To me, this is HUGE news (and sad news) . . . rbdjr1 is breaking up his #1 1976 Topps baseball set

detroitfan2 · October 2, 2007 11:49AM

I was really surprised to see that our friend and long-time board member rbdjr1 is breaking up his #1 all-time 1976 Topps Baseball Set. He had initially offered it as a whole set in his ebay store, and now he is breaking it up (along with a number of his high quality 1978 Topps cards).

Here is a link to his auctions: Bob's auctions.

In any case, this bums me out a little bit (actually a lot). We watched Bob complete this sucker over the last few years and to me it's one of the most amazing sets on the registry. I'm really hoping that cincyfan (#2 and another board member) gobbles up some of the PSA 10's he needs. It would be so awesome to see a complete 1976 PSA 10 set.

Also, I hope Bob is doing this out of choice and not necessity. If I recall, he is in the real estate field, and times are pretty tough in that area right now. Bob, if you read this, good luck with your auctions.

jmbkb4 · October 2, 2007 12:49PM

I remember some of the prices he paid -- it's be really hard to break even on what he's paid for a lot of these.

Bosox1976 · October 2, 2007 8:48PM

Some darn fine cards...

Stingray · October 2, 2007 9:09PM

Wow, he must have some mixed feelings on that. Hope that Brett pulls him in some coin, already going good!!

Morgoth · October 2, 2007 11:43PM

Yeah their definately not refractors

bifff257 · October 3, 2007 12:03AM

<< to me it's one of the most amazing sets on the registry. >>

The 76 set is under appreciated as far as I am concerned.

lawnmowerman · October 3, 2007 12:18AM

<< Yeah their definately not refractors >>

Yeah those modern collectors sure do waste their money.

Stone193 · October 3, 2007 1:21AM

<< 

<< Yeah their definately not refractors >>

Yeah those modern collectors sure do waste their money. >>

Yeah!

I think we should take'm out back and shoot'em!!!

stown · October 3, 2007 1:43AM

Bob is one of the good guys, even though he already sold the one item I wanted.

Clemaz · October 3, 2007 2:03AM

I love that set.

lawnmowerman · October 3, 2007 2:10AM

<< 

<< 

<< Yeah their definately not refractors >>

Yeah those modern collectors sure do waste their money. >>

Yeah!

I think we should take'm out back and shoot'em!!!

>>

Cincyfan01 · October 3, 2007 2:22AM

I hate to see Bob break up his set, but I certainly understand. I broke mine up several months back. (I kept the Reds of course). My wife and I bought 26 acres of land in February and will be building on it in about a year and a half. The set went a long way in helping pay for it. I hated to break up the set, but look forward to seeing my horses out my back window. Oh - it also helps that I will have about 1800 - 2000 square feet of finished basement that is mine to decorate!

Stingray · October 3, 2007 2:39AM

<< I hate to see Bob break up his set, but I certainly understand. I broke mine up several months back. (I kept the Reds of course). My wife and I bought 26 acres of land in February and will be building on it in about a year and a half. The set went a long way in helping pay for it. I hated to break up the set, but look forward to seeing my horses out my back window. Oh - it also helps that I will have about 1800 - 2000 square feet of finished basement that is mine to decorate! >>

Glad to see that you made the right decision, a house is a home, but a baseball card is still just a piece of cardboard.

julen23 · October 3, 2007 2:50AM

no -ish!

i love this set, and his set was an inspiration for me!!!!

may premiums come your way on EVERY transaction my friend!

j

Morgoth · October 3, 2007 3:46AM

I collect modern as well but stating somone has "overpaid" for his stuff when refractor prices have plummeted as well seems odd. I would have just wished the guy luck as his set rocks.

rbdjr1 · October 3, 2007 5:10AM

Other than money problems, life is still good!

Thanks everyone.

Building this set was one of the most rewarding things I've done in years, and yes I'm sad to see this set go bye bye!

Money was no object, when I bidding on many cards in this set. I was aggressive.

Over the past 6 years, I watched 1976 PSA 9s go from an SMR price of $45 for singles, down to $16 (or maybe even lower, as I haven't looked in a while!), yikes!

Well, the hobby is still strong, as I got a ton of messages, PMs and emails, from Set Registry guys, team set collectors, player collector, and more! So I can pass this on that all is "alive and well" with 1976s!

Again, thanks all for your kind words! 9(i.e. detroitfan2, thanks!)

Sincerely,

Bob

rd

P.S. detroitfan2, with 2 days to go, that 1976 #3 Mickey Lolich PSA 10 1/1 only has a high bid of $45

Other: Would you believe there are over 40 "listed watchers" for my George Brett auction! Wow!

Stingray · October 3, 2007 5:16AM

I am sure going to miss you posting up a bunch of 1976 PSA 10s on the boards. Well I will watch for you posts of 1978s!!

rbdjr1 · October 3, 2007 5:18AM

<< I am sure going to miss you posting up a bunch of 1976 PSA 10s on the boards. Well I will watch for you posts of 1978s!!

>>

I'm breaking-up that set too!

rd

Stone193 · October 3, 2007 8:01AM

Bob

I'm really sorry to hear that you're breaking up such a fantastic set.

I wish you all the best - and I'm sure, down the road, you'll be on a new 'journey' with great scans for us to appreciate.

mike

jmbkb4 · October 3, 2007 8:01AM

<< Yeah their definately not refractors >>

Douche. How many grammatical errors can one make in one line!!??!!??

BTW, do you know my finances?

[If ya did, ya probably wouldn't have commented!!]

...carry on....

(Just don't "take me out thar to the back and shoot me --- git 'r done")

zef204 · October 3, 2007 8:23AM

Sorry to hear that you have to break up the set Bob. It surely is an awesome set!

Morgoth · October 4, 2007 6:54AM

What does your net worth have to do with you calling out another collector for overpaying for cards that have gone down in value when you have done the same? I have too it's part of the game but his set is outstanding and just as great as your refractor set.

rbdjr1 · October 4, 2007 7:41AM

Update on my 1976 George Brett PSA 9 on ebay:

Would you believe there have been well over 600 visits and over 40 registered "watchers" for this card.

I cannot remember having that many "visits to an ebay listing".

I turned down $1400.

"Life's a beeech!"

rd

P.S. thanks all! (i.e., zef, stone, stingray, julen, and the rest here, including the "ton of PMs, emails, calls, messages" from you all!) ...For all your kind words.

detroitfan2 · October 4, 2007 11:45AM

Bob,

The Brett auction is fascinating to me, I didn't realize how tough this card was in PSA 9.

Of the 660 cards in your set, is this the most valuable?

-Tom

rbdjr1 · October 4, 2007 1:10PM

<< Bob,

The Brett auction is fascinating to me, I didn't realize how tough this card was in PSA 9.

Of the 660 cards in your set, is this the most valuable?

-Tom >>

I cannot think of another 1976 card that would create as much interest at an auction as the George Brett card would.

rd

P.S. The final price? Should be around $2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.00

jmbkb4 · October 4, 2007 1:17PM

<< What does your net worth have to do with you calling out another collector for overpaying for cards that have gone down in value when you have done the same? I have too it's part of the game but his set is outstanding and just as great as your refractor set. >>

My main problem with you was your logic, among other things.

You stated that "refractor prices have plummeted," which I assume made you feel good, implying that if I were to sell I would lose money.

The problem with that logic is that you have no idea what I paid for these cards raw, which then were awarded mostly PSA 10s and some PSA 9s. That was the problem I had with you.

Regarding Bob, I hope Bob makes a ton, no -- a killing, on his set...a ton of profit. I just remember some of the threads in the past talking about the expensive and low population cards he purchased. No malice intended, obviously -- anyone on here knows that. Anybody that would take delight in another's financial state is a very sad person indeed.

In the end, I was just kind of disappointed at your logic regarding my set. My point was not to brag about my net value, which isn't much(!!!); rather, it was to state that it is idiotic to make assumptions about the profitability of cards when you have absolutely no clue what I've paid for them. Understand?

Morgoth · October 4, 2007 11:00PM

It doesn't matter what you paid in terms of value. If something was worth $1000 and now $300 at some point you lost $700. That was my point with the refractors. It is the same with most 70's vintage sets. I was making an allegorical statment that his 70s set has lost value similiar to the 93 refractor set. I have no problems with you just thought someone was revelling in someone losing money.

Stingray · October 4, 2007 11:24PM

<< I remember some of the prices he paid -- it's be really hard to break even on what he's paid for a lot of these. >>

it's be really

You are going to call someone out on grammatical errors??

jmbkb4 · October 4, 2007 11:34PM

You put two question marks at the end of your post.

jmbkb4 · October 4, 2007 11:37PM

<< It doesn't matter what you paid in terms of value. If something was worth $1000 and now $300 at some point you lost $700. That was my point with the refractors. It is the same with most 70's vintage sets. I was making an allegorical statment that his 70s set has lost value similiar to the 93 refractor set. I have no problems with you just thought someone was revelling in someone losing money. >>

Wow. Logic is a problem here.

Ummmm, actually it does matter what I paid. That was my initial point all along. Let me explain profit to you. You don't make a profit when you sell something, you make a profit when you BUY something. If you are smart enough to buy well, you will always make money in the end. And that is my point.

Regarding my initial post, I am terribly sorry that Bob is having to sell his sets; obviously, he didn't buy these for an investment, as he is unfortunately forced to sell them. My point was that is sucks, nothing else. When you BUY high, it is difficult to make a profit. With the interest that his 1976 set has generated, hopefully he can make a nice profit on them. I just don't know.

Stingray · October 4, 2007 11:40PM

<< You put two question marks at the end of your post.

>>

Trade Marked by Stingray Inc.

jmbkb4 · October 4, 2007 11:42PM

BTW,, I love the lady getting punched.. makes me laugh every time..

ArchStanton · October 5, 2007 1:08AM

As a straggler around 50% complete on my '76 set, I have always admired the cards in Bob's registry. That Brett is a knockout. I believe the only PSA 7 in my registry set is #19 Brett.

rbdjr1 · October 5, 2007 2:02PM

Well, the George Brett PSA 9 and the first 20 or so of my 1976 PSA 10s (out of close to 500 PSA 10s!) "hit the auction block" tonite! Here's a few highlights:

$500.00 #03 - Mickey Lolich RB PSA 10
$120.00 #04 - Dave Lopes RB PSA 10
$195.00 #05 - Tom Seaver RB PSA 10
$535.00 #10 - Lou Brock PSA 10
$1,635.00 #19 - George Brett PSA 9
$115.00 #23 - Brian Downing PSA 10
$125.00 #48 - Dave Concepcion PSA 10
$200.00 #50 - Fred Lynn PSA 10
$175.00 #229 - Jerry Remy PSA 10

Well, its a beginning!

WELL, NO FOOD STAMPS!

One of my personal favorites of this set was my Lou Brock PSA 10. It was the only PSA 10 out of 429 submissions. And IMO, was easily worth $500.

rd

jmbkb4 · October 5, 2007 3:44PM

Nice, Bob! Did these go for more than you thought they would? May you continue to fare well with them!

To me, this is HUGE news (and sad news) . . . rbdjr1 is breaking up his #1 1976 Topps baseball set

Comments