POLL: Is a 1/1 really a 1/1 of there are 30 1/1s?
 

There are sets that have five 1/1s for the same player, some with jerseys, some with autographs, some have neither, some just include a picture of the player wearing sunglasses. Are they really 1/1s if there are 30 of them?

If they’re all different (even slightly) then yes, there are 30 1/1’s in the set. It is lame of Fanatics to do? Also yes.

[QUOTE=MiamiMarlinsFan;19906531]If they’re all different (even slightly) then yes, there are 30 1/1’s in the set. It is lame of Fanatics to do? Also yes.[/QUOTE]

I must agree with my esteemed Marlins colleague.

Any ABCD/YYYY serial numbered card is a 1/1.

Don't @ me.

[QUOTE=FTLFTL;19906517]There are sets that have five 1/1s for the same player, some with jerseys, some with autographs, some have neither, some just include a picture of the player wearing sunglasses. Are they really 1/1s if there are 30 of them?[/QUOTE]You are mostly correct. I'll give the benefit of the doubt to Dynasty which does a 1/1 logo man, then a 1/1 Nike swoosh, 1/1 team logo patch, and 1/1 laundry tag (awful).

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[QUOTE=Bosoxfan5990;19906535]Any ABCD/YYYY serial numbered card is a 1/1.

Don't @ me.[/QUOTE]

This is correct.

Don’t fall for artificial scarcity.

Not all serial numbers are created equally.

No, and this means you Leaf

No. There's a true 1/1; that depends on which product it is. Printing plates are false 1/1s. In the case of something like Leaf, I consider the gold vinyl pattern the true 1/1. It's a real "which one is the true chalice of Christ" scenario.

All right, who's gonna tell this guy about the Archives signature 1 of 1s?

[QUOTE=ATLOTP;19906589]No. There's a true 1/1; that depends on which product it is. Printing plates are false 1/1s. In the case of something like Leaf, I consider the gold vinyl pattern the true 1/1. It's a real "which one is the true chalice of Christ" scenario.[/QUOTE]

How is a cyan printing plate a false 1/1?

[QUOTE=MiamiMarlinsFan;19906611]How is a cyan printing plate a false 1/1?[/QUOTE]

I don't make the rules, the market does. I'm simply an adherent.

[QUOTE=Gene;19906593]All right, who's gonna tell this guy about the Archives signature 1 of 1s?[/QUOTE]

False 1/1s. Are they nice? Yes. Are they really 1/1s? No. The same card can be a 1/1 in two years of Archives.

For me, if the card shows "1/1" or states "1 of 1"/"One of One" (I might be missing some other version), it's a 1/1 [B]with the exception[/B] of those white/black box and national stamped 1/1s (to me, those are fake 1/1s).

Basically, if a card is on a set checklist as a 1/1, it's a 1/1.

[QUOTE=Gene;19906593]All right, who's gonna tell this guy about the Archives signature 1 of 1s?[/QUOTE]Hahaha

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

Leaf?

[QUOTE=Giroux;19906620]Leaf?[/QUOTE][url]https://www.beckett.com/news/2023-leaf-exotic-football-cards/[/url]

[Quote]
Versions:

Alligator Crystal – 1/1
Alligator Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Alligator Mojo – 1/1
Alligator Prismatic – 1/1
Butterfly Crystal – 1/1
Butterfly Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Butterfly Mojo – 1/1
Butterfly Prismatic – 1/1
Chameleon Crystal – 1/1
Chameleon Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Chameleon Mojo – 1/1
Chameleon Prismatic – 1/1
Clown Fish Crystal – 1/1
Clown Fish Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Clown Fish Mojo – 1/1
Clown Fish Prismatic – 1/1
Deer Crystal – 1/1
Deer Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Deer Mojo – 1/1
Deer Prismatic – 1/1
Dragon Crystal – 1/1
Dragon Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Dragon Mojo – 1/1
Dragon Prismatic – 1/1
Elephant Crystal – 1/1
Elephant Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Elephant Mojo – 1/1
Elephant Prismatic – 1/1
Giraffe Crystal – 1/1
Giraffe Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Giraffe Mojo – 1/1
Giraffe Prismatic – 1/1
Leopard Crystal – 1/1
Leopard Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Leopard Mojo – 1/1
Leopard Prismatic – 1/1
Parrot Crystal – 1/1
Parrot Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Parrot Mojo – 1/1
Parrot Prismatic – 1/1
Peacock Crystal – 1/1
Peacock Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Peacock Mojo – 1/1
Peacock Prismatic – 1/1
Snake Crystal – 1/1
Snake Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Snake Mojo – 1/1
Snake Prismatic – 1/1
Tiger Crystal – 1/1
Tiger Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Tiger Mojo – 1/1
Tiger Prismatic – 1/1
Zebra Crystal – 1/1
Zebra Kaleidoscope – 1/1
Zebra Mojo – 1/1
Zebra Prismatic – 1/1
[/Quote]

Every card ever printed is a 1/1. When you own a card, and have it in your possession, no one else can own that exact copy. Every card is unique.

[QUOTE=Giroux;19906626][url]https://www.beckett.com/news/2023-leaf-exotic-football-cards/[/url][/QUOTE]

Excuse me I just threw up in my mouth a little bit

Manufactured scarcity just doesn't interest me.

[QUOTE=corndog;19907864]Manufactured scarcity just doesn't interest me.[/QUOTE]

Always wondered what the definition of manufactured scarcity is/was.

[QUOTE=ScooterD;19907866]Always wondered what the definition of manufactured scarcity is/was.[/QUOTE]

Basically numbered parallels/refractors.

In some cases I like it. Like TC blue #/150’s, and especially gold #/50’s, but Topps and Panini have taken it to outrageous lengths over the last 5-ish years.

[QUOTE=ScooterD;19907866]Always wondered what the definition of manufactured scarcity is/was.[/QUOTE]


I like to contrast manufactured scarcity with scarcity from organic means. A 1962 Amazing Fantasy #15 in NM condition is scarce. But it wasn’t intended to be scarce when it was made…there would have been many thousands made, sitting on racks. Problem is people read them, beat them up over the years, and threw them out.

A /5 baseball card is intended to be scarce from the get-go. It is manufactured scarcity. It doesn’t even have to be numbered. Anything that is just made rare from the get go, intended to be scarce (including rare inserts or photo variations etc).

This is not to say manufactured scarcity cannot have organic demand though- it certainly can. A 90s Flair or Ultra Masterpieces 1/1, especially for a key player, has a LOT of organic demand at this point. And that was manufactured scarcity. As were any 90s #’d insert or parallel like PMGs. The question more is whether this absolute ocean of ultra modern manufactured scarcity will retain much value as the years go on…I’m skeptical it will in the longer term.

[QUOTE=FTLFTL;19906517]There are sets that have five 1/1s for the same player, some with jerseys, some with autographs, some have neither, some just include a picture of the player wearing sunglasses. Are they really 1/1s if there are 30 of them?[/QUOTE]

A question plaguing the hobby since Donruss Diamond Kings and their 40 layers of parallels.

Yes, they are 1/1s. No, they do not have the same value. Yes, when a product has a bunch of 1/1s it devalues all of the 1/1s from that product.

Yes, I wish there was only one 1/1 parallel per product.

The false scarcity in this hobby is a joke

But it seems to fool a lot of people

Not surprisingly

Just like not all numbered parallels and inserts from the 90s are equally valuable and sought after, such will be the case with today's low numbered parallels and inserts. Something will be valuable and sought after, though.

Most likely not a card--even a 1/1-- from a low tier, unlicensed product that parodies itself with the amount of different "rare" parallels, though.

I think someone else said it…but in this glut of stuff….I would look to the most mainstream set….(Flagship, or like Chrome)….and the most mainstream 1/1 in that set (platinum, superfractor). Longevity is also relevant and I think those are pretty long lasting although I don’t collect much baseball. I mean if you’re gonna weed out the fluff, stick with mainstream and longevity. Or any late 90s 1/1s because they’re in their own category.

[QUOTE=DynaEtch;19907907]I like to contrast manufactured scarcity with scarcity from organic means. A 1962 Amazing Fantasy #15 in NM condition is scarce. But it wasn’t intended to be scarce when it was made…there would have been many thousands made, sitting on racks. Problem is people read them, beat them up over the years, and threw them out.

A /5 baseball card is intended to be scarce from the get-go. It is manufactured scarcity. It doesn’t even have to be numbered. Anything that is just made rare from the get go, intended to be scarce (including rare inserts or photo variations etc).

This is not to say manufactured scarcity cannot have organic demand though- it certainly can. A 90s Flair or Ultra Masterpieces 1/1, especially for a key player, has a LOT of organic demand at this point. And that was manufactured scarcity. As were any 90s #’d insert or parallel like PMGs. The question more is whether this absolute ocean of ultra modern manufactured scarcity will retain much value as the years go on…I’m skeptical it will in the longer term.[/QUOTE]

I appreciate the explanation - most of it makes sense.

I’m thinking about an article that Keith Olbermann wrote about proof cards that he has from 1977 Topps. They were created in the natural course of business - not intended to be scarce at all - but circumstances (player traded, player retired, player died) meant that the proofs were pulled and replaced with other players.

His cards (I think there are 3-4 of them) are the only ones known. Not meant to be scarce… but there are only one of each known.

They were manufactured normally though. So are those manufactured scarcity?

POLL: Is a 1/1 really a 1/1 of there are 30 1/1s?
 

[QUOTE=ScooterD;19907968]
They were manufactured normally though. So are those manufactured scarcity?[/QUOTE]

When you get into unreleased stuff like proof cards, or another example, certain uncut sheets (that weren’t publically distributed but happened to be backdoored from the manufacturer or something)…the lines of manufactured scarcity can be somewhat blurred I think. So I get your point about it’s somewhat ambiguous what it means. It depends how you’re defining it.

With manufactured scarcity, many things you can obviously say it is or is not manufacture scarcity. A 1952 Topps Mantle in high grade is not. A Topps Chrome Red Refractor /5 is. With an unreleased thing like those proof cards…they [i]did[/i] manufacture them with scarcity…so arguably they’d be classified as manufactured scarcity. It wasn’t a thing that was released in large quantity that happened to become scarce due to wear and tear, loss, and high demand- like the mantle or AF #15. But it’s surely a different case than a company purposely putting out a /5 parallel…it seems a little more organic (that’s a whole other question one could ask…what does “organic” mean with collectibles ;) )

Here’s another area of blurred lines: error cards. Like picture if Topps today came out with an “NNOF” error variant card (maybe they do). Purposely have no name on the card for a rare parallel. That would clearly be manufactured scarcity- just another parallel.

But what about actual errors- perhaps as in misprints from the 80s or 90s? What about the Thomas NNOF? Is that manufactured scarcity? Clearly they were manufactured with scarcity- not many made, in some cases unique. But if it was by accident? Does that make it organic and not manufactured scarcity like the modern error variant would be? I think like the 1977 proofs, the Thomas NNOF should still be considered manufactured scarcity in a technical sense…but their existence came about in a more interesting and organic fashion than a company purposely just making a /5 or /250 parallel.

[QUOTE=DynaEtch;19908005]Like picture if Topps today came out with an “NNOF” error variant card (maybe they do). Purposely have no name on the card for a rare parallel. That would clearly be manufactured scarcity- just another parallel.

[/QUOTE]
Yep one more $#@*ing parallel.
[IMG]https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/ftQAAOSw2kRoI1qK/s-l1600.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=ScooterD;19907968]I appreciate the explanation - most of it makes sense.

I’m thinking about an article that Keith Olbermann wrote about proof cards that he has from 1977 Topps. They were created in the natural course of business - not intended to be scarce at all - but circumstances (player traded, player retired, player died) meant that the proofs were pulled and replaced with other players.

His cards (I think there are 3-4 of them) are the only ones known. Not meant to be scarce… but there are only one of each known.

They were manufactured normally though. So are those manufactured scarcity?[/QUOTE]

Proofs are created solely to be used as a visual for final approval before on press printing. Back then, proofs were always one sided with nothing on the back. They weren't meant for release or sale.
Final proofs were used by the pressman as a visual representation to achieve and maintain optimal color on press.

They are unique in that they were a tool used in the pre-press process, but they are not cards.
Oftentimes progressive proofs were created of each CMYK color and combinations of the colors.

In the 1990s there were Printers Proofs and Artist Proofs inserted into packs but they are just base cards with foil stamping or other type of additional notation added. These are not pre-press progressive proofs.

Although Olbermann's proofs are unique and one of a kind(ish) they are not trading cards.

POLL: Is a 1/1 really a 1/1 of there are 30 1/1s?
 

[QUOTE=TBTC Baseball;19908112]Yep one more $#@*ing parallel.
[IMG]https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/ftQAAOSw2kRoI1qK/s-l1600.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

Figures!

[QUOTE=corndog;19908166]Proofs are created solely to be used as a visual for final approval before on press printing. Back then, proofs were always one sided with nothing on the back. They weren't meant for release or sale.
Final proofs were used by the pressman as a visual representation to achieve and maintain optimal color on press.

They are unique in that they were a tool used in the pre-press process, but they are not cards.
Oftentimes progressive proofs were created of each CMYK color and combinations of the colors.

In the 1990s there were Printers Proofs and Artist Proofs inserted into packs but they are just base cards with foil stamping or other type of additional notation added. These are not pre-press progressive proofs.

Although Olbermann's proofs are unique and one of a kind(ish) they are not trading cards.[/QUOTE]

Thank you - never knew the distinction of the proofs

Guess math was not your strong suit in school

I like manufactured scarcity, to a degree.

2 or 3 parallels and an 1/1 is great.

30 parallels and 6 1/1's is overkill for me.

ymmv

A lot of overanalyzing here.

[QUOTE=JWBlue;19908729]A lot of overanalyzing here.[/QUOTE]

For sure. A chrome superfractor, flagship platinum, or Dynasty logoman are obviously better 1/1s than a random insert 1/1 or printing plate. It's not rocket science.

And Leaf doesn't even count, who cares about that. Panini barely counts.

Does anybody still care about 1/1's?

[QUOTE=mfw13;19908955]Does anybody still care about 1/1's?[/QUOTE]

Me, I do

[IMG]https://allthecubs.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/cubs-1-1-small.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=mfw13;19908955]Does anybody still care about 1/1's?[/QUOTE]

Of course. What would make you think otherwise? Especially when it’s a superfractor of a player’s key card.