Can anyone tell me what this Joe Dimaggio pin is?
Davino
Posts: 333 ✭
I appreciate your help!
Dave
0
Davino
Posts: 333 ✭
I appreciate your help!
Dave
Comments
Pin was issued in 1983 as an unlicensed issue. They were made to look like the 1969 MLB pins (copyright line on back reads 1969 MLBPA MFG IN U.S.A.) but they are not. 36 different players. No value. The real 1969 MLB pins have the added notation "R.R. Winona, MINN" on the rim in addition to the copyright.
Bob
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets
Dave
I don't totally agree with Bob on the value - altho my 2004 Catalog doesn't list the 69 or the 83 set, my 1996 catalog lists the 1983 DiMaggio for 15-20 bucks. I agree there is no indication that the set was authorized by MLB but the set is collected. I have many of the pins. They are commonly mistaken for the 69 pins but unless Bob has something that has recently discredited these pins, they do have collector value IMO.
Also, unfortunately, there is no Joe D. in the 69 set to make a price comparison.
your friend
Mike
edit: clarity on the 83 pin
I'm gonna put it on Ebay starting at 9.99.
Dave
<< <i>Thanks very much, Mike!
I'm gonna put it on Ebay starting at 9.99.
Dave >>
Hi Dave
Great - just a suggestion - you might get better play overall, if you start it lower IMO - just a thought.
You can list the pin as the "1983 MLBPA" pin; patterned after the 1969 MLBPA pins. People who know the pin won't mix them up since there is no DiMaggio in the other set.
Good luck
your friend
Mike
2005 Standard Catalog lists the pins but without prices (as they do now with all unlicensed issues). They usually put the blurb "no collector value" with these listings, but they don't with the pins (probably because they're kind of neat). I would personally assign them some value as a collector, just as I would the Starliner Stickers. It gripes me though, that they were put out to mislead the collecting public. If they had just had a 1983 copyright on them, I'd be less put off.
Bob
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets