You know what would be great.. buy them all off of him and send them in to PSA (cracked) and get all 10's and e-mail him saying 'Thanks! I sent them in and they came back as 10's this time around!'
Heh that has to be the most overused line in all of ebay graded sales 'looks like a (whatever)'.
On a related note, are OPC cards more popular than the topps counterparts for hockey rookies? Seems they sell for a bunch more....why is that? (I'm no hockey collector, just curious, since the opposite seems true for baseball).
I honestly don't know how the production numbers compare between Topps and O-Pee-Chee hockey cards, but the game is essentially Canadian so it stands to reason that the Canadian hockey cards are more desirable. Plus, the OPC sets have a more comprehensive player selection than their Topps counterparts, which also gives them a popularity boost.
I'm sure there are plenty of examples, but one of the most notable differences in player selection is Mark Messier. His RC is in '80-81 OPC but Topps didn't produce a card of him until they resumed hockey production in '84-85 after a two-year layoff.
O-Pee-Chee hockey cards certainly book for more (in nearly every year but 89-90, when OPC was reputed to have grossly overproduced), but I don't know if the difference in price is justified. The way I figure it, Canada has 1/10th the population of the US, but the average Canadian is probably 10X more likely to collect hockey cards, so the production numbers between OPC and Topps probably aren't that far off from one another.
Steve calls it correctly when he says that the OPC sets were generally much more comprehensive, and therefore more desirable as sets. I don't know if I'd shell out the extra clams for an OPC Gretzky RC vs. the Topps verson though.
I'm currently working on the Topps 81-82 set. It is missing some key rookies vs. the OPC version, but at half the set size it is more manageable as a collecting goal, and the borders on the OPC cards look a little stupid with a small "O-PEE-CHEE" printed inside the "Topps"-shaped void left behind.
Well, he kinda undermines his own advertising by automatically saying every card "looks like 10." Surely he must own some cards that only look like 9's!
How odd. Earlier this morning I was looking at the Lemieux this guy has up now, and was thinking to myself "Gee, oversell your cards much?" I come here, and walk straight into this post. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go buy a lottery ticket...
Comments
You know what would be great.. buy them all off of him and send them in to PSA (cracked) and get all 10's and e-mail him saying 'Thanks! I sent them in and they came back as 10's this time around!'
On a related note, are OPC cards more popular than the topps counterparts for hockey rookies? Seems they sell for a bunch more....why is that? (I'm no hockey collector, just curious, since the opposite seems true for baseball).
I'm sure there are plenty of examples, but one of the most notable differences in player selection is Mark Messier. His RC is in '80-81 OPC but Topps didn't produce a card of him until they resumed hockey production in '84-85 after a two-year layoff.
cards were produced for the population...
OPC = Canada
Topps = US
A lot more topps produced than opc.
Except 1989, I believe opc ran the presses til they failed.
Bob
61 Topps (100%) 7.96
62 Parkhurst (100%) 8.70
63 Topps (100%) 7.96
63 York WB's (50%) 8.52
68 Topps (39%) 8.54
69 Topps (3%) 9.00
69 OPC (83%) 8.21
71 Topps (100%) 9.21 #1 A.T.F.
72 Topps (100%) 9.39
73 Topps (13%) 9.35
74 OPC WHA (95%) 8.57
75 Topps (50%) 9.23
77 OPC WHA (86%) 8.62 #1 A.T.F.
88 Topps (5%) 10.00
Steve calls it correctly when he says that the OPC sets were generally much more comprehensive, and therefore more desirable as sets. I don't know if I'd shell out the extra clams for an OPC Gretzky RC vs. the Topps verson though.
I'm currently working on the Topps 81-82 set. It is missing some key rookies vs. the OPC version, but at half the set size it is more manageable as a collecting goal, and the borders on the OPC cards look a little stupid with a small "O-PEE-CHEE" printed inside the "Topps"-shaped void left behind.