ERROR CARD OF THE WEEK 01/10/2010 (1987 Donruss Opening Day Barry Bonds)

richtree

Happy Playoff Sunday to Everyone !!!!!!!!

Today we are looking at one of the hardest modern error cards to find. In 1987 Donruss made a set called opening day. It was suppossed to focus on the players the started the opening day game for their respective teams. This card is very hard to find and for years many collectors weren't sure what the error card even looked like (be internet era).

Now they seem to circulated a little more than normal. The error card has a picture of Johnny Ray instead of Barry Bonds. Donruss caught this error very early and it always carried a hgih value.

A raw error version of this card is always in the 200-350 range. High grades carry the worth up to 1500 or even more. The combination of a star player, a hard to find error, and a strong value make this card very desireable even today.

Take a look and I encourage you to comment below. Enjoy.

ERROR

Corrected

richtree

bump to keep the weekly thread ALIVE !!!!!

lsutigers1973

So what was the reason you couldn't keep all these in one post?

richtree

3 reasons.

1 - I will be using these for the website I have finally got underway

2 - It is impossible for someone to find any information if the wanted to use the research through pages and pages of one thread

3 - This allows people to read or not read based on the topic of the week


There are more organizational reasons and I think it just helps me keep up with it too. lol

ROCKDJRW

One of my favorite threads. Keep up the great work!

milbroco

One of my favorite threads. Keep up the great work!

Ditto.......

Thanks for the great threads! I have been printing them out to keep them on file for future use when I decide to go through all my "commons".

Thanks,
Bob

richtree

thANKSSSS

divecchia

Love reading these error threads...

Keep up the great work...Donato

jamesryanbell

I've always wanted one of those.

schr1st

Same here. Even with Bonds being a near hobby pariah, that card still sells well.



<< <i>I've always wanted one of those. >>

bobsbbcards

<< <i>Love reading these error threads...

Keep up the great work...Donato >>




I have a bit of an addiction to this card........

WinPitcher

I like the fact that they are all in different threads.

Are we trying to save on bandwidth or sumthin?

If so I did not get that memo.




Steve

mikeschmidt

Bob -- nine of those? Jeepers -- that is certainly taking things to a Bob level!

I've always been intrigued by this card. One thing that fascinates me is that people will place so much value on a card that does not even depict the player it purports. In full candor, I've owned the card in the past [no longer do], but it basically suggests that people are paying for the name on the card, and not for the actual picture...which they don't do for team cards, etc.

A very inriguing error card, for sure. Is there any thought as to whether or not this error was created on purpose [a trend that blossomed in 1989/1990?] -- as Bonds clearly was a budding star and the son of a former major league star. Just wondering if this was done intentionally -- or if they blame it on some simple mistake, or something else.

m

bobsbbcards

<< <i>Bob -- nine of those? >>


Yeah, and that's after I sold two.

I've never heard of any rumors about the card being created on purpose. I think Donruss just.....er....messed up (whew....had to remember which board I was on there).

RedHeart54

<< <i>Is there any thought as to whether or not this error was created on purpose [a trend that blossomed in 1989/1990?] >>



I doubt it. Like you wrote the error craze started a few years later. (I remember Upper Deck was accused of intentionally making the 1990 Ben McDonald error, though.)

ajw

I'd also be surprised if they chose Bonds to intentionally screw up. He was far, far down the list of hot 1986 rookies at the time. Guys easily more popular at the time were Will Clark, Wally Joyner, Jose Canseco, Cory Snyder, Bo Jackson, Danny Tartabull, Ruben Sierra and Pete Incaviglia. Bonds just wasn't a big name in the spring of 1987. Also, if they were trying to build interest, they likely would not have corrected the error as quickly as they did. It's almost too rare to really drive interest.

Still, a great card. I do tend to agree with mikeschmidt that it sort of makes me question the reason people collect it. Then again, if it was a Will Clark error, I'd be all over it! (As a note, isn't one of the top Carlos Beltran rookies similar, but uncorrected?)

richtree

The Beltran rookie is seen here. Juan Lebron is the other player pictured.

I also have the Beltran error where the Name is not on the front of the card. Sometimes I think that any set produced with any type of gold or foil lettering on front finds its way to sellers that remove the foil, but that is something I can't prove. PIctures below.

metsfan

These are always fun threads to read! You mentioned your website is up? What is the name of it?

richtree

I have purchased the site. The domain is now mine, and I have it up and hosted but I am only at 1% complete.

LOL.

Once I have some content up and available I will alert everyone here first.

I am new to using Joomla with HTML and CSS so this is a new process for me.

Alot has changed since I was writing in Pascal in 1996.

WinPitcher

Back in the day it was thought that it was done on purpose. (Just like many of the other error/variations that soon followed).

The error craze started right around that time and not IMO a few years later.

Yes it got ridiculous a few years later but it was happening in 1987 too. Al Leiter?

It's funny how peoples perception of things change over time.

Bonds was more popular then some of the aforementioned players.

Joyner, Canseco and McGwire (85 Topps ) and Bo were but Snyder, Incaviglia etc, IMO were not.

I base my statement on what I heard from other card store owners at the time

and from what I remember selling.


Of course the above is only my opinion others may differ and usually do.




Steve

jacksoncoupage

This card is a great study in what exposure to the general population of collectors can show us about rarity.

Prior to the entire world scrambling for anything 1986-1987 Barry Bonds, this card was almost mythical - it never showed up for sale and there were staggeringly low estimates on it's print run. A card mentioned in error articles and top ten lists that most people knew little about.

After Bonds picked up McGwire's mantle and people were paying for everything "rookie" of his, these started coming out of the woodwork. I swear, it seems as if the BGS 9.5 has been up on ebay at some ridiculous price or another for the last 3+ years now! Granted they don't show up as often anymore (now that Bonds is "disgraced") but for a period, they proved to be produced in larger quantities than what they were originally estimated to exist in.

This is what the error & variation market needs. Lots and lots of discussion and exposure to firmly establish how rare or how common a variety is.

alnavman

another thread is making me pull out my 82 Donruss set....errors are intriging....

bobsbbcards

This one is legitimately scarce. PSA shows 89 graded of the error and 2,301 of the regular Bonds card. Now, I'm sure that the 89 represents a MUCH larger percentage of the existing error cards than the 2,301 represents of the non-error Bonds card (who would bother grading that one anyway?).

I'm also sure that out of the 89, many of those were cracked out and resubmitted trying to get a 10 (it was YEARS before a ten appeared of this card). There were 18 PSA 9s at one point and zero 10s. I owned 10 of the 18 at that point.

Current Pop.
PSA 10: 6
PSA 9: 27
PSA 8.5: 1
PSA 8: 41
PSA 7: 7
PSA 6.5: 1
PSA 6: 4
PSA 5: 2

richtree

great info bob, thanks !

I am gonna send mine in and see what grade I get., lol

mikeschmidt

Bob:

As a frame of reference, Beckett has graded 125 examples of the error card, including 31 BGS 9.5s and one BGS 10

James123

Hi all,

I inherited this card set from my great-uncle and I was wondering if anyone on this forum saw any telltale signs that it was either real or fake?