I wonder how many cards are so condition sensitive that there's no 10s and few 9s?
Ya know? Back in 1992, I bought a 79T vending case. I thought when I retire, I would put together a minty set.
Then I found out how a vending case may run such that the bulk of the cards might be OC.
Needless to say - it sits with other unopened - what will I do? Haven't a clue?
@Stone193 said:
Wow. That was massive and impressive.
I wonder how many cards are so condition sensitive that there's no 10s and few 9s?
Ya know? Back in 1992, I bought a 79T vending case. I thought when I retire, I would put together a minty set.
Then I found out how a vending case may run such that the bulk of the cards might be OC.
Needless to say - it sits with other unopened - what will I do? Haven't a clue?
Thanx, this was a fun read. 👍
I believe there are currently around 30 cards in the 1975 set that has a top grade of PSA 9, no PSA 10s... yet...
10 years ago, when I was finishing up my registry set, I'm pretty sure there were at least twice that.
@countdouglas I love this thread so far. Thank you for sharing.
I have a question: In your experience of buying all of your 1975s, did you find it harder to acquire cards #1-132? I seem to recall hearing about a "scarcity" with the first 132 cards compared to the rest of the set, even though we all know that these were issued all 660 cards at once.
I have a question: In your experience of buying all of your 1975s, did you find it harder to acquire cards #1-132? I seem to recall hearing about a "scarcity" with the first 132 cards compared to the rest of the set, even though we all know that these were issued all 660 cards at once.
No there wasn't any apparent scarcity or discrepancy in quantity for those numbers compared to the rest.
I believe UFFDAH broke a vending box in his thread that ONLY contained #1-264, so there could be something where those numbers are indeed less than the rest, depending on collation and distribution of the remaining numbers, I don't know.
I have an uncut sheet with the Aaron Highlights #1 and the Brett #228 and Yount #223 on the same sheet, so if someone is saying that #1 is short printed, then #228 would have to be, as well, and I just don't believe that to be the case.
I just want to comment that I'm not sure that my photography skills are doing my cards any favors. I'm trying to avoid shadows, so I'm taking pics from a distance and a bit to the side, and then cropping and rotating a bit to center it.
The raw cards have a bit of a bow to them when face up, and I think sometimes the result is that they look diamond cut or the upper left side looks a bit crooked. Then when I flip them over, the bow doesn't affect it as much, and you can see much better that they are indeed a rectangle.
I'm really saying that more for your benefit than mine. I can assure you that these cards have been scrutinized to the extreme before they were ever promoted to my #1 raw set. Are they all perfect? No, I admit that. But they are pretty dang nice, and I'm not sure that the pics are doing them justice.
Comments
#32 Reggie Cleveland
.
Wow. That was massive and impressive.
I wonder how many cards are so condition sensitive that there's no 10s and few 9s?
Ya know? Back in 1992, I bought a 79T vending case. I thought when I retire, I would put together a minty set.
Then I found out how a vending case may run such that the bulk of the cards might be OC.
Needless to say - it sits with other unopened - what will I do? Haven't a clue?
Thanx, this was a fun read. 👍
I believe there are currently around 30 cards in the 1975 set that has a top grade of PSA 9, no PSA 10s... yet...
10 years ago, when I was finishing up my registry set, I'm pretty sure there were at least twice that.
#33 Johnnie B. Baker
.
#34 Steve Renko
.
#35 Ron Santo
.
#36 Joe Lovitto
.
@countdouglas I love this thread so far. Thank you for sharing.
I have a question: In your experience of buying all of your 1975s, did you find it harder to acquire cards #1-132? I seem to recall hearing about a "scarcity" with the first 132 cards compared to the rest of the set, even though we all know that these were issued all 660 cards at once.
buying O-Pee-Chee (OPC) baseball
No there wasn't any apparent scarcity or discrepancy in quantity for those numbers compared to the rest.
I believe UFFDAH broke a vending box in his thread that ONLY contained #1-264, so there could be something where those numbers are indeed less than the rest, depending on collation and distribution of the remaining numbers, I don't know.
I have an uncut sheet with the Aaron Highlights #1 and the Brett #228 and Yount #223 on the same sheet, so if someone is saying that #1 is short printed, then #228 would have to be, as well, and I just don't believe that to be the case.
#37 Dave Freisleben
.
#38 Buddy Bell
.
I just want to comment that I'm not sure that my photography skills are doing my cards any favors. I'm trying to avoid shadows, so I'm taking pics from a distance and a bit to the side, and then cropping and rotating a bit to center it.
The raw cards have a bit of a bow to them when face up, and I think sometimes the result is that they look diamond cut or the upper left side looks a bit crooked. Then when I flip them over, the bow doesn't affect it as much, and you can see much better that they are indeed a rectangle.
I'm really saying that more for your benefit than mine. I can assure you that these cards have been scrutinized to the extreme before they were ever promoted to my #1 raw set. Are they all perfect? No, I admit that. But they are pretty dang nice, and I'm not sure that the pics are doing them justice.
#Andy Thornton
.
#40 Bill Singer
.
#41 Cesar Geronimo
.
#42 Joe Coleman
.
Joe Coleman could stand to be upgraded. I hadn't looked at this set in awhile.