WOW! Unopened Stuff
xbaggypants
Posts: 2,185 ✭✭✭
xbaggypants
Posts: 2,185 ✭✭✭
xbaggypants
Posts: 2,185 ✭✭✭
Comments
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
A for sure gum stain on every card and a nice wax stain on the back to boot!!!
1.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
The cards shown do not look that bad. Certainly they do not look like garbage.
last yr a guy was selling a box of these things, made it so hard to even answer a few questions and took a
beating on them. Steve wound up buying them for mastro. They too were 1 packs and they were fine.
Steve
Steve
<< <i>The seller obviousely has opened some how else would he be able to show the 5 then?
The cards shown do not look that bad. Certainly they do not look like garbage.
last yr a guy was selling a box of these things, made it so hard to even answer a few questions and took a
beating on them. Steve wound up buying them for mastro. They too were 1 packs and they were fine.
Steve >>
This isn't the same situation as the other one. First off, this is a different type of seller, much more experienced in collectibles than the other seller. Secondly - those packs were pretty nice, and still, from all accounts the cards inside the packs were garbage - Were any packs from that other seller opened, and the cards graded? None that I know of. Why? Because the cards were garbage.
These packs are obvious garbage, but again, some buyer may try to get the garbage slabbed, and with some flowery language explain how he found them at some luxurious estate sale of a little old lady from Pasadena, or some BS like that, and will try to make a profit...and it might work.
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
<< <i>These packs are obvious garbage, but again, some buyer may try to get the garbage slabbed, and with some flowery language explain how he found them at some luxurious estate sale of a little old lady from Pasadena, or some BS like that, and will try to make a profit...and it might work. >>
You wouldn't even have to use a stupid story. Unless there is a huge increase in the final minutes, even if the 64 packs sell for 1/4 of bbcexchange prices, someone could make out pretty well
RIP GURU
Really? And you know this how? I have never heard anything like that.
Also and FWIW my whole point was they were both 1 count packs.
The truth of the matter is you are guessing, your post has no basis in fact,
Ie: they are garbage.
Just like my contrarian view is a guess.
Steve
Steve
Did you even bother to look to see what this seller was also selling?
Actually, just by looking at what they both sold I would say the first seller sold more collectibles.
If my memory serves me I'd agree with you if you said that this second seller sold more cards.
But as far as collectibles you are dead wrong.
He sold many types of different collectibles.
But lets not let any of the facts get in the way here.
Steve
<< <i>much more experienced in collectibles than the other seller.
Did you even bother to look to see what this seller was also selling?
Actually, just by looking at what they both sold I would say the first seller sold more collectibles.
If my memory serves me I'd agree with you if you said that this second seller sold more cards.
But as far as collectibles you are dead wrong.
He sold many types of different collectibles.
But lets not let any of the facts get in the way here.
Steve >>
This seller is definitely more experienced with collectibles than the other seller and it isn't even debatable - that's one main reason why the other auction sold for perhaps less than it should have. The other seller was more involved with household and commercial machines of various types, furniture, and things of that nature if I'm remembering correctly...he definitely wasn't involved with cards and this seller clearly states that he is involved with cards. Case closed.
Duh isn't that what I said? I also said the first seller sold more collectible type of things. Which I stand by, things like matchbox cars etc.
The first seller sold more then blenders.
The word you chose in your first post was 'collectibles' not cards. as usual you change your tune when shown to be wrong.
And fwiw the first seller sold 64 standups that were found to be decent, not garbage like you falsely claimed.
Again lets not let the facts get in the way here.
The reason the first seller did not get more was the way he would answer questions.
NOT because he was not a card seller, he was a flea market type seller that sold just about anything.
He kept everyone in the dark. Of course you were proven wrong at that time too.
Now you must resort to revisionist history.
Steve
<<< Duh isn't that what I said? I also said the first seller sold more collectible type of things. Which I stand by, things like matchbox cars etc.
The first seller sold more then blenders.
The word you chose in your first post was 'collectibles' not cards. as usual you change your tune when shown to be wrong. >>>
I didn't change my viewpoint - I changed the wording a bit to further make my point, and to help you understand it - obviously you still don't understand. I don't remember the matchbox cards, not saying you're wrong, but I do remember that the higher priced items in his auction were the machines. And if somebody has a lot worth $17,000 then I'm gonna look at the other high priced items he is used to selling, and not some $25 matchbox cars, to analyze the seller's credibility.
<<< And fwiw the first seller sold 64 standups that were found to be decent, not garbage like you falsely claimed.
Again lets not let the facts get in the way here.>>>
You're still not getting it Steve - "Garbage" is in the eyes of the beholder. Of course that lot was in better condition than this lot, and the price went for considerably more. But the bottom line is, and if I'm remembering right that auction sold for around $17,000...might have been higher. For $17,000 the buyer basically received about 100 unopened packs containing a card with a wax stain and a gum stain which would receive a PSA qualifier making the graded cards worth far less, FAR LESS than $17,000. I didn't add it all up but roughing it with about 2 seconds of thought that opened pack graded lot would probably be worth less than $1,000. If I paid $17,000 for something and it turned out it was only worth $1,000, then I would call that garbage - You call it whatever you want.
I realize the slabbed unopened packs are worth better money than $1,000 - but that is mainly because of the "dream" of there possibly being a high grade card in there from future buyers who wouldn't know the history of the packs. Any "dream" for those packs pulling a high grade card simply isn't going to happen.
<<< The reason the first seller did not get more was the way he would answer questions.
NOT because he was not a card seller, he was a flea market type seller that sold just about anything.
He kept everyone in the dark. Of course you were proven wrong at that time too. >>>
You're technically wrong about that - Steve from BBCE inspected the cards before paying for them - This wasn't some seller who wasn't willing to have anyone see the cards in person before paying for them. Yes, you're right about the guy "sold just about anything" which further illustrates my point. You contradicted your own statement.
<<< Now you must resort to revisionist history. >>>
Again Steve - You call it whatever you want.
No one is ripping these packs looking for high grade cards.
(Edit to say that these packs do nothing for me, I'm just saying where I think the value lies with them.)
<< <i>stevek- You're view that the packs are only driven by the potential value of the cards inside is faulty. Pack collectors drool over these packs, not because of what the cards inside might be, but because of the rarity of the packs themselves. Why do you think some wax trays from the 70s sell for 20x-50x what three wax packs would sell for? The value in these packs lies in the demand from pack collectors due to perceived scarcity. I have no doubt that guys like Griffins and bobscards would pay a few hundred each for one pack just to have it in their collection.
No one is ripping these packs looking for high grade cards.
(Edit to say that these packs do nothing for me, I'm just saying where I think the value lies with them.) >>
Point understood Lee and I don't disagree with you. But I wonder how "rare" these unopened packs actually are? I guess perhaps rarer than I thought. I do know this for sure - as a young boy I was collecting cards back then and issues such as this basically didn't sell very well - I don't even remember a single one of any of my friends buying a pack of these - and we were very, VERY avid card collectors - back then all we did all summer was basically play baseball, and collect and trade/flip baseball cards.
So of course the point can be made if many packs weren't sold, perhaps they were just thrown away as wasted inventory by the candy shops and such, making them rare today. But a point could also be made that there are a lot of these still laying around, unopened, because most kids weren't interested in opening them, even the kid of a candy shop owner who decided to just keep the unsold inventory in his attic or garage, rather than just throwing it away. I guess maybe based on that perspective the former comment in this paragraph may be valid....and you would be right that the collectors of these don't necessarily care about what's inside the pack. Thanks for the reply.
Like I said, the packs do nothing for me really, but I can understand the value from a pack collector's standpoint. Based on the hammer prices though, I'm not sure there's much room left for profit.
<< <i>I have no doubt that guys like Griffins and bobscards would pay a few hundred each for one pack just to have it in their collection. >>
Bingo! Already contacted the buyer. I'd love to add a '65 penny pack.
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
P.S. I'd like to see a couple close-up pics when you get one of those packs.
<< <i> Based on the hammer prices though, I'm not sure there's much room left for profit. >>
interesting thread , seems like the same thread from when the 64 stand ups box came up. stevek saying that it was junk and us pack guys on the other side.
<< <i>
<< <i> Based on the hammer prices though, I'm not sure there's much room left for profit. >>
interesting thread , seems like the same thread from when the 64 stand ups box came up. stevek saying that it was junk and us pack guys on the other side. >>
"Junk" only in relation to the value of the cards inside the packs based on the selling price of the unopened packs - it was in that context I used the word junk. "Junk" in relation to a profit motive of busting the packs in order to get the cards graded and make a profit. Perhaps I could have used a better word because I truly enjoy all Topps cards of the 50's, 60's and 70's, even the non-sports cards.
Not sure if any were graded but I have been told from a source (that would know) that they were not garbage.
So exactly what 'accounts' are you referring too?
Also I mis spoke originally. The first seller did not take a beating, he simply could have made more had he answered questions.
These are not 'opinions' they are facts.
Steve
<< <i>Secondly - those packs were pretty nice, and still, from all accounts the cards inside the packs were garbage - Were any packs from that other seller opened, and the cards graded? None that I know of. Why? Because the cards were garbage.
Not sure if any were graded but I have been told from a source (that would know) that they were not garbage.
So exactly what 'accounts' are you referring too?
Also I mis spoke originally. The first seller did not take a beating, he simply could have made more had he answered questions.
These are not 'opinions' they are facts.
Steve >>
Accounts from other posters here, much more knowledgeable than me about this item, who clearly stated that the cards inside the packs were likely "ruined" from the wax and the gum, presuming, likely correctly, that the packs were not stored very well over the years - particularly when the cards were sold at a yard sale. These packs as you know are not hermetically sealed like a slab - When stored in an attic or basement, the paper inside is prone to heat and humidity which isn't conducive for keeping a paper product in its original condition.
PS: not a single thing you stated there is technically a "fact" - you obviously didn't do well in 5th grade word definition tests.
<<< Not sure if any were graded but I have been told from a source (that would know) that they were not garbage. >>>
that is similar to hearsay - it isn't a fact
<<< So exactly what 'accounts' are you referring too? >>>
I explained it
<<< Also I mis spoke originally. The first seller did not take a beating, he simply could have made more had he answered questions. >>>
That is conjecture - not a fact
<<< These are not 'opinions' they are facts. >>>
Uh, no Steve they are not facts, but keep studying and I feel confident that someday you'll be smarter than a 5th grader...and maybe you could go on that TV game show and prove it. LOL
That is conjecture - not a fact
No it's a fact! And I know this cuz I spoke to 2 people that would have bid more had he answered the questions.
The key word being 'more' as they did bid.
And no reason to insult me Stevek the bottom line here is that you have twisted and revised your statements each time I have shown
you to be wrong. The packs did not contain cards found to be garbage, the first seller sold 'collectibles' too, and lastly you have no idea
regarding these packs only conjecture.
And I'm still waiting for you to prove your 'on all accounts' statement.
Steve
Actually I did understand, that is why you were forced to change your wording.
And as usual you change your story with each post. In the beginning you made the statement that the cards were garbage because of gum
and stain problems. Then when you were shown that that may not be, you then changed it 'to garbage as in value of unopened vs opened'.
It is all here in black and white.
Again you have no idea if those packs are garbage just like you had no idea that the first seller sold collectibles too.
Steve
Nice try, Steve hart inspected them AFTER the auction closed, and the seller would not let anyone INSPECT them during the auction.
Thus my point that he could have done better is based on FACT not conjecture, like almost all of your statements.
I did not contradict anything, the guy not only sold collectibles he sold just about anything, what is so hard to understand about that?
You claimed he did not sell any collectibles that he sold machines.
With that I'm done with this BS. Just like you were hard headed regarding the 53 Mantle and Mays that BBCE was selling a few months ago, (and was shown to be wrong then too I may add)
You are being just as hard headed now.
Have the last word, knock yourself out.
Steve
<< <i>You're technically wrong about that - Steve from BBCE inspected the cards before paying for them - This wasn't some seller who wasn't willing to have anyone see the cards in person before paying for them.
Nice try, Steve hart inspected them AFTER the auction closed, and the seller would not let anyone INSPECT them during the auction.
Thus my point that he could have done better is based on FACT not conjecture, like almost all of your statements.
I did not contradict anything, the guy not only sold collectibles he sold just about anything, what is so hard to understand about that?
You claimed he did not sell any collectibles that he sold machines.
With that I'm done with this BS. Just like you were hard headed regarding the 53 Mantle and Mays that BBCE was selling a few months ago, (and was shown to be wrong then too I may add)
You are being just as hard headed now.
Have the last word, knock yourself out.
Steve >>
You're right - Steve came in after the auction was over - If those cards were resealed, there's no way the buyer would have paid for that auction. When Steve saw the packs were genuine and also not resealed, the sale was consummated.
I don't recall that thread about the "53 Mantle and Mays" - You may have the wrong cards or you're thinking of somebody else.