1975 Topps...24 Sets and Counting!

69topps8

I just noticed that 1975 now has 24 partial sets registered. That's more than even the mightly 1972 set could muster! Aside from the 1968 set (26 registered), this may be the highest number. I haven't gone through and checked the other years but I think these are the top 2.

I predict by the end of the year, some issues will be approaching 100 registered sets and the total registered sets will be pushing 2000. Anyone else care to predict?

Wayne8348

Make that 25 - I just registered my 1975 set yesterday.

Wayne

Kep13

Don't forget that many people are probably just registering under a particular set so they can get the use the "70's Grading Registry Special", even if they only had 10 cards from 1975 to send in.....just my opinion.....

69topps8

kep13 - Good point. Hopefully that will stimulate them to continue building the sets.

mcastaldi

A few observations about the 1975 set registry. . .

* I am currently leading, but I have no illusions about having the "best set". Frank Smith is very close behind me and has many more 9s than I do. The only reason I'm in front of him now is because in the last two weeks I was lucky enough to add a Schmidt, Rose, and Ryan.

* I know of at least one other person who's at least as far along as me who has chosen not to list his set yet.

* There's only 3 sets listed above 10%, but the competition on eBay for 1975s in PSA8 and PSA9 has become somewhat out of hand. PSA8 commons have been climbing quite substantially. I'm not sure if these prices will hold, but right now it's sort of silly in my opinion.

* There seems to be quite a few people willing to build this set in less than PSA8. Considering the quantity of very nice ungraded 75s still available, this seems very short-sighted to me. But to each his own.

* In line with what Kep said, there are 8 sets with less than 1% completion. Keep in mind, for these set, 1% means a mere 7 cards.

Anyway. . .
Mike

AdamM

I had originally wanted to do this set because it's my birth year but the 9's for some of the cards were a bit out of my budget. I think it's a great set to do and tough because of the colored borders. It also has very good HOF rookies in it and contains quite a few other HOFers in it too.

I agree with you Mike and I don't understand why people would want 7's from anything from the mid 70's on because that is what is listed as average in most price guides. May as well keep the cards ungraded. I know I wouldn't want a 77 common in PSA 7. PSA 8's usually only break even.

I'm glad I went away from it though because I don't think I could stay in the bidding wars for these cards. Of course, I am having a time at it myself with the 77's.

Adam

mcastaldi

Adam> Actually, back in January I was finding PSA9 commons from time to time for under $30 each. Because I'm doing several sets, I could only pick up a few. But they're out there. And if you have a good eye, there's plenty of 9s still waiting to be submitted.

Mike

Kurt

My last submission had only 75's and 77's in it. Not a huge bunch, but I will try to remember to post what happens. PSA has it and is taking their time on it? Registry deal seems slower than economy anyhow.

1975 to date not including qualified cards 7.5% are 9 or better
1975 to date including qualified cards 8.6% are 9 or better

1977 to date not including qualified cards 10.2% are 9 or better
1977 to date including qualified cards 11.8% are 9 or better

1975 total submitted: 16427 1977: 4371
1975 Total 10's: 20 1977: 1
1975 Total 9's(NQ): 1209 1977: 445

Good Luck on your sets........

PS Adam did you win the Eck, or the 2 1/1 rookies in 9's??

AdamM

Kurt,

I didn't win any of the three. I wasn't going to pay over a certain price for the Eck and was surprised to see it go for over $50. I am bidding on another one right now though. The one PSA Rookie pitchers went for $17 and some change and I felt I could wait for something else. As far as the other 1/1, it's not a 1/1 because I have one. Card #493 has a few graded 9's. I wanted to email the seller and ask him where he got his numbers from but decided not to do it.

Adam

AdamM

Mike

I hope to find the same thing with the 77's. I know there has to be some nice examples still sitting around out there. I hope to be stationed back in Omaha in late July so I can try to make it to the National. I have a friend back there that has a table for the show and if I can go I think I will ask him if I can tag along. I want to go pretty bad because I haven't been to a real show in 1 1/2 years. I would also like to go so I could maybe meet up with some of you guys and talk cards.

Adam

Kurt

Eck went pretty good then, huh? Not as insane as the Nettles PSA 8 for $118. What are you willing to pay for 77 8's, 9's, and the coveted question if I get lucky for 10's?? As for me I will pay $6 for 8's to save time, $10 for Red Sox 9's and other than that I will submit the rest until it seems unlikely to do any better. If a 7 ever goes for under $4, which they don't seem to I will grab it. I sent all doubles and triples on the 77's and will continue to do it that way so I can grab one and sell the duplicates. Just curious on what you are willing to pay? Good Luck as usual Adam.

Kurt

Also Adam at a minimum let's get together as many "77" guys as we can find and weight this set. Surely Dale, Andre, or even a Joe Kerrigan RC should be worth more than some cards

helionaut

Over the course of about 550 commons, spending $5-6 for a 7 versus $10-12 (or a whole lot more) for an 8 equates to a savings of about $3500, which means a lot to some people. Plus, the 7s I have compare pretty favorably to the 8s I've collected. It seems like the only thing that separates an 8 from a 7 is an extra corner touch or something that you have to look hard at. And if you're looking that hard, you probably wouldn't bother looking at a 7 at all. Besides, if 8s soften due to quantity as you think they will, upgrading will be easier and cheaper than buying 8s now. I don't see how prices for 7s could drop much unless they start to outnumber raw cards.



<< <i>A few observations about the 1975 set registry. . .

* I am currently leading, but I have no illusions about having the "best set". Frank Smith is very close behind me and has many more 9s than I do. The only reason I'm in front of him now is because in the last two weeks I was lucky enough to add a Schmidt, Rose, and Ryan.

* I know of at least one other person who's at least as far along as me who has chosen not to list his set yet.

* There's only 3 sets listed above 10%, but the competition on eBay for 1975s in PSA8 and PSA9 has become somewhat out of hand. PSA8 commons have been climbing quite substantially. I'm not sure if these prices will hold, but right now it's sort of silly in my opinion.

* There seems to be quite a few people willing to build this set in less than PSA8. Considering the quantity of very nice ungraded 75s still available, this seems very short-sighted to me. But to each his own.

* In line with what Kep said, there are 8 sets with less than 1% completion. Keep in mind, for these set, 1% means a mere 7 cards.

Anyway. . .
Mike >>

69topps8

One possible reason for the high prices being realized for PSA 8 1975 commons could be people filling holes in their sets. Some poeple may have no intention of building a graded set but need to upgrade some less than NM/MT raw cards in their set. The safest way to do it is to buy a PSA 8 card. This could be particularly important to collectors that don't live near major cities and therefore don't have the opportunity to attend a large show to purchase raw cards.

If someone only needs a handful of cards to be satisfied that they have a NM/MT set throughout, they may be willing to pay well over book to obtain the card(s). The 1975 set is more condition sensitive than other years which may encourage people to bid higher even though there is still plenty of unopened material out there.

mcastaldi

helio> I guess it depends on your point of view. The way I see it, I've been paying about $1 each for vending-quality commons and submit them myself. So after grading fees are added, I'm paying roughly $7.25 each for my PSA8 commons.

As for differences between 7s and 8s, sometimes these differences can be dramatic. While you can find some very nice 7 NQ cards from 75, you will also find some very marginal cards in 7 NQ holders. There's just a lot more latitude as to what constitutes a 7 as opposed to an 8.

In looking on eBay nearly every day at the 1975s, over the last six months PSA8s are generally a lot more available than are 7s. While the 7s can indeed be had for a lot less money, they are less frequently available.

Ultimately, you have to build a set which makes you happy.

Mike

zardoz51

I have to be honest, many of my sevens look better than some of my eights. Yes, there does seem to be a wide latitude for sevens, but a nice high end seven is nothing to be ashamed of.

AdamM

Kurt>I'm not really looking to buy any PSA 8's right now. I will start adding 8's in the future when I start submitting them myself. As far as 9's go I try to pay no more than $20 for any common or semistar (shipping included). I don't know what I'd pay for a 10. Would like to see one though.

I would also like to see the set weighted. Granted I only have a few cards so far but it sucks that my Murphy 9 and Brett RB 9 are seen the same as a common in any condition. The Brett RB has a pop of 3 and they all seem to have centering problems. I don't know how to weigh sets but if someone tells me what to do I would be willing to work with others to weight this set.

Good luck with your set also.

Adam