|NSU Home | NSU Store | In The Current Issue... | Contact Us ||
When 1990 Marvel Universe Series 1 cards blew up last month or the month before, I saw a lot of eBay listings with "rookie card" in the title.
Actually, didn't Impel use the term "Rookie" in some of the Marvel Universe sets?
I think there was a discussion at Blowout about whether or not the 1987/1988 Comic Images Marvel Universe sets should be considered the first appearance on card for many of the big name superheroes. There was no consensus, if I recall correctly.
Sorry to have derailed the "cards to watch" discussion. Back on topic: Has anyone compiled a list of the oldest actors from Star Trek/Star Wars/other franchises? I know it's morbid but maybe some of their auto cards will skyrocket when they pass.
That doesn't always seem to be the case, though. Various cards signed by Dawn Wells from Gilligan's Island didn't pop after she died in December, probably because so few people know she signed any cards.
|Platinum Card Talk Member|
1. I think you are referring to a small subset in 1990 and 1992 Impel Marvel Universe sets. A total of 6 cards out of the 162 in 1990 and 9 cards out of the 200 in 1992 had Rookie on the card. I assume because those characters weren't in the prior sets. There could be other cards in other years or from other makers, but that's all I see, and it's not a rational. Rookie card applied to the first year a sports player appeared on a pro card wearing a major league uniform for whatever pro team. At one time there could be several rookie cards in the same year, if several manufacturers had a license or produced multiple number of sets, but I believe the rule has changed in recent years just because everyone wanted to claim sports rookies and there were too many. Hope that's accurate.
2. There is rarely any consensus on anything with card collecting, which is why anyone can claim anything.
3. For more minor celebrities, the "death bounce" tends not to matter too much and is only temporary. Values return back to normal pretty soon. For very well known people, speculators jump on autographs fast and the demand and price will rise. I think true fans should already have the signatures if they ever wanted them, so it's more than morbid, but it represents the capping of the supply to some people.
|Silver Card Talk Member|
Years ago, I read in "Comic Cards and Their Prices" that many characters did make their trading card first appearance in Comic Images' "Marvel Universe" set from 1987. I don't understand how that set wouldn't count. A character is either on a card or not.
I was talking to someone else about when I learn that a celebrity has died, I now immediately think about whether I have a card with that person on it but it's not wondering if the card might go up in value. It's weirder than that. It's now because, if I have one, I'll make a point of scanning it for Bill's Non-Sport Obituaries thread especially if it's not something regularly seen.
I agree with Raven that most celebrity autograph cards either bump up a bit and then dip back or they don't go up at all after the person dies. In the case of David Bowie, I think he signed for just one set, and because he's one of those celebrities with a loyal longtime following across a unique career, his card did jump in value and might continue to rise. I would still like to get the Dawn Wells' Topps 75th autograph in any case just because I remember watching "Gilligan's Island" with family and friends after it went into syndication in the early 70's.
|Bronze Card Talk Member|
It’s similar to how many baseball card collectors think of 1952 Topps as the beginning of the modern baseball cards and is the home of Mickey Mantle’s Rookie Card. But there were baseball cards made years before 1952 and Mickey Mantle Rookie Card is in 1951 Bowman.
For many, that 1990 Marvel Universe by Impel was/is the start of the “modern” Marvel cards because it’s closer resemblance to sports cards since it has “stats” on the back of the card. Very odd reason to hang your hat on, but I’ve heard that many times since 1990 and more so over the last year. So that loose association with being the “first” modern Marvel card set means that, of course, every character in that set has it’s “rookie” card in there
Maybe it’s just people trying to manipulate the market’s perceptions on what the “Rookie Cards” and “First Appearances” could/should be for Marvel trading cards to give certain cards slightly more relevance for the hobby to fixate on. In comic books, there’s various terms for a character’s first appearances that help bring focus on different issues: First FULL Appearance, First CAMEO Appearances, First COVER Appearance, First Appearances IN FLASHBACK, First Appearance WITH DIALOGUE, and so on. If there is just one card/issue (or even a handful) for the market to zero in on to chase then those will be valued more than just any card with their picture on it.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8|