thoughts on undervalued cards?
begsu1013
Posts: 1,943 ✭✭
considering the thread going on w/ the 54 aaron and the what "seems" to be an unfathomable price, what other players or actual cards do you deem "undervalued"?
as for my thoughts on that aaron card, I do think it's definitely an undervalued card. I bought a sgc 88 for a steal and is one of the very few cards that I think actually look better in the sgc slab.
however considering the team, the rings, the era, the presence, the age make early and high graded yogi berra cards quite undervalued....
as for my thoughts on that aaron card, I do think it's definitely an undervalued card. I bought a sgc 88 for a steal and is one of the very few cards that I think actually look better in the sgc slab.
however considering the team, the rings, the era, the presence, the age make early and high graded yogi berra cards quite undervalued....
0
Comments
Also Pete rose rookie seems good value, along with schmidt rookie, the 75 yount and Brett too.
Both 1957 Robinsons seem undervalued too.
1948 leaf has some undervalued rookie cards too I feel like spahn.
Agree that the 54 banks seems cheap too
Really wondering what they are thinking, and cannot tell someone what to sell a card for but no way they sell or bump.
looking into the banks card now...
Aaron
Mays
Clemente
Koufax
WTB: PSA 1 - PSA 3 Centered, High Eye Appeal 1950's Mantle
That said anything rare(low population in either total quantity such as Baltimore Ruth or low pop in certain grade such as Jordan fleer BGS 10 rookie or Aaron Psa 10 rookie), and with exorbitant demand such as the Jordan and Aaron mentioned will sell for ridiculously high amounts.
Just a matter of supply and demand.
<< <i>It's human nature people pay extraordinary amounts for rare and popular items. Look at Picasso paintings selling for 100 million dollars.
That said anything rare(low population in either total quantity such as Baltimore Ruth or low pop in certain grade such as Jordan fleer BGS 10 rookie or Aaron Psa 10 rookie), and with exorbitant demand such as the Jordan and Aaron mentioned will sell for ridiculously high amounts.
Just a matter of supply and demand. >>
Why do you keep mentioning Picasso paintings when referring to prices of sports cards?
Paintings are not "rare" they are unique.
The difference between a piece of fine art and a trading card is the same as a bottle of chateau mouton to a bottle of Hurricane Malt Liquor.
<< <i>
<< <i>It's human nature people pay extraordinary amounts for rare and popular items. Look at Picasso paintings selling for 100 million dollars.
That said anything rare(low population in either total quantity such as Baltimore Ruth or low pop in certain grade such as Jordan fleer BGS 10 rookie or Aaron Psa 10 rookie), and with exorbitant demand such as the Jordan and Aaron mentioned will sell for ridiculously high amounts.
Just a matter of supply and demand. >>
Why do you keep mentioning Picasso paintings when referring to prices of sports cards?
Paintings are not "rare" they are unique.
The difference between a piece of fine art and a trading card is the same as a bottle of chateau mouton to a bottle of Hurricane Malt Liquor. >>
So reproductions of Picasso paintings or lithographs or copies of paintings of artists such as kinkaid are unique?
<< <i>
<< <i>It's human nature people pay extraordinary amounts for rare and popular items. Look at Picasso paintings selling for 100 million dollars.
That said anything rare(low population in either total quantity such as Baltimore Ruth or low pop in certain grade such as Jordan fleer BGS 10 rookie or Aaron Psa 10 rookie), and with exorbitant demand such as the Jordan and Aaron mentioned will sell for ridiculously high amounts.
Just a matter of supply and demand. >>
Why do you keep mentioning Picasso paintings when referring to prices of sports cards?
Paintings are not "rare" they are unique.
The difference between a piece of fine art and a trading card is the same as a bottle of chateau mouton to a bottle of Hurricane Malt Liquor. >>
Both paintings and cards are Collectibles.
- The Lou Gehrig 1925 RC. The secret has begun to get out on this one, as evinced by the most recent sale of a copy at REA this month. Once the hobby realized the TPGs were not initially distinguishing the 1925 true RC from the later version that used the same picture, the rarity of the true rookie of Gehrig was known and appreciated (check the combined PSA & SGC pop reports on this card). Gehrig is a beloved American cultural icon and his story is perhaps the most tragic and moving in the history of the game. Not to mention he is right there among the best hitters the game has ever seen, alongside the likes of Ruth.
- 1968 Topps Nolan Ryan RC. Take a look on eBay at every Ryan RC up right now. How many have elite centering? This is a sneaky tough card. Not to mention Ryan holds records that are not likely to ever be challenged, let alone broken. This is arguably the top card from the 1960s onward. Koosman was also no slouch. I can see centered copies of this card becoming hotly contested pieces as time goes by.
- 1951 Bowman Mickey Mantle RC. Mantle is and always will be the biggest name in baseball cards. While his #311 will always be the hobby's standard bearer (alongside the T206 Wagner), his undisputed rookie card is a favorite among many collectors. Aesthetically pleasing with its pastel palette, it is also notoriously off centered. Many copies are also afflicted with vertical print lines. Finding an even remotely centered copy is a big challenge, and the great copies continue to sell for increasing amounts.
- Ted Williams' key cards, led by hobby icon the 54 Franks, but the 54B, 54T, and the rookie as well. Anytime someone flirts with .400, Williams re-enters the zeitgeist. With multiple biopic projects about him in the Hollywood pipeline, interest in Teddy Ballgame stands to be renewed. He also has tough cards in the rare Wilson Franks and the 54B.
- Joe DiMaggio cards; for similar reasons to Ted above-- the next time someone flirts with 56, a hallowed number and record, Joe D enters the national conversation. He has some classics like the 41 Play Ball and some very rare and challenging early issues from the Zeenut batting pose to the V355 and 1937 OPC.
I could add a few more like Clemente but gonna crash out. Peace.
Instagram: mattyc_collection
<< <i>You also have the opposite going on by some sellers on Ebay where they have cards for sale for FAR more than what they are going for. Saw where one seller has a 1975 PSA 8.5 Ryan for $999 BIN or with OBO. Another has the same card in an 8 for $899. Have to wonder what they are thinking since they go for $480-525 and $150-190 respectively.
Really wondering what they are thinking, and cannot tell someone what to sell a card for but no way they sell or bump. >>
Another good example of why looking at BIN 's is a waste of time.
I'll step outside baseball and add the 1980-81 Topps Magic/Bird RC to the list. That card is criminally undervalued.
<< <i>
<< <i>You also have the opposite going on by some sellers on Ebay where they have cards for sale for FAR more than what they are going for. Saw where one seller has a 1975 PSA 8.5 Ryan for $999 BIN or with OBO. Another has the same card in an 8 for $899. Have to wonder what they are thinking since they go for $480-525 and $150-190 respectively.
Really wondering what they are thinking, and cannot tell someone what to sell a card for but no way they sell or bump. >>
Another good example of why looking at BIN 's is a waste of time. >>
Appreciate the comments and what is your thinking when you see a BIN price on Ebay?
<< <i>I couldn't agree more with the Gehrig and the 51B Mantle.
I'll step outside baseball and add the 1980-81 Topps Magic/Bird RC to the list. That card is criminally undervalued. >>
I was just looking at that card last night and thinking the same thing. A PSA 9 with 3 of the best players ever, two of them rookies on the same card going for under $2K just seems wrong. Two loyal fanbases fighting it out on ebay and that's all that it gets to?
In fact, I think a lot of basketball cards pre-1986 are criminally undervalued. I know they weren't that popular and there were a bunch of starts and stops along the way but there are a lot of good HOF rookies from that era.
I also think that cards from a player's iconic year are undervalued because historians will always point to those key years- '67 Yaz, '61 Maris, '68 Gibson, '77 Reggie and '66 Frank Robinson for example. I also think Fred Lynn's rookie would qualify since he won ROY and MVP that year.
Lee
<< <i>I think that football Hall of Fame rookies especially have a lot of room to grow. >>
a quote from the Evan Mathis article in SMR.
i agree, Evan.
<< <i>I couldn't agree more with the Gehrig and the 51B Mantle.
I'll step outside baseball and add the 1980-81 Topps Magic/Bird RC to the list. That card is criminally undervalued. >>
I agree with you. IF Jordan psa 9's are going for $2300, this card should be over $3000.
82 Topps Traded PSA 10 Cal Ripken has room to grow
83 OPC Gywnn and Boggs PSA 10 should do well
84 Topps, Tiffany, OPC, & Nestle Mattingly's could see some increases
84 Topps Traded Tiffany Dwight Gooden will go higher.
88 Topps Cloth Tom Glavine in a 9 or 10
Any PSA 10 from the 1985 topps Bears team set will go higher.
Most of the young collectors from the 80's are now in their 40's. As the demo grows older, the factors of a larger earning ability combined with nostalgia for their youth, will combine and increase the prices realized for these cards.
<< <i>I couldn't agree more with the Gehrig and the 51B Mantle.
I'll step outside baseball and add the 1980-81 Topps Magic/Bird RC to the list. That card is criminally undervalued. >>
I could not agree with you more.
by all means, continue....
The 1983 OPC Boggs is an incredibly tough card to find in any grade.
All Goudey Ruth's -PSA 5-6
All Goudey Gehrig cards in PSA 5-7
1954 cards should explode with Aaron, Banks, and Kaline rookies along with the Williams bookend cards #1 and 250.
All Aaron and Mays cards
1968 Ryan and Bench rookies
Pete Rose cards - when the ban is ever lifted people will focus on his numbers and titles and not the negative stuff.
The key is to get the cards before they explode in price. 3-5 years ago was the time to grab the 55 Clemente, 52 and 53 Mantle's...
<< <i>Pete Rose cards >>
this is and always will be a super competitive branch of the collector market, regardless of Pete's potential to someday get in.
his popularity is so well established, that even folks who couldn't stand him during his playing days are compelled to chase his cardboards.
folks like me.
i've yet to find a high profile auction for a Rose card which didn't attract a swarm.
<< <i>83 OPC Gywnn and Boggs PSA 10 should do well
The 1983 OPC Boggs is an incredibly tough card to find in any grade. >>
Heh.
P.Reese: '53 Bowman - One of my favorite cards and incredible visual appearance.
Montana: 81 Topps PSA 9/10
J.Rice: 86 Topps PSA 9/10
-Best QB to WR combo of the 80s/90s and possibly of all time.
Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona.
-George F. Will
1) 1961 Chamberlain
2) 1961 Robertson
3) 1957 Russell
4) 1972 Erving
5) 1980 Bird/Magic
6) 1984 Jordan
7) 1986 Jordan
8) 1957 Unitas
9) 1965 Namath
10) 1958 Brown
11) 1976 Payton
There will still be solid value in others, but elite RC's have always held up the best and the above are exactly that.
Kiss me twice.....let's party.
Instagram: mattyc_collection
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It's human nature people pay extraordinary amounts for rare and popular items. Look at Picasso paintings selling for 100 million dollars.
That said anything rare(low population in either total quantity such as Baltimore Ruth or low pop in certain grade such as Jordan fleer BGS 10 rookie or Aaron Psa 10 rookie), and with exorbitant demand such as the Jordan and Aaron mentioned will sell for ridiculously high amounts.
Just a matter of supply and demand. >>
Why do you keep mentioning Picasso paintings when referring to prices of sports cards?
Paintings are not "rare" they are unique.
The difference between a piece of fine art and a trading card is the same as a bottle of chateau mouton to a bottle of Hurricane Malt Liquor. >>
So reproductions of Picasso paintings or lithographs or copies of paintings of artists such as kinkaid are unique? >>
I've never seen a reproduction, lithograph or print sell for "100 million dollars"
There are some prints (Dali, Picasso, Warhol, et cetera) which sell in the range of the T206 Wagner, Ruth RC, '52 Mantle, and high grade Jordan RC. And while these sports cards are popular, especially the baseball ones, globally they don't even come close to the popularity of the artists mentioned.
To answer the thread, I think the 1953 Parkhurst Hockey set is extremely undervalued.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It's human nature people pay extraordinary amounts for rare and popular items. Look at Picasso paintings selling for 100 million dollars.
That said anything rare(low population in either total quantity such as Baltimore Ruth or low pop in certain grade such as Jordan fleer BGS 10 rookie or Aaron Psa 10 rookie), and with exorbitant demand such as the Jordan and Aaron mentioned will sell for ridiculously high amounts.
Just a matter of supply and demand. >>
Why do you keep mentioning Picasso paintings when referring to prices of sports cards?
Paintings are not "rare" they are unique.
The difference between a piece of fine art and a trading card is the same as a bottle of chateau mouton to a bottle of Hurricane Malt Liquor. >>
So reproductions of Picasso paintings or lithographs or copies of paintings of artists such as kinkaid are unique? >>
I've never seen a reproduction, lithograph or print sell for "100 million dollars"
There are some prints (Dali, Picasso, Warhol, et cetera) which sell in the range of the T206 Wagner, Ruth RC, '52 Mantle, and high grade Jordan RC. And while these sports cards are popular, especially the baseball ones, globally they don't even come close to the popularity of the artists mentioned.
To answer the thread, I think the 1953 Parkhurst Hockey set is extremely undervalued. >>
You said paintings in general are unique. I was referring to some paintings are reproductions, copies or lithographs which would not be considered unique as they are duplicates. Obviously these duplicates would not sell for 100 million dollars as only the original would.
Still lithographs or copies of paintings can be limited in number and signed such as kinkaid and Peter lik which can still sell for tens of thousands of dollars.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It's human nature people pay extraordinary amounts for rare and popular items. Look at Picasso paintings selling for 100 million dollars.
That said anything rare(low population in either total quantity such as Baltimore Ruth or low pop in certain grade such as Jordan fleer BGS 10 rookie or Aaron Psa 10 rookie), and with exorbitant demand such as the Jordan and Aaron mentioned will sell for ridiculously high amounts.
Just a matter of supply and demand. >>
Why do you keep mentioning Picasso paintings when referring to prices of sports cards?
Paintings are not "rare" they are unique.
The difference between a piece of fine art and a trading card is the same as a bottle of chateau mouton to a bottle of Hurricane Malt Liquor. >>
So reproductions of Picasso paintings or lithographs or copies of paintings of artists such as kinkaid are unique? >>
I've never seen a reproduction, lithograph or print sell for "100 million dollars"
There are some prints (Dali, Picasso, Warhol, et cetera) which sell in the range of the T206 Wagner, Ruth RC, '52 Mantle, and high grade Jordan RC. And while these sports cards are popular, especially the baseball ones, globally they don't even come close to the popularity of the artists mentioned.
To answer the thread, I think the 1953 Parkhurst Hockey set is extremely undervalued. >>
I don't see the 1953 parkhurst set as being undervalued. Hockey is way more popular in canada and is still behind football, basketball and baseball in terms of popularity in the United States. I don't see much upside for old time hockey sets without major rookie cards. I see more upside for the great hockey player rookie cards such as Gretzky, Orr and Howe whom most collectors know. I'm not aware of any big rookie cards in the set. Who are the major rookies in the set?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It's human nature people pay extraordinary amounts for rare and popular items. Look at Picasso paintings selling for 100 million dollars.
That said anything rare(low population in either total quantity such as Baltimore Ruth or low pop in certain grade such as Jordan fleer BGS 10 rookie or Aaron Psa 10 rookie), and with exorbitant demand such as the Jordan and Aaron mentioned will sell for ridiculously high amounts.
Just a matter of supply and demand. >>
Why do you keep mentioning Picasso paintings when referring to prices of sports cards?
Paintings are not "rare" they are unique.
The difference between a piece of fine art and a trading card is the same as a bottle of chateau mouton to a bottle of Hurricane Malt Liquor. >>
So reproductions of Picasso paintings or lithographs or copies of paintings of artists such as kinkaid are unique? >>
I've never seen a reproduction, lithograph or print sell for "100 million dollars"
There are some prints (Dali, Picasso, Warhol, et cetera) which sell in the range of the T206 Wagner, Ruth RC, '52 Mantle, and high grade Jordan RC. And while these sports cards are popular, especially the baseball ones, globally they don't even come close to the popularity of the artists mentioned.
To answer the thread, I think the 1953 Parkhurst Hockey set is extremely undervalued. >>
You said paintings in general are unique. I was referring to some paintings are reproductions, copies or lithographs which would not be considered unique as they are duplicates. Obviously these duplicates would not sell for 100 million dollars as only the original would.
Still lithographs or copies of paintings can be limited in number and signed such as kinkaid and Peter lik which can still sell for tens of thousands of dollars. >>
Then why not say, hey the Jordan I'm trying to peddle on these boards is like an art print instead of classing it with a $100 million dollar Picasso, which it is not. Frankly, the Jordan isn't even in the same league as prints from the above mentioned artists.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It's human nature people pay extraordinary amounts for rare and popular items. Look at Picasso paintings selling for 100 million dollars.
That said anything rare(low population in either total quantity such as Baltimore Ruth or low pop in certain grade such as Jordan fleer BGS 10 rookie or Aaron Psa 10 rookie), and with exorbitant demand such as the Jordan and Aaron mentioned will sell for ridiculously high amounts.
Just a matter of supply and demand. >>
Why do you keep mentioning Picasso paintings when referring to prices of sports cards?
Paintings are not "rare" they are unique.
The difference between a piece of fine art and a trading card is the same as a bottle of chateau mouton to a bottle of Hurricane Malt Liquor. >>
So reproductions of Picasso paintings or lithographs or copies of paintings of artists such as kinkaid are unique? >>
I've never seen a reproduction, lithograph or print sell for "100 million dollars"
There are some prints (Dali, Picasso, Warhol, et cetera) which sell in the range of the T206 Wagner, Ruth RC, '52 Mantle, and high grade Jordan RC. And while these sports cards are popular, especially the baseball ones, globally they don't even come close to the popularity of the artists mentioned.
To answer the thread, I think the 1953 Parkhurst Hockey set is extremely undervalued. >>
You said paintings in general are unique. I was referring to some paintings are reproductions, copies or lithographs which would not be considered unique as they are duplicates. Obviously these duplicates would not sell for 100 million dollars as only the original would.
Still lithographs or copies of paintings can be limited in number and signed such as kinkaid and Peter lik which can still sell for tens of thousands of dollars. >>
Then why not say, hey the Jordan I'm trying to peddle on these boards is like an art print instead of classing it with a $100 million dollar Picasso, which it is not. Frankly, the Jordan isn't even in the same league as prints from the above mentioned artists. >>
At least the Jordan has lots more upside than your unpopular 1953 parkhurst hockey set you are trying to peddle on the boards.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It's human nature people pay extraordinary amounts for rare and popular items. Look at Picasso paintings selling for 100 million dollars.
That said anything rare(low population in either total quantity such as Baltimore Ruth or low pop in certain grade such as Jordan fleer BGS 10 rookie or Aaron Psa 10 rookie), and with exorbitant demand such as the Jordan and Aaron mentioned will sell for ridiculously high amounts.
Just a matter of supply and demand. >>
Why do you keep mentioning Picasso paintings when referring to prices of sports cards?
Paintings are not "rare" they are unique.
The difference between a piece of fine art and a trading card is the same as a bottle of chateau mouton to a bottle of Hurricane Malt Liquor. >>
So reproductions of Picasso paintings or lithographs or copies of paintings of artists such as kinkaid are unique? >>
I've never seen a reproduction, lithograph or print sell for "100 million dollars"
There are some prints (Dali, Picasso, Warhol, et cetera) which sell in the range of the T206 Wagner, Ruth RC, '52 Mantle, and high grade Jordan RC. And while these sports cards are popular, especially the baseball ones, globally they don't even come close to the popularity of the artists mentioned.
To answer the thread, I think the 1953 Parkhurst Hockey set is extremely undervalued. >>
You said paintings in general are unique. I was referring to some paintings are reproductions, copies or lithographs which would not be considered unique as they are duplicates. Obviously these duplicates would not sell for 100 million dollars as only the original would.
Still lithographs or copies of paintings can be limited in number and signed such as kinkaid and Peter lik which can still sell for tens of thousands of dollars. >>
Then why not say, hey the Jordan I'm trying to peddle on these boards is like an art print instead of classing it with a $100 million dollar Picasso, which it is not. Frankly, the Jordan isn't even in the same league as prints from the above mentioned artists. >>
At least the Jordan has lots more upside than your unpopular 1953 parkhurst hockey set you are trying to peddle on the boards. >>
Don't own a single '53 card, but would love to get in on that set. It's a great entry-level series for the newbie interested in vintage hockey.
I do have lots of '89 Topps Hockey, though. And honestly I think unopened they're a bit undervalued. For $25-$30 you can pick-up a box, have fun ripping the wax and have a shot at pulling a PSA 10 Gretzky ($200-$250), Lemieux ($250) or Sakic ($800-$1,000). Oh, did I mention it's FUN to rip!
Don't mean to imply that Jordan isn't valuable, it definitely is, but you have to take a step back and catch your breath with advertising that card
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It's human nature people pay extraordinary amounts for rare and popular items. Look at Picasso paintings selling for 100 million dollars.
That said anything rare(low population in either total quantity such as Baltimore Ruth or low pop in certain grade such as Jordan fleer BGS 10 rookie or Aaron Psa 10 rookie), and with exorbitant demand such as the Jordan and Aaron mentioned will sell for ridiculously high amounts.
Just a matter of supply and demand. >>
Why do you keep mentioning Picasso paintings when referring to prices of sports cards?
Paintings are not "rare" they are unique.
The difference between a piece of fine art and a trading card is the same as a bottle of chateau mouton to a bottle of Hurricane Malt Liquor. >>
So reproductions of Picasso paintings or lithographs or copies of paintings of artists such as kinkaid are unique? >>
I've never seen a reproduction, lithograph or print sell for "100 million dollars"
There are some prints (Dali, Picasso, Warhol, et cetera) which sell in the range of the T206 Wagner, Ruth RC, '52 Mantle, and high grade Jordan RC. And while these sports cards are popular, especially the baseball ones, globally they don't even come close to the popularity of the artists mentioned.
To answer the thread, I think the 1953 Parkhurst Hockey set is extremely undervalued. >>
You said paintings in general are unique. I was referring to some paintings are reproductions, copies or lithographs which would not be considered unique as they are duplicates. Obviously these duplicates would not sell for 100 million dollars as only the original would.
Still lithographs or copies of paintings can be limited in number and signed such as kinkaid and Peter lik which can still sell for tens of thousands of dollars. >>
Then why not say, hey the Jordan I'm trying to peddle on these boards is like an art print instead of classing it with a $100 million dollar Picasso, which it is not. Frankly, the Jordan isn't even in the same league as prints from the above mentioned artists. >>
At least the Jordan has lots more upside than your unpopular 1953 parkhurst hockey set you are trying to peddle on the boards. >>
Don't own a single '53 card, but would love to get in on that set. It's a great entry-level series for the newbie interested in vintage hockey.
I do have lots of '89 Topps Hockey, though. And honestly I think unopened they're a bit undervalued. For $25-$30 you can pick-up a box, have fun ripping the wax and have a shot at pulling a PSA 10 Gretzky ($200-$250), Lemieux ($250) or Sakic ($800-$1,000). Oh, did I mention it's FUN to rip!
Don't mean to imply that Jordan isn't valuable, it definitely is, but you have to take a step back and catch your breath with advertising that card
Yeah 89 topps would be cool to find a Lemieux or Gretzky(I know those guys
Re: Stan Musial. Undervalued in a sense, yes. The fact that he didn't have a Topps card prior to 1958 probably makes his cards seem cheap by comparison. Those 1959-1963 cards were his later cards, which, for like most HOFers, tend to be cheaper. If he had had a '52 or '53 Topps card, I don't think we'd be talking about how undervalued Musial cards are. His '52 and '53 Bowman cards are certainly a little more expensive, but face it, those Bowman sets, while very nice and in demand, are Topps' little brothers.
I will say this- IMO Musial's rookie cards still have a lot of room to grow. I posted a while back asking about recent sales of his '48 Leaf PSA 8. That card seems to have disappeared. One sold recently at Memory Lane for over $10K and that is, as far as I know, the only public sale of the card in the last 4 or 5 years.
<< <i>I concur on the 2nd year card topic. I'd even single out those 2nd year cards where the player's rookie was a multi-face card; I've found this makes the 2nd year card somewhat special and extra desirable. See the 69 Ryan, 74 Schmidt, 64 Rose, 79 Molitor-- a HOFers first "solo" card, if you will. >>
A nicely centered 1969 Ryan is just a fantastic card. I overpaid for my centered PSA 7 and I never regretted it.
Kiss me twice.....let's party.
<< <i>A nicely centered 1969 Ryan is just a fantastic card. >>
i love this comment. it feels like a hug.
the value of a PSA graded mint example has essentially doubled over a 2 year period. that's pretty good.