Options
Most overvalued cards in the hobby
halosfan
Posts: 2,651 ✭✭✭✭
Just thought that thread needed the flip side
Looking for a Glen Rice Inkredible and Alex Rodriguez cards
0
Comments
52 topps Mantle
Sorry!
he's an overvalued Angel now.
I am thankful that the guy I collect, Killebrew is (to my thinking) undervalued. His rookie is in the same set as Clemente and Koufax and his cards are much more affordable.
Joe
1986-87 Jordan (Theres just so many of these out there)
Oh, and maybe the 2006 topps Alex Gordon, because it sure seems like a lot of them are turning up now. Maybe not as scarce as first thought, or some good counterfeits? I'm not sure.
<< <i>Lower grade 1952 Topps #1 Andy Pafko's. I can see the high grade ones carrying a hefty premium but I'm not sure why low grade examples sell for a premium. >>
Because of inexperienced collectors and beckett. I know I've made that mistake before I was told that a low condition Pafko is valued the same as a low condition common.
Joe
Citing the sheer population of number graded is specious reasoning at best-- because the demand for/popularity of the cards far outstrips the supply of examples with eye-appeal. Simple population/supply is only part of the overall equation in determining value.
There are also far too many sales in the cards' histories supporting their value at current levels. In contrast, a card with a thin market or little history like say a 21,000 dollar Jeremy Lin would in my estimation be way overvalued. In its heyday, I'd say the 1989F Ripken errors that were selling for tons were WAY overvalued-- and time has borne this out. Another great example of an easily overvalued card would be hot rookies du jour like circa 1990 Kevin Maas, 1988 Gregg Jefferies, or today's equivalents. These are cards where the causes behind their value are very volatile and just not that solid.
Circling back to the 1952T Mantle and 1986F Jordan, these two have been embraced by the overwhelming majority of the hobby. These are iconic images of two of the premiere players in their sports, if not all of American popular culture. Demand has met supply at a level that determines high prices, sure.
While I am a firm believer that the 1951 Bowman Mantle-- his true RC-- sells for shockingly less than one would assume at first, I don't believe the 1952 is overvalued. Look how many ugly examples constitute the majority of examples out there-- beaters that may have charm in the best cases, but most have a marred image of the subject, or just brutal centering that wrecks eye appeal. Same for the 1986 Jordan Fleer-- many examples out there, but clearly there is not one Jordan RC in an eye-appealing, centered state for every collector who wants one.
Sometimes the intense popularity and demand connected to a card trumps their seemingly common population number, and I think this is the case for both the 1952T Mick and 1986F Jordan. I also think that there is-- sometimes-- a natural tendency, a subconscious psychological urge, to try and knock down certain seminal cards. I remember desperately trying to convince myself that the 1986 Jordan Fleer card wasn't "all that." That his second year card was so undervalued, and that was the one to have. I was right I believe in identifying a value in the 2nd year card, but I was just rationalizing when it came to poo-pooing the first one, because I think deep, deep down I wanted it.
The Pafko #1 in low grade I think is a very interesting subject, when it comes to overvalued cards. When it comes to batting around the notion of overvalued, I guess one of the things to ask is, "Exactly what factors are supporting the value of the card?" This bleeds into the subject of low pop commons commanding huge premiums due to The Registry. The first example to hit market sells for a ton, but we almost always see subsequent ones arrive, even if years later, and when there are only two factors determining value (population and number of guys competing on the Registry), odds are that first common to sell is overvalued-- the subsequent ones sell for much, much less. Compare that scenario to key star cards, where the market is deeper and broader and the player pictured is the main pillar supporting the value.
Did I win?
d wade
c paul
d howard
a rodgers
That card is the most graded card in the set I think.
T222's PSA 1 or better
<< <i>1965 Topps Joe Namath rookie. As overrated as the player. >>
How come I knew this was inevitable?
<< <i>
<< <i>1965 Topps Joe Namath rookie. As overrated as the player. >>
How come I knew this was inevitable? >>
When you throw more interceptions than touchdowns in your career and still make the HOF, then most likely you are overrated.
<< <i><< 1965 Topps Joe Namath rookie. As overrated as the player. >>
How come I knew this was inevitable? >>