Why doesn't the POP report separate 1993 Finest & 1993 Finest Refractors?

pandrews

it annoys me.. maybe it shouldn't.. but I would like to be able to view JUST the refractors, ie: how many submitted, how many 10's, etc.. but instead I have to look at the base cards too..

mudflap02

I will second that motion. They are two distinct sets, and it seems like it's just a shortcut someone took as the pop report was in its infancy that just blew out of proportion.

koby

The two sets should definitely be separated. Also I find it interesting that the population for many of the refractors are greater than the population for regular cards. Proably just not worth people's time and money to send in the regular commons.

boggs301012

I want to know why they arent listed in the SMR. Especialy the refractors they sell all the time and there are thousands graded.


James

koby

I think Joe Orlando tries too hard to cater to vintage collectors. Every few months Joe would add prices for totally obscure or regional or oddball vintage sets. Unfortunately, he does this at the expense of regular collectors. Vintage is cool, but there are so many more collectors of modern cards. And when it comes to modern cards, there are few sets as widely bought and sold as the 1993 Topps Refractors.

PhilG

I beat the system by cutting and pasting the 93 data to a Excel spreadsheet. Then I sort on the column containing the word refractor. The sort puts all the refractors together in numerical order. Crude but effective.

Phil

My hoard of 93 Finest refractors