Low pop. commons '55-'59 Topps BB?

WinPitcher · December 13, 2009 5:49AM

Low pop in PSA 7 for the 59 set IMO are:

11#
12
77#
120
141#
182
198#
238#
250#
316# Both Varieties appear tough (no option) being tuffer
321# No Option
322# No trade statement
336# No Trade statement
362# No Option
474
504

Numbers with # after them appear to be pretty difficult to obtain in 7 for a variety of reasons.
One could be it is also low pop in 8, another reason could be it has a pop under 40 in 7 and a pop under 50 in 8
or if it is a variety it is just low pop.

My good deed for the day.

Steve

otwcards · December 13, 2009 6:11AM

<< <i>My good deed for the day. >>

I did a good deed once . . .

Mickey71 · December 13, 2009 6:40AM

Otwcards,
I'm sure that I've never complained about postage---so get your facts straight. You have mentioned twice about me complaining about postage. Instead of looking for low pops- find where I started a thread complaining about postage. I may have added my opinion to someone elses post in regards to their situation; but I've never started a thread about a postage problem. Postage , I take into consideration when I bid on a card. Just to add: If you show a thread that I started complaining about postage I will apologize. If not you can step up to the plate.

Brick · December 13, 2009 7:04AM

To add to Nam812s list of 55s, #3 Art Fowler, # 58 Jim Rivera, and # 192 Jim Delsing are also tough in 7. Many of the 55s that sell for well over SMR in 7 are quite affordable in 6.

swartz1 · December 13, 2009 10:11AM

<< <i>

<< <i>.......Where did you find those answers?..... >>

I got the answers from the Swartz1 link above, though that is not the same page I got the question from. Obviously the page I got the questions from must have gotten them originally from the page Swartz1 linked. >>

Obviously...

It is also obvious from your first post that you were trying to be helpful...

nam812 · December 13, 2009 10:19AM

Go get some sleep Swartz, you have a classroom full of kids to make dumber tomorrow.

swartz1 · December 13, 2009 10:25AM

good one...

I just thought you were trying to get a head start on being poster of the year 2010...

grow some thicker skin...

nam812 · December 13, 2009 10:28AM

At least you didn't dispute the fact that they'll learn nothing.

swartz1 · December 13, 2009 11:06AM

I am taking the day off...

mrpeanut39 · December 13, 2009 11:32AM

Is there a set number of what would be considered low pop in a set? For instance, if a set had 500 cards, would you consider the top 10 cards low pop? The top 10%? Up to the individual?

Brick · December 13, 2009 12:53PM

To me a low pop is one that commands a premium due to scarcity regardless of how many are in a particular set.

WinPitcher · December 13, 2009 1:51PM

Each set is different, many times it is simply perceived scarcity.

All one can do is look at the pop reports if building a certain set and

draw ones own conclusions.

Steve

otwcards · December 14, 2009 9:18AM

<< <i>Otwcards,
I'm sure that I've never complained about postage---so get your facts straight. You have mentioned twice about me complaining about postage. Instead of looking for low pops- find where I started a thread complaining about postage. I may have added my opinion to someone elses post in regards to their situation; but I've never started a thread about a postage problem. Postage , I take into consideration when I bid on a card. Just to add: If you show a thread that I started complaining about postage I will apologize. If not you can step up to the plate. >>

Mickey71:

I concur. You were not the person that I recalled complaining about shipping and I apologize for suggesting that you were. I was in error. To this end, I have also posted a public apology to the board in it's own thread.

Low pop. commons '55-'59 Topps BB?

Comments