Does having a card listed in the price guide make it more relevant than if it wasn't included?

With my recent focus on lobbying which cards should be and shouldn't be included in the NSU supplemental price guide, I've had this reoccurring question in the back of my head ... is a card listed in a price guide make a card more relevant than if it wasn't included? And, in turn, does that make your collection of cards more "real" being able to see the "value" of it in print?

Those thoughts became more pervasive after reading this post about the relevance of price guides these days from:
http://nonsportupdate.infopop....453/m/8017089386/p/3

quote:

Originally posted by wolfie:
Am i the only person who does not care what the price guide says or does not say?

The dealer / seller is going to charge whatever they want for the card they are selling.

The buyer / me knows what he is prepared to pay for particular card.

If i want to know roughly how much something is selling for i will look at ebay completed sales which are bang up to the minute.

All this will take place without a written guide full of prices which are out of date by the time the guide is printed.

Intrested to hear what other people think.

Of course, I think there is still a place for the antiquated notion of a printed price guide even in this at-your-finger-tips-eBay-completed-auction-referencing modern collecting time. I'm an old-head so, of course, I want to hang on to the past when the Beckett price guides helped moved the sports card hobby and the internet was just in it beginning stages before there was eBay ... even though I know that digital is a more efficient way to go. But I also feel that there is something that makes it a little more "real" about seeing a card (or set) actually listed in a printed magazine and I feel a little more justified spending money on my collection after seeing it on a page. I can point the prices and say, "See, those cards are worth something" when all I know that it's only worth what someone is willing to pay ... but still ... seeing it in print makes it feel like there's "value" to them to me.

That's probably why I have a reoccurring theme about believing that sketch cards should be listed in a price guide if there is enough market data in a given set ... because I want my sketch card collection to be justified ... to have relevance ... to be legitimate ... to have that stamp of approval of being listed in a price guide. I know about what I paid for them and have a general idea of what they go for now because I follow those sketch cards from the various products and artists, but other collectors may not be as versed. As catskilleagle eloquently described price guides in that same thread mentioned earlier ...

quote:

Originally posted by catskilleagle:
Price guides might be of less use to the longtime collector looking for relatively few items but they are a big help for the newbie, the casual collector, and those getting back into the hobby after being away for a few years.

To illustrate, I'll give an example of a couple of sketch cards (one of Sinestro and another of Zatanna) by Darryl Banks from DC Legacy that ended yesterday. I know that most of his cards from that set generally range between $40-$100 depending on the character (and, yes, some have sold for more and some have sold less). If this was still 2008, I would have skew that range a little higher, but I digress. If I looked at eBay before those auctions ended to get an idea of what Banks sketch cards go for from DC Legacy, I would have found only one completed auction that ended July 31 around $45 for Captain Cold. They ended for around $70 (Sinestro) and $80 (Zatanna). That's just about the middle of the range that I had in mind. On the other hand, a newbie or casual collector that might have interested in those cards might have thought the $45 that the Captain Cold sold for represented the higher range for a Banks sketch card since for some Marvel sketch cards are up on eBay now up for $45-$48 with more being offered between $32-$38 in this oversaturated era of sketch cards. Yeah, I get it that sketch cards are one-of-one works of art and are different animal than regular base cards and inserts but if there is a big enough sample size of sketch cards by an artist from a particular set then patterns and trends can be derived from the previous ended auctions to extrapolate an accurate representation of a price range of previously sold sketch cards.

So when collectors express their disappointment in not seeing a particular card, set or promo in the price guide ... I get it. There's frustration. I want to see what I collect in the price guide ... even if it has the occasional down arrow ... just not too many down arrows in a consecutive issues. I don't know if the majority other collectors like having that validation of collecting something relevant enough for inclusion in the price guide like I do though, but I think there's a big percentage of collectors like that unsaid acknowledgement of seeing their cards in there. Does anyone else like that stamp of validation of seeing the cards that the collect in the printed price guide? Or am I in a small percentage of collectors that feel having their cards listed in the price guide makes them seem more relevant?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Heroes For Hire,

I think we all like to see our cards listed (as I have said before the guide is a useful checklist as well). The danger, for me, is that if the price guide doesn't list all the sets - vintage could have it's own yearly list - then it becomes pointless anyway.

Simple answer is YES. Any card that is individually listed in a price guide is perceived to be more important/relevant because it has been assessed a greater value than the "common" card in the same product. A price guide listing validates its worth, not just to the collector, but to all his/her non-collecting friends.

However the opposite is not true. Just because a card does not get an individual listing does not conversely mean it is not relevant. If you have a fairly large collection it's probably safe to say that a large majority of your cards are not individually listed. They are part of complete sets, or "common" hits, or cards that are 1/1s and don't appear simply because they are too rare to mention. They may be some of your favorite cards, or even hardest to get cards, but they don't have the secondary market activity or collector demand to warrant an individual line.

Like hammer, I like to see cards I own listed in the NSU supplement guide, but it is not the reason why I own them.

Wow, I make so many typos. Sorry everyone. Maybe I shouldn't post stuff before going to sleep.

Nice points. I'll have to agree. I might be in the minority on wanting to buy a price guide for updated pricing also

In my opinion the NSU price guide is sadly out of touch with reality.

quote:

Originally posted by cardaddict:
In my opinion the NSU price guide is sadly out of touch with reality.

Wow! In how many different ways is it out of touch? I think 2011 Marvel Beginnings Villain Holograms are vastly undervalued in the price guide. Wait, maybe that should go in the "Non-Sport Update Wants Your Input" thread
http://nonsportupdate.infopop....453/m/7677025286/p/2

But, seriously, printed price guides are inherently behind the times even before they're printed ... even more so when a particular card gets "hot" due to some "breakout" circumstance. Sometimes I think the best that we can hope for is if the price guide is "in the ballpark" in most cases.

I just pulled out the latest price guide from my last issue of NSU I received yesterday (and I do mean last issue, I simply can't afford to take it anymore, that's how bad it's gotten), looking for the example of the RC8 para-hawk parachute card from THE COMPLETE JAMES BOND, which the price guide had formerly listed between $20 and $30 (for a card worth $700 to $800 dollars!), and found the set isn't even listed anymore. That's just one of many examples of the out of date listings. Many cards are valued much too high and many others much too low, some are completely ignored. I have no idea where the data is compiled from, but a certain percentage of it (not all by any means) does not jibe at all with prices I've paid for some of these cards, or what I've seen others pay or sell them for. Many of these prices have been in the guide for years without being updated.

There are a couple of threads in the General Non-Sport Update Magazine Discussion section where we have been posting comments and suggestions on the revised format for the latest NSU supplement pricing guide that was included with the last issue. There is a lot wrong with it, not just incorrect pricing as you point out, but simply a poor selection of what sets they have kept in and what sets they removed. That is of course solely my own opinion, but I have already expressed it.

I understand that the people in charge want input and hopefully that means what we have now will change for the better. I would suggest that any members who want to get their suggestions for improvements to the NSU price guide at least try to voice them in those threads. I'm sure they are being read by people who have some influence over the process.

quote:

Originally posted by cardaddict:
I just pulled out the latest price guide from my last issue of NSU I received yesterday (and I do mean last issue, I simply can't afford to take it anymore, that's how bad it's gotten), looking for the example of the RC8 para-hawk parachute card from THE COMPLETE JAMES BOND, which the price guide had formerly listed between $20 and $30 (for a card worth $700 to $800 dollars!), and found the set isn't even listed anymore. That's just one of many examples of the out of date listings. Many cards are valued much too high and many others much too low, some are completely ignored. I have no idea where the data is compiled from, but a certain percentage of it (not all by any means) does not jibe at all with prices I've paid for some of these cards, or what I've seen others pay or sell them for. Many of these prices have been in the guide for years without being updated.

Just just looked for the 2007 Complete James Bond Relics in the 2016 Beckett Non-Sport Almanac and just found the listings for those relics. RC8 Parahawk Parachute is listed as VL (Very Limited) with between 200-300 copies. No pricing listed for any of those cards.

Not sure if the folks at Beckett are slowly intergrating their pricing data with the pricing that NSU already had for old sets like this. Maybe if there were large pricing discrepancies like you described or if Beckett hadn't been tracking those sets at the time that they are waiting for more data to come in before publishing (new/updated) prices.

Beating an old horse about my favorite omission - pricing sketch cards, I was following prices for 2008 DC Legacy sketch cards and those prices today are much different from 2008 and 2009. I had paid much higher prices for the majority of artists back then compared to what they sell for in 2016. There are a few artists that sell in about the same range or higher also. But, for the most part, pricing is lower overall. Would Beckett use the 2009 data that I compiled on what I paid or more current data from places like eBay to put in the price guide today? Maybe a combination of both would be nice to get a range of pricing out for the public to consume (especially newer collectors) to make better informed decisions on selling, buying, and/or trading.

I get the frustration of not seeing prices listed and wrong pricing (too low) is a pain to look at also. Maybe send them some pricing that you observed or tracked to help them get up to speed.
In the meantime, perhaps taking a break from buying (voting with your wallet) the price guide is good route to go until the pricing in the guide catches up to your needs. Instead just post here about the things that could help improve the price guide. Hopefully by the next Non-Sport Almanac there will be some pricing for those James Bond cards. And then that money that you saved from buying the magazine could be used towards the 3rd Edition Beckett Non-Sport Almanac.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Heroes For Hire:
Just just looked for the 2007 Complete James Bond Relics in the 2016 Beckett Non-Sport Almanac and just found the listings for those relics. RC8 Parahawk Parachute is listed as VL (Very Limited) with between 200-300 copies. No pricing listed for any of those cards. /QUOTE]

That's another issue with both the annual and bi-monthly guides. Cards are listed, but price columns are left blank. I can understand that if product was just released and there is not enough data available to make an average determination. I can understand that if the card is so rare, it just isn't traded enough. However a relic card with at least 200 copies, issued in 2007, should be priced. It has a history. As long as it is making it into the guide because it has enough value, someone should be able to say how much value.

This is the research part of it and it's not easy, but blank columns tell you nothing, and nine year old premium hits have been trading for something. Guide prices will never be completely accurate or up to date at publishing and will certainly become stale later on, but collectors have to feel that an effort has been made to report a ballpark value for that particular point in time.

I'm surprised that so many card collectors seem to say they don't care about guides at all. They are a reference and dealers continue to try and use them. What card collectors should do is demand better price guides and see what happens.

To be perfectly honest, I always bought NSU around once or twice a year. Not that I wasn't willing to buy it regularly, I just felt I had little reason to. I am mainly interested in the price guide and so many of the prices weren't accurate and were never updated. And some valuable autographs/relics weren't even listed at all. So I would skip a few issues and then buy again mainly to see the new sets put in there since the last issue I bought. If the price guide was up to date and reflected the current market (with some "+" and "-" signs sprinkled in each issue, and included most of the sets I was interested in, then I would buy each and every one and be excited to do so.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
That's another issue with both the annual and bi-monthly guides. Cards are listed, but price columns are left blank. I can understand that if product was just released and there is not enough data available to make an average determination. I can understand that if the card is so rare, it just isn't traded enough. However a relic card with at least 200 copies, issued in 2007, should be priced. It has a history. As long as it is making it into the guide because it has enough value, someone should be able to say how much value.

I concur, 200 copies is more than enough to come up with a ballpark range for a relic. To account for unique looking examples they could put in a notation that states some could command a premium. I'm going to speculate that Beckett wasn't following the James Bond card market prior to 2010 so has limited data on that 2007 set.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
This is the research part of it and it's not easy, but blank columns tell you nothing, and nine year old premium hits have been trading for something. Guide prices will never be completely accurate or up to date at publishing and will certainly become stale later on, but collectors have to feel that an effort has been made to report a ballpark value for that particular point in time.

I appreciate seeing effort.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
I'm surprised that so many card collectors seem to say they don't care about guides at all. They are a reference and dealers continue to try and use them. What card collectors should do is demand better price guides and see what happens.

Maybe it's a combination of being able to look up stuff on eBay, apathy from prolonged inaccurate pricing, and seasoned collectors not needing to look up in a particular because of their expertise.

quote:

Originally posted by Logan:
To be perfectly honest, I always bought NSU around once or twice a year. Not that I wasn't willing to buy it regularly, I just felt I had little reason to. I am mainly interested in the price guide and so many of the prices weren't accurate and were never updated. And some valuable autographs/relics weren't even listed at all. So I would skip a few issues and then buy again mainly to see the new sets put in there since the last issue I bought. If the price guide was up to date and reflected the current market (with some "+" and "-" signs sprinkled in each issue, and included most of the sets I was interested in, then I would buy each and every one and be excited to do so.

I know what you mean. If the price guide isn't updated then that's one less reason to buy the magazine. I started to buy the Beckett Sport Card Monthly more often because they started to include recent Non-Sport cards and Wrestling cards a few years ago. Of course, because of the set up of that magazine there aren't pricing from older sets listed, basically just from a couple of years back (although wrestling cards go further back). Hopefully the new set up for the NSU price guide will incorporate more of the reader's suggestions and will be regularly updated to get collectors excited to purchase the next issues.

I think it is fair to point out that price guides are not the only warped perspective providers of reality as it relates to cards. The Internet and on-line trades or auctions have lulled our perception as it relates to production and availability.

As an example, nearly a year ago I decided to collect the diamond parallel set of Topps 75th anniversary. As of today I have managed to catalog 85 out of 100. Each card in this set is numbered 1 to 75. In most cases the cards were purchased for less than 10 dollars.

The other day I was thinking about my pre-internet and childhood collecting days. What would have been a realistic time table to complete this set back then? A decade? The rest of my life? Never? The whole thing would need to have been done through ads, fanzines, dealer contacts and conventions. Finding a major Topps release card numbered to 75 would have been like opening that Golden Chocolate Bar.

What would this perception do the price? No click here, click there and buy it now. In either case, the same amount of cards were produced. Still, one scenario pushes a higher value than the other.

I often catch myself counting sold and for sale single items on ebay. When I consider how many fans there are on a certain subject, the numbers are not very big. Yet, there is a mentality that if we consistently see 5 or 6 of what we are looking for being sold, we falsely assume there are plenty. When it doesn't sell at one price......it drops until it does.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
The other day I was thinking about my pre-internet and childhood collecting days. What would have been a realistic time table to complete this set back then? A decade? The rest of my life? Never? The whole thing would need to have been done through ads, fanzines, dealer contacts and conventions. Finding a major Topps release card numbered to 75 would have been like opening that Golden Chocolate Bar.

What would this perception do the price? No click here, click there and buy it now. In either case, the same amount of cards were produced. Still, one scenario pushes a higher value than the other.

In a nut shell you have described how the internet and specifically eBay destroyed nearly all collectible markets. From cards, to comics, to Hallmark ornaments, to Beany Babies, to plates, to Hummels, to Lenox figurines, to you name it. Everything that was so limited you couldn't find it anywhere was suddenly available from places that you would have never reached before. And now all those limited editions of 5,000 and 10,000 that seemed so rare were no challenge at all, so prices dropped. And then people that already had them, seeing the value dropping, decided to sell, further increasing supply when there was declining demand. There goes the foundation, but for those who liked the item, didn't own it, and was not concerned with long term value, the internet revolution was a very good thing.

Which is why I always say, what the internet giveth, the internet taketh away. I think it was a more rewarding time when we had to work harder for our collections and had more collectors. It wasn't so much a warped perspective as it was a reality of the time that changed with greater connectivity. It opened up availability to everyone, but unfortunately in collector markets where limited was the drawing point, that becomes a really bad thing.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
I think it is fair to point out that price guides are not the only warped perspective providers of reality as it relates to cards. The Internet and on-line trades or auctions have lulled our perception as it relates to production and availability.

As an example, nearly a year ago I decided to collect the diamond parallel set of Topps 75th anniversary. As of today I have managed to catalog 85 out of 100. Each card in this set is numbered 1 to 75. In most cases the cards were purchased for less than 10 dollars.

The other day I was thinking about my pre-internet and childhood collecting days. What would have been a realistic time table to complete this set back then? A decade? The rest of my life? Never? The whole thing would need to have been done through ads, fanzines, dealer contacts and conventions. Finding a major Topps release card numbered to 75 would have been like opening that Golden Chocolate Bar.

Yeah, back in those pre-internet days, parallels limited to less than 100 were like finding a golden ticket! Nowadays, getting $10 is doing pretty good. Granted popular characters can command more most of the time.

Regular insets (non-parallels) numbered to 100 or less still can get a little pricey and can sell close to $100 for certain characters from time-to-time some non-sport releases. But it a different world compared to inserts from baseball cards in the early 1990's though. I remember back in 1991 and 1992 that there were insert cards for baseball limited to 5,000 and 10,000 that were super hard to find ... and expensive! Those insert sets would have taken years to finish off. Of course, back then they were hidden literally within millions of packs so there's that little wrinkle on perspective, too. But still today, some of the stars from those sets can sell for $30 or more.

Here's another similar perspective on supply from those days, there's a Cal Ripken, Jr. autographed card from 1992 Donruss that's limited to 5,000 and auto card still goes for around $150-$300 today because it's so hard to unpack from those millions of packs, but you can probably pick up a 2015 or 2016 auto by him limited to 50 or less for $100 or less.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:


In a nut shell you have described how the internet and specifically eBay destroyed nearly all collectible markets. From cards, to comics, to Hallmark ornaments, to Beany Babies, to plates, to Hummels, to Lenox figurines, to you name it. Everything that was so limited you couldn't find it anywhere was suddenly available from places that you would have never reached before. And now all those limited editions of 5,000 and 10,000 that seemed so rare were no challenge at all, so prices dropped. And then people that already had them, seeing the value dropping, decided to sell, further increasing supply when there was declining demand. There goes the foundation, but for those who liked the item, didn't own it, and was not concerned with long term value, the internet revolution was a very good thing.

You know what trips me out on perspective and perception is comic books these days. A good selling comic for DC or Marvel sells over 100,000 copies and one that's has talk of cancellation is under 20,000 (of course, those numbers are way lower than the days of when Jim Lee's X-Men #1 sold over 1 million copies). Then some new character will make a first appearance and the book will sell between $10-$20 up from the $3 cover price.

Also, I'll read comic book collectors of looking for a various short printed variant issues at comic book shops that could have a print run between 1000 to 2000 copies for $50-$75 ... and advise others if they see it for that price to buy it because there so hard to find and they'll go up. So comics with print runs of thousands will sell for more than trading cards of the same character(s) with print runs of less than 100. Maybe there's much more comic book collectors than card collectors. The perception of scarcity is so different, but I guess it depends on your perspective.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
I'm surprised that so many card collectors seem to say they don't care about guides at all. They are a reference and dealers continue to try and use them. What card collectors should do is demand better price guides and see what happens.

Another thing that concerns me about cards not being represented in the price guide is that they'll have a greater propensity of slipping into obscurity. When you don't see them listed (or even talked about) those cards fall quicker into that limbo state. After time, it's harder to remember if certain cards were short printed, a key release, or if the odds of pulling it were astronomical. Then new collectors come in and they have no reference point on the cards that produced before they entered the hobby. The story of the hobby should be passed on to the following generations of collectors. Price guides can help with that. Publications with insightful articles help. Message boards like this definitely help get the hobby alive. When cards aren't listed it's one step closer to "out of sight, out of mind" then the reason why certain cards were popular begins to fade away ...

With no reference points about what made certain older cards popular, the less likely newer collectors will be willing to purchase expensive older cards over newer releases. They'll question thing like ... Why are commons from 1996 Marvel Masterpieces so expensive? Why does it seem like Sketchagraphs from 1997 are more expensive than those from 1998 when it's by the same artist? What make a Hulk sketch card from 2003 Incredible Hulk more than one from 2001 Marvel Legends when the card looks the same? What makes 2016 Marvel Masterpieces so special?

Just like that 2007 Complete James Bond Relic card of the Parahawk Parachute example earlier in the thread, I had no idea that it used to used to sell for so much back then. If I would have see it at the card shop over the weekend and was told it had a print run of 200-300 then I would have tried looked up some relic with a similar print run from 2016 James Bond Classics and would guessed that it probably goes for around $30-$40. Then I probably would have looked it up on eBay to see if the RC8 card was listed and what other parachute relics were selling for. Nothing listed for the RC8 card so I would have definitely passed on it for anything over $20 because I hadn't no reference to help guide me.

The collectors of today should take steps to improving this hobby. Posting here is a start. Doing as Raven suggested by demanding a better price guide. Because if we don't make improvements, after a while without reference, the cards start to lose their story and their meaning to the hobby will lessen to the point that the novice collectors reduced all those cards that we hold dear to ... mere commons status.

On the bright side, without a better price guide that could mean more deals for those that are in the know in the future.

quote:

Originally posted by Heroes For Hire:

You know what trips me out on perspective and perception is comic books these days. A good selling comic for DC or Marvel sells over 100,000 copies and one that's has talk of cancellation is under 20,000 (of course, those numbers are way lower than the days of when Jim Lee's X-Men #1 sold over 1 million copies). Then some new character will make a first appearance and the book will sell between $10-$20 up from the $3 cover price.

Also can't forget the other element which is card and comic collecting today is based on product preservation. In 25 or 30 years if 80 to 90% of a production run is still in mint condition, it is going to take a long time (collectors children and grandchildren) for a value to rise with any significance.

Manufacturers try to help this with an imposed rarity but you still lose that thought among collectors who remember when they used to have something and now they don't. The collective experience is not the same if a product is released that most collectors have no chance of ever owning in the first place.

Nostalgia equals value.

I think the drop in values across the collectibles markets was caused mostly by the recent recession. The early 2000's was a great time to sell. Values were peaking, but right at the end of 2007 and into 2008, money seemed to get tight for a lot of people. Companies cut back on product releases and laid-off employees. A healthy economy needs the average person to go out to eat more often and buy a lot of unnecessary stuff. The economy is better now but collectibles have not recovered. The average collector is still not buying as much as in the 90's-early 2000's and has probably even sold (or tried to sell) a few items. That's the increase in supply which lowers perceived value or at least makes it unclear. It used to drive some collectors to stock up on extras of some things for trading but it doesn't appear anyone is stocking up on extras these days.

I was just talking to a friend who used to collect fossils, coins, specialty books, and other antiques. He collects mostly just fossils now after deciding to cash out on everything else even if it wasn't the best time to sell. You can go nuts waiting for a good peak to sell at.

The internet did make finding some items easier but there are still plenty that remain rarely-seen/not seen in years. And yes, the lowered values have made the past few years a great time to swoop in and pick up things at 20-50% of previously-posted value.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
The other day I was thinking about my pre-internet and childhood collecting days. What would have been a realistic time table to complete this set back then? A decade? The rest of my life? Never? The whole thing would need to have been done through ads, fanzines, dealer contacts and conventions. Finding a major Topps release card numbered to 75 would have been like opening that Golden Chocolate Bar.

What would this perception do the price? No click here, click there and buy it now. In either case, the same amount of cards were produced. Still, one scenario pushes a higher value than the other.

In a nut shell you have described how the internet and specifically eBay destroyed nearly all collectible markets. From cards, to comics, to Hallmark ornaments, to Beany Babies, to plates, to Hummels, to Lenox figurines, to you name it. Everything that was so limited you couldn't find it anywhere was suddenly available from places that you would have never reached before. And now all those limited editions of 5,000 and 10,000 that seemed so rare were no challenge at all, so prices dropped. And then people that already had them, seeing the value dropping, decided to sell, further increasing supply when there was declining demand. There goes the foundation, but for those who liked the item, didn't own it, and was not concerned with long term value, the internet revolution was a very good thing.

Which is why I always say, what the internet giveth, the internet taketh away. I think it was a more rewarding time when we had to work harder for our collections and had more collectors. It wasn't so much a warped perspective as it was a reality of the time that changed with greater connectivity. It opened up availability to everyone, but unfortunately in collector markets where limited was the drawing point, that becomes a really bad thing.