

    I agree! I thought the parkie pack would go for way more, the winning bidder I’ll bet is very happy

  • AANVAANV Posts: 343 ✭✭✭

    That seems pretty outrageous to me, given that there really isn't anything inside that can justify the price. It's also the worst year in o-pee-chee's history for quality control. Years ago, I bought two vending boxes of 1968 Topps and hit 3 PSA 10 commons out of 1,000 cards. I can't imagine that O-Pee-Chee's quality control coming out of a wax pack would even touch that rate.

    I would think that this is the result of two pack registry people competing against one another above all else.

  • @Mikeygiggs_336699 said:
    Was watching this item along with some other rare unopened hockey packs in this auction. Pretty decent hammer! Pretty rare pack.

    There were also 3 1965T Unopened FB packs (PSA 8 and two PSA 7's) that fetched $26,840 in a recent Goldin auction (link below). I collect unopened packs and have 3 unopened 1965T FB unopened packs in my collection -- all graded by GAI as PSA didn't grade these packs (these are the first PSA graded 1965T FB packs I've actually seen in the market). I bought my unopened packs back in the early 1980's as a teenager. For whatever reason, I've always been fascinated by the tall unopened packs -- 64T Hockey, 65T FB, 69-70T & 70-71T Basketball.

    I don't want to make too big a deal out of this which is why I didn't set up a separate thread. But I was really surprised that you could see through the packs so clearly on the front & back. I've seen a significant number of these '65T FB packs throughout the years & cannot recall an instance where you could see through the packs so clearly. And the first thing I'd do (especially in the early years before packs were even graded) was try to see who the players were on the front/back as part of whether I would buy the pack. Goldin didn't reference anything historical relative to where the packs came from so assuming they were in someone's collection & they just had them graded. Just an observation -- not sure what to make of it but its pretty rare that unopened packs look so different from one pack to another.

    https://goldin.co/item/1965-topps-football-unopened-wax-pack-collection-3-possible-joe-namathc26z3?queryId=eyJxdWVyeUlkIjoiZTY0MGY4NjA2NDUwZDc0ZWNiZjlmMTNmYWVmYTU2NDciLCJjYXJkSW5kZXgiOjE0fQ==

  • coinspackscoinspacks Posts: 1,026 ✭✭✭✭

    Nice auction grouping. I didn't see that one.

  • TheGoonies1985TheGoonies1985 Posts: 5,611 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @coinspacks said:
    They all fetched decent pricing .

    I thought the 1958 was the bargain

    How can it be so cheap? Jim Brown's rookie year.

    NFL: Buffalo Bills & Green Bay Packers

  • coinspackscoinspacks Posts: 1,026 ✭✭✭✭

    @TheGoonies1985 said:

    @coinspacks said:
    They all fetched decent pricing .

    I thought the 1958 was the bargain

    How can it be so cheap? Jim Brown's rookie year.

    It was hockey
    ..not football

  • TheGoonies1985TheGoonies1985 Posts: 5,611 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @coinspacks said:

    @TheGoonies1985 said:

    @coinspacks said:
    They all fetched decent pricing .

    I thought the 1958 was the bargain

    How can it be so cheap? Jim Brown's rookie year.

    It was hockey
    ..not football

    Still cheap if you find a Bobby Hull rookie.

    NFL: Buffalo Bills & Green Bay Packers

Sign In or Register to comment.