Bowman prices up in SMR

Spahnfan · December 15, 2004 8:51AM

I have not looked at the SMR for a few weeks. I checked it out yesterday and saw all the Bowman baseball cards from 1948 to 1955 up across the board. Anyone know when the price increases were changed?

Vargha · December 15, 2004 9:09AM

They were changed for this issue. As you can tell, it was an extremely technical methodology that was employed to implement the current price increases.

WinPitcher · December 15, 2004 9:29AM

are they all up about 5 bucks?

jrdolan · December 15, 2004 12:11PM

<< <i>They were changed for this issue. As you can tell, it was an extremely technical methodology that was employed to implement the current price increases. >>

The extremely technical methodology was: "Hey, we gave early '50s Topps a little boost this summer. Is it Bowmans' turn?"

Up next, mid-late '50s Topps. At this rate, they'll fix some of the laughably off-base values in the '70s and '80s by about 2008.

Griffins · December 15, 2004 12:51PM

At least Bowman has been updated. Try and buy any number of sets or singles for SMR and you won't stand a chance. '33 Sport King, '48 Leaf, '15 Cracker Jack, any E card, '41 Play Ball, Wilson Franks, you name it. Between the opening editorial and the equally worthless info that follows it really seems a crime to waste trees on this POS. If they don't want to put the effort into making it accurate it would be better to just fold the whole thing.

mudflap02 · December 15, 2004 1:14PM

Hey don't go trashing the Pujols cover article I wrote for the last issue.....

mikeschmidt · December 15, 2004 1:20PM

<< <i>At least Bowman has been updated. Try and buy any number of sets or singles for SMR and you won't stand a chance. '33 Sport King, '48 Leaf, '15 Cracker Jack, any E card, '41 Play Ball, Wilson Franks, you name it. Between the opening editorial and the equally worthless info that follows it really seems a crime to waste trees on this POS. If they don't want to put the effort into making it accurate it would be better to just fold the whole thing. >>

Griffins:

Tell us what you REALLY think. Honestly, though - you've hit the nail on the head for a good number of issues. For better or worse, John Branca was pretty much able to engineer the SMR changing in relation to the 1954 Wilson Franks he purchased - although the pricing overall for the set still lags behind what "real" market data would dictate.

~ms

gmoneystyles · December 15, 2004 1:44PM

I hope it doesnt change for another 10 years; no reason given.

NickM · December 16, 2004 2:48AM

Would anyone be so kind as to post the new commons pricing for the Bowmans?

Nick

Vargha · December 16, 2004 3:08AM

1948 BOWMAN
No Description EX5 EXMT6 NM7 NMMT8 MT9
Singles: 1 - 36 15+ 22+ 35+ 75 250
Singles: 37 - 48 20+ 30+ 45+ 100 375
Short Prints: 1 - 36 25+ 40+ 60+ 125+ 400

1949 BOWMAN
No Description EX5 EXMT6 NM7 NMMT8 MT9
Singles: 1-144 15+ 22+ 35+ 70+ 225
Singles: 145 -240 30+ 45+ 75+ 125+ 375+
NOF/PNB Variations: 30+ 45+ 70+ 140 425

1950 BOWMAN
No Description EX5 EXMT6 NM7 NMMT8 MT9
Singles: 1 - 72 30+ 45+ 70+ 155 450
Singles: 73 - 252 15+ 20+ 35+ 65 225

1951 BOWMAN
No Description EX5 EXMT6 NM7 NMMT8 MT9
Singles: 1 - 252 14+ 20+ 35+ 70+ 375
Singles: 253 - 324 30+ 42+ 70+ 140+ 600

1952 BOWMAN BASEBALL
No Description EX5 EXMT6 NM7 NMMT8 MT9
Singles: 1 - 216 15+ 20+ 35+ 65+ 225
Singles: 217 - 252 30+ 40+ 70+ 130+ 400

1953 BOWMAN COLOR
No Description EX5 EXMT6 NM7 NMMT8 MT9
Singles: 1 - 112 20+ 30+ 50+ 140 450
Singles: 113 - 128 50+ 75+ 120 525 1500
Singles: 129 - 160 35+ 55+ 90+ 300 900

1953 BOWMAN BLACK AND WHITE
No Description EX5 EXMT6 NM7 NMMT8 MT9
Singles: 1 - 64 25 35 65 195 600

1954 BOWMAN BASEBALL
No Description EX5 EXMT6 NM7 NMMT8 MT9
Singles: 1 - 224 8+ 12+ 20+ 50+ 185

1955 BOWMAN
No Description EX5 EXMT6 NM7 NMMT8 MT9
Singles: 1 - 224 8+ 13+ 20+ 55+ 165+
Singles: 225 - 320 10+ 15+ 25+ 70 200+
Umpire Cards 12+ 18+ 30+ 80 220

NickM · December 16, 2004 4:04AM

On '54 Bowman, I'd love to know where they are getting their #s, because the cards were seldom breaking SMR when it was 16 and 45 for PSA 7 and 8.

Nick

Vargha · December 16, 2004 4:15AM

Heretic!

NickM · December 16, 2004 4:24AM

No. Apostate.

BTW, Thank you for the prices. I forgot to say that in my last post.

Nick

Vargha · December 16, 2004 4:34AM

Apostate, you say? NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition! Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope, and nice red uniforms

Vargha · December 16, 2004 7:42AM

ttt (For Nick, who was bummed that I derailed a serious topic)

Vargha · December 16, 2004 7:54AM

Really, it is.

Machodoc · December 16, 2004 1:49PM

Cardinal Fang, the RACK!!!! (devious laughter which dissolves into confusion....)

Brought to you by Heh.. Inc. A fully owned subsidiary of 20th Century Wolfe

SW

Vargha · December 17, 2004 12:02AM

Thanks for ruining a serious thread, Steve!

NickM · December 17, 2004 4:26AM

What do collectors who track prices on the other years of Bowman cards think of the accuracy of the changes?

Nick

Vargha · December 21, 2004 12:00AM

Someone here please help Nick on this one. He's a good guy and may be going through holiday depression because nobody will help him out.

Buccaneer · December 21, 2004 3:09AM

<< <i>Between the opening editorial and the equally worthless info that follows it really seems a crime to waste trees on this POS. If they don't want to put the effort into making it accurate it would be better to just fold the whole thing. >>

I fully agree. It is my perception that nearly none of the 60s prices have changed in the last year or so. I also like the fact that the price difference between the grades of a card is a simple Excel formula.

I agree that it would take more resources that they can possibly have to do a semi-realistic survey but don't pretend that you (and the SMR) are the "authority" when it really is a POS.

GOODLIEU · December 21, 2004 4:53AM

I collect 1948 Bowman Basketball and feel that the SMR prices on these sets are also in need of a overhaul. There are "Common" cards in these sets that are very scarce (#2 HAMILTON,#36 TIDRICK are two that come to mind) but are just lumped in "The Singles 1-36" category. Also the PSA 7 grade which is very underappreciated and in my opinion based on their low pops very undervalued. Like the Baseball there was some small price movement on the PSA 8s but as the previous members had stated it appears that it was a blanket type increase to appease the Registry Sets members.

NickM · December 21, 2004 9:11AM

What do you mean I'm a good guy?

Are you trying to ruin my reputation?

Nick

Vargha · December 21, 2004 9:18AM

Sorry . . . I wasn't being serious, Nick.

Buccaneer · December 21, 2004 10:07AM

<< <i>it appears that it was a blanket type increase to appease the Registry Sets members. >>

I surmise that in other businesses, such an activity would be called "racketeering".

Vargha · January 1, 2005 2:01PM

ttt for Nick

Bowman prices up in SMR

Comments