Topps Base Fad

[Friars]

Originally Posted by rogueriver

Can someone please explain to me the Topps Rookie card fad going on now with all these players, Garnett, Kobe,Shaq and so on. I left the hobby in 2000 and came back 2 years ago when I left Topps from the 1990s was Junk nobody wanted Kobe Topps Rookie Cards, this was way down on the list at number 48 or so.... Now all of a sudden it is his like number 3 rookie card.. This is across the board on a ton of players. Shaq is another one. These were solid dollar box cards, I am not saying they were not decent cards to have but there were much better rookies to have that Topps. Why all of a sudden is Topps Getting so much love this is some kind of market manipulation going on. Nobody who collected these cards in the 1990s collected topps base....

I'm 42, I was with you throughout the entire 90s not buying Topps. Fleer ultra, pinnacle and all their different cards, metal, etc. I have about 1700 griffeys right now that were saved st my folks house. You can tell the topps cards ore there due to neccity not desire. Dupes of everything but topps, discarding 1990 which everyone i know had 7 million of each player. Topps did a good job while many of us were away by licensing and apparently convincing the newer generation they are the go to and always have been. Not even close to the truth, in 1988 we were begging for new manufacturer and score didn't cut it.

[Willikn]

I've accepted the Topps Bass RC craze as the new normal. Perhaps some regression to the mean must occur but the old days (1990-2018) are gone. Born first from the Steph and Trout Topps RCs. LeBron and Kobe were next. Then Durant. Now nearly everyone.

The part that continues to baffle me is that Topps is classic, iconic, timeless, flagship, legendary, and a few more words incorporating icon, but not for Jordan. Every other player, yes. MJ, his cheapest base card every year is a Topps card... at least right now.

[Tallboy]

Originally Posted by Friars

I'm 42, I was with you throughout the entire 90s not buying Topps. Fleer ultra, pinnacle and all their different cards, metal, etc. I have about 1700 griffeys right now that were saved st my folks house. You can tell the topps cards ore there due to neccity not desire. Dupes of everything but topps, discarding 1990 which everyone i know had 7 million of each player. Topps did a good job while many of us were away by licensing and apparently convincing the newer generation they are the go to and always have been. Not even close to the truth, in 1988 we were begging for new manufacturer and score didn't cut it.

I really feel like the key moment for Topps' turn around came in 1991 with Stadium Club.

Prior to that point, I saw Topps as literally the worst company and that anything they made was the worst product. Topps & Bowman, worst sets in baseball. Topps in football worse than Score, Fleer & Pro Set. Topps in hockey, the particularly bad version of O-Pee-Chee, that was worse than Pro Set, Score & Upper Deck. Topps just seemed completely left behind in the dust.

And then Stadium Club hit in 1991 and it was just clearly an order-of-magnitude nicer than anything else in any sport on the hobby. It hit at the same time as Fleer's analogous Ultra, and 1991 Ultra was a joke in comparison. Overnight, Topps went from being the butt of jokes, to being the market leader again.

From there Topps' found a premium niche for Bowman, brought chrome & refractors in with Finest, and by the time Topps Chrome his in '96-97, collectors were frankly used to thinking of Topps as the company making the best product even if they weren't in love with Topps base.

I think all of that is what led to hobby love eventually embracing Topps base. Take out those particular successes in the '90s, we don't see Topps the same was in 2020. Quite possibly Topps isn't able to be swallowed up by Upper Deck or someone else in any of the subsequent hobby winters that followed.

[Friars]

Originally Posted by Tallboy

I really feel like the key moment for Topps' turn around came in 1991 with Stadium Club.

Prior to that point, I saw Topps as literally the worst company and that anything they made was the worst product. Topps & Bowman, worst sets in baseball. Topps in football worse than Score, Fleer & Pro Set. Topps in hockey, the particularly bad version of O-Pee-Chee, that was worse than Pro Set, Score & Upper Deck. Topps just seemed completely left behind in the dust.

And then Stadium Club hit in 1991 and it was just clearly an order-of-magnitude nicer than anything else in any sport on the hobby. It hit at the same time as Fleer's analogous Ultra, and 1991 Ultra was a joke in comparison. Overnight, Topps went from being the butt of jokes, to being the market leader again.

From there Topps' found a premium niche for Bowman, brought chrome & refractors in with Finest, and by the time Topps Chrome his in '96-97, collectors were frankly used to thinking of Topps as the company making the best product even if they weren't in love with Topps base.

I think all of that is what led to hobby love eventually embracing Topps base. Take out those particular successes in the '90s, we don't see Topps the same was in 2020. Quite possibly Topps isn't able to be swallowed up by Upper Deck or someone else in any of the subsequent hobby winters that followed.

My problem with stadium club is there was sooooo much of it in my house it was overwhelming and I just never fell in love with it. Now basketball stadium club was a lot more fun to rip for me than baseball, as thats what we had the most of, but I saw those backs so often I was overdosed with no other options to look forward to.

Even today, I'm not a fan of stadium club, I went a year trying to find a pack of cards in target, so much so I'd buy racing or hockey cards just to feed me addiction to rip. Well I found three stadium club blasters and I did not buy them. Lol

The inserts were a lot of fun when they started showing up in fleer and fleer ultra, with upper deck having soke limited autos to find.

If you came back to the hobby recently like me, topps being valuable must feel like Michael j fox showing up in a world owned and Co trolled by Biff, wtf happened?

[Tallboy]

Originally Posted by Friars

My problem with stadium club is there was sooooo much of it in my house it was overwhelming and I just never fell in love with it. Now basketball stadium club was a lot more fun to rip for me than baseball, as thats what we had the most of, but I saw those backs so often I was overdosed with no other options to look forward to.

Even today, I'm not a fan of stadium club, I went a year trying to find a pack of cards in target, so much so I'd buy racing or hockey cards just to feed me addiction to rip. Well I found three stadium club blasters and I did not buy them. Lol

The inserts were a lot of fun when they started showing up in fleer and fleer ultra, with upper deck having soke limited autos to find.

If you came back to the hobby recently like me, topps being valuable must feel like Michael j fox showing up in a world owned and Co trolled by Biff, wtf happened?

Sounds like you're saying your first memories of Stadium Club were as something that had already saturated the market, rather than of the moment when Stadium Club first hit the market. If so, I think that explains the difference.

And yeah, I think a big part of what happened with Stadium Club is that Topps looked to profit on it as much as possible rather than limiting themselves in the name of keeping demand above supply like they later did with Finest and Chrome.

Re: Biff! lol, yeah, something like that. As you can probably tell, I'm more interested in trying to understand the gears making this happen than anything else so it doesn't bother me.

Also, my cards from back then burned in a fire, so I don't have old cards I have a vested interest in keeping their dignity. My pride and joy back then was a Score Barry Sanders card that I'm now free to acknowledge to myself I think is a poorly designed card, and that I think the Pro Set looks way better.

[Spacemanspif]

Originally Posted by JeremyNick

The point was before this wave, your premise was completely false.

People didn’t flock to Topps RCs because of OCD collecting. Those same OCD types were around then and are now, so it just doesn’t make sense.

It’s pump and chasing $$$. If you look at current trends in cards with that perspective it all makes sense. People are in now solely to make money, not OCD. As mentioned, Topps is not a heritage brand with Basketball and doesn’t represent the lineage of rookies. It’s just money to be made.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

new 'amateur' money understands Topps base. I read somewhere that eBay sold something like 4 million more cards January 2021 than January 2020. All those new eyes and new money understand Topps base and PSA grading. they don't want to learn about Flair row 2/1/0 and the print runs of each. hell I'm not a newbie and I hardly care to learn about those differences. they don't want a Beckett slab with sub grades and different values within a 'true gem' and a 'minimum gem'...

Its really that simple.

Originally Posted by asujbl

It absolutely is the case

Collectors are OCD.

You can’t have a Kobe Topps but not a Duncan Topps.

It absolutely drives the value compared to some off brand like a Topps Pristine or something.

Especially with new folks. They don’t know what a Garnett Flair is. They know what Topps is.

Just wanted to say I agree with JeremyNick, and the notion that "it's because new money doesn't know better" and "collectors are OCD" are fine as hypotheses, but...
1) those statements contradict each other, because is it new money, or is it collectors with OCD that also somehow didn't want these cards at $100 but now need them at $1000?
2) is easily dispelled. Now, I suppose the only way to actually know would be to call up every auction winner and survey them on why they bought the card, but the way to at least poke holes in these hypotheses:

Recent search results for "1992 shaquille o'neal topps psa 10"
a) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/27...p2047675.l2565
b) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/14...p2047675.l2565
c) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/12...p2047675.l2565
d) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/25...p2047675.l2565
e) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/20...p2047675.l2565

feedback scores of 194, 194 (same person), 1316, 834, 426. so, definitely not new ebay accounts. were these "new money amateurs" all buying bath robes and replacement light bulbs on their ebay accounts until now and just decided to jump in to cards that have already exploded? is the guy buying multiples of the same card so OCD that he needs to buy Topps everything but doesn't mind buying PSA slabs with different labels? or the simplest explanation... it's people following the money.



If I were to assume the worst (that all these markets are being manipulated), I think the strategy would be: target highly available, highly liquid cards of star players that don't sell for much. specifically, those with high print runs but low POP counts, because the raw are so cheap they generally didn't justify being graded.

Furthermore, you can easily manipulate price of specific players / cards with low volume of cards on ebay relative to their POP. Now I hope nobody actually does this, but I'm going to throw out an example of something that has already exploded so I don't think it's as easy to manipulate: 2007 Kevin Durant Topps Chrome PSA 9. There are only 18 of these for sale via BIN on ebay out of a POP of 1169. It's entirely feasible that someone has a stack of 10-20 of these. If they had deep enough pockets, they could wipe out the 11 cards listed in the $3-4k range (probably using 2nd accounts to NPB for some as well), and then there's very little price support in the $4-6k range (only 4 listings). so by eliminating 15 listings, they effectively doubled the market price for the cards they just bought and could now flip, as well as the 10-20 they already owned. The SCI / Card Ladder algorithms would pick it up and mark it as a "hot" card, and youtubers and podcasts all over would be talking about it. Again, I don't think it is realistic given the price range, but you get the idea and I think it's definitely being done on the lower price ranged cards. Momentum and the prospect of making money is all that is driving the market these days, not any intrinsic value of the cards themselves.

[Friars]

Originally Posted by Tallboy

Sounds like you're saying your first memories of Stadium Club were as something that had already saturated the market, rather than of the moment when Stadium Club first hit the market. If so, I think that explains the difference.

And yeah, I think a big part of what happened with Stadium Club is that Topps looked to profit on it as much as possible rather than limiting themselves in the name of keeping demand above supply like they later did with Finest and Chrome.

Re: Biff! lol, yeah, something like that. As you can probably tell, I'm more interested in trying to understand the gears making this happen than anything else so it doesn't bother me.

Also, my cards from back then burned in a fire, so I don't have old cards I have a vested interest in keeping their dignity. My pride and joy back then was a Score Barry Sanders card that I'm now free to acknowledge to myself I think is a poorly designed card, and that I think the Pro Set looks way better.

It was exciting when they first came out however I was inundated with the product for a year and was overly exposed to the initial stadium club sets.

[sebreg]

Originally Posted by Spacemanspif

Just wanted to say I agree with JeremyNick, and the notion that "it's because new money doesn't know better" and "collectors are OCD" are fine as hypotheses, but...
1) those statements contradict each other, because is it new money, or is it collectors with OCD that also somehow didn't want these cards at $100 but now need them at $1000?
2) is easily dispelled. Now, I suppose the only way to actually know would be to call up every auction winner and survey them on why they bought the card, but the way to at least poke holes in these hypotheses:

Recent search results for "1992 shaquille o'neal topps psa 10"
a) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/27...p2047675.l2565
b) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/14...p2047675.l2565
c) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/12...p2047675.l2565
d) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/25...p2047675.l2565
e) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/20...p2047675.l2565

feedback scores of 194, 194 (same person), 1316, 834, 426. so, definitely not new ebay accounts. were these "new money amateurs" all buying bath robes and replacement light bulbs on their ebay accounts until now and just decided to jump in to cards that have already exploded? is the guy buying multiples of the same card so OCD that he needs to buy Topps everything but doesn't mind buying PSA slabs with different labels? or the simplest explanation... it's people following the money.



If I were to assume the worst (that all these markets are being manipulated), I think the strategy would be: target highly available, highly liquid cards of star players that don't sell for much. specifically, those with high print runs but low POP counts, because the raw are so cheap they generally didn't justify being graded.

Furthermore, you can easily manipulate price of specific players / cards with low volume of cards on ebay relative to their POP. Now I hope nobody actually does this, but I'm going to throw out an example of something that has already exploded so I don't think it's as feasible to manipulate: 2007 Kevin Durant Topps Chrome PSA 9. There are only 18 of these for sale via BIN on ebay out of a POP of 1169. It's entirely feasible that someone has a stack of 10-20 of these. If they had deep enough pockets, they could wipe out the 11 cards listed in the $3-4k range (probably using 2nd accounts to NPB for some as well), and then there's very little price support in the $4-6k range (only 4 listings). so by eliminating 15 listings, they effectively doubled the market price for the cards they just bought and could now flip, as well as the 10-20 they already owned. The SCI / Card Ladder algorithms would pick it up and mark it as a "hot" card, and youtubers and podcasts all over would be talking about it. Again, I don't think it would be feasible given the price range, but you get the idea and I think it's definitely being done on the lower price ranged cards. Momentum and the prospect of making money is all that is driving the market these days, not any intrinsic value of the cards themselves.

I am shocked! the bedeviling scumbaggery of it all!

I heard one of the buyer's of the psa 10 750k Jordan already had 10 of those. Mirrors high-end art market manipulation. If you have liquidity, or friends/partners with requisite liquidity, engineering these rackets isn't too difficult. When big money is to be made, it's sad but not surprising to see some underhanded tactics from some people come into play... some of those services where you pay to be part of a card group is basically just one guy gathering a herd of buyers to manipulate the market (in my eyes). Maybe it's more innocent, but the basic mechanics being used by some of these "investment" groups and gurus sounds like straight up manipulation to me. And they are right out in the open and bragging about it too.

[lseecon]

most of you who dont understand why classic base topps rookie cards are the preferred choice of most collectors and investors clearly dont invest in vintage and likely are younger collectors. The so called new money being referenced is not new money but old money that has come back in the hobby with a vengeance. guys age 40-60 who have deep pockets that want a 1963 Topps Pete Rose, a 1969 Kareem, a 1975 Topps Brett, a 1980 Topps Bird/Magic rookie, a 1996 Kobe Topps PSA 10, a 2003 Topps Lebron PSA 10, a 1986 Fleer Jordan. They want the traditional easy to recognize, liquid, highly coveted rookies. Most vintage and older collectors dont care about an RPA Zion numbered to 49 that was pulled out of National Treasures case by some breaker. Not saying that card isnt cool or isnt super valuable, but its not going to be as popular or as collected as a 2019 Topps base Zion (yes i know there is no 2019Topps basketball so what took its place is Prizm base for now so a 2019 prizm psa 10 zion is today's equivalent of a 1989 UD Griffey PSA 10 or a 2003 Lebron Topps PSA 10).

Despite all the misinformation and conspiracy theories, right now demand for these cards exceeds supply. There are less than 3,000 Kobe topps psa 10 rookies. I can assure you there are more than 3,000 people who would love to have that card. Will the card stay at $10,000? I dont think so, because prices go up and prices go down. Its been that way for 50 plus years in the card hobby. Cards get hot, then they cool off. Then they got hot again. Prices may fall by 50% but then they may get hot again and break new highs on the next surge.

Topps base rookie cards are not a fad. If you think they are, you really dont understand card collecting. They have been coveted and collected from before most of you were born. While the price appreciation we have seen is crazy, its just demand overtaking supply. Whats likely to be more of a fad is the thousands of numbered, parallels, shiny stuff that didnt exist 10 years ago. Those have "fad" written all over them. silvers, holos, blues, greens, disco. I mean they are nice and limited but I still dont see them taking the place of the traditional base rookie card for the majority of collectors. Those cards are likely to be purchased "in addition" to the traditional base rookie cards of stars and HOFers, but not in place of.

There are only 359 2009 Topps base PSA 10 Stephen Curry rookies. that is nuts!!! And Only 900 graded PSA 9. Yes, a base card. And dont give me some BS excuse that there are thousands waiting to be graded. There arent. That card has been valuable enough to have been graded for many years, but there just arent that many around. Demand far outstrips supply. Just like there arent thousands of 1996 topps kobe rookies waiting to be graded PSA 10. There may be lots of Kobe topps waited to be graded, but very few will be graded a 10. Plus if you have some you think will grade a 10, you would pay $500 right now on a two day turnaround service get them graded a 10 and have them sold for $8,000 to $10,000 within a week. But thats not happening with Kobe base rookies or Lebron base rookies or Curry base rookies, because that many more dont exist that will grade 10.

So many clueless posts on this board.

Prices may not be sustainable but demand and interest in topps "bass" rookie cards will always remain high despite the naysayers and newbies who dont understand traditional collecting and investing in sports cards.

For the newbies who cant understand the importance of topps in the hobby, name the top 10 most iconic HOF rookie basketball cards and tell me which brand or manufacturer has more cards in that list than topps.

[sebreg]

Originally Posted by Tallboy

Woot, let's get a visual:



They absolutely nailed it and gave Ultra a new identity along the way. Flashy. Bold. Player-focused. Plus, they included Ben Wallace in their rookies, which is something I appreciate.

Re: Finest on a pedestal.

I've been thinking about this, and I think part of the deal is that in real time, we couldn't necessarily see the individual card designs. Growing up in my small town, the idea of buying "singles" was almost foreign to me. Yeah the card shop had some cards for sale, but I had no expectation that he'd get any particular card in stock.

As one example: As someone getting into cards as an obsession as a kid in 1990, I literally never saw an '86 Fleer basketball card in person (let alone Star or deeper vintage). We talk about how a ton of stuff was made back then, and in a real sense that's true, but in terms of what I could get access to, it was completely dependent on specific decisions that one dude in my town made.

When that's how things are, you're buying things based on the general notion of special-ness in the set and then bolting on more special-ness for the player whose face graces the card.

I'd argue that this way of thinking is still has a massive inertia that is largely not perceived. What people notice instead are the changes, and some of those changes involve a recognition of quality on a card-by-card basis which I'd say tend to come out of the high end with the most iconic players.

Serious Jordan-heads want a Jordan card that makes them feel something about Jordan, so to them photography matters. Once it matters to them, trends ripple out from there.

This is why, while I'll acknowledge that a lot of the new blood coming into the hobby is understandably tone deaf to things they should make a point of understanding better, I really think it's cool that we're getting new sources of momentum pumping in with a great deal of force on the hobby, because some of the old school ways of doing things weren't driving aesthetic quality to rise to the top.

Re: good Finest. It definitely exists yeah. I can point to quite a few Finest sets that I like. I think the problem is that they lost the thread thematically (specifically, lost the retro component) and after that became hit & miss. When you have a guiding theme to stick to, it's easier to make sure collectors feel a continuity in what you're doing, and that helps with brand loyalty.

Re: prices in 6 months. Indeed, it will be interesting to see. I'll note that the existence of '90s Topps base in cases and attics can't help but remind me of folks mining Bitcoin. I don't think there's every doubt that if every Topps flooded the market over night, that market would crash, but there's a natural friction to that process keeping this from happening.

What's fascinating is that while in theory you might think this means the same rise and fall plays out, just slower, it won't necessarily be so. Topps rising and sticking for a while solidifies the idea that Topps is worth a premium. Maybe not the level of premium it currently sits at, but the idea of Topps' specialness may well be hear to stay now.

And yeah, for us '90s kids, this is the furthest thing from what we expected.

Yes, I think you make good points on continuation issues regarding the Finest sets. I sort of feel Fleer Ultra and Flair also disintegrated and went away from things that worked so well for those sets initially. I think some change is cool, but when a thing is completely reengineered you can risk damaging the brand, especially if that brand resonated with a deep enough base of people.

Topps lasting power could definitely be a thing. Interested to see how that plays out. I'd certainly be happy buying up the chrome from 08 and 09, my two favorites... and there are some wonderful historical sets I really love as well.

And to the point of Topps power. When I dipped back in in 2015 and wanting to buy rookies of my favorite players, I was completely overwhelmed with all the sets and cards. So I turned to what I remembered from my youth, Topps (chrome), and those were the cards I bought. Having fully come back in 2020 and learned more, I now enjoy a greater diversity of brands. But the Topps brand power is a real thing, and it had its influence on me for sure!

[mc1]

Originally Posted by sebreg

I am shocked! the bedeviling scumbaggery of it all!

I heard one of the buyer's of the psa 10 750k Jordan already had 10 of those. Mirrors high-end art market manipulation. If you have liquidity, or friends/partners with requisite liquidity, engineering these rackets isn't too difficult. When big money is to be made, it's sad but not surprising to see some underhanded tactics from some people come into play... some of those services where you pay to be part of a card group is basically just one guy gathering a herd of buyers to manipulate the market (in my eyes). Maybe it's more innocent, but the basic mechanics being used by some of these "investment" groups and gurus sounds like straight up manipulation to me. And they are right out in the open and bragging about it too.

Locally, I was told theres a guy buying as many PSA Topps 10 Kobes as he can find.

Youd think if was a sharp “investor” he would have been buying those at 3-5k or maybe even diversified and bought the NBA at 50 parallel. He wasnt.

Buying at the all-time highs.

[duron]

Originally Posted by KingInTheWest

I feel like I went back in time to a parallel universe of 1994 but in this parallel world collectors prefer plain old Topps to Topps Finest, Stadium Club and Fleer Ultra.

Lol, right? Parallel universe is the best way to put what’s been happening. Good thing it will crumble.

[sebreg]

Originally Posted by mc1

Locally, I was told theres a guy buying as many PSA Topps 10 Kobes as he can find.

Youd think if was a sharp “investor” he would have been buying those at 3-5k or maybe even diversified and bought the NBA at 50 parallel. He wasnt.

Buying at the all-time highs.

Yeah, you need to already have big enough position on the card (with lower cost basis, most important thing!), and enough liquidity to influence the marketplace (whether it's a headlining buy like psa 10 jordan or just cleaning the decks on ebay and setting a streak of new ebay comps). Need lower cost basis otherwise the scam doesn't really work. It sucks but this is the racket that is run in the high-end art market, a lot of money is made with these underhanded tactics. Creating the illusion of purported value.

Nba 50th is the variant I'd want above all others. No greening, condition sensitive, nice foil aesthetic... closest thing to chrome without the greening.

[Tallboy]

Originally Posted by sebreg

Yes, I think you make good points on continuation issues regarding the Finest sets. I sort of feel Fleer Ultra and Flair also disintegrated and went away from things that worked so well for those sets initially. I think some change is cool, but when a thing is completely reengineered you can risk damaging the brand, especially if that brand resonated with a deep enough base of people.

Topps lasting power could definitely be a thing. Interested to see how that plays out. I'd certainly be happy buying up the chrome from 08 and 09, my two favorites... and there are some wonderful historical sets I really love as well.

And to the point of Topps power. When I dipped back in in 2015 and wanting to buy rookies of my favorite players, I was completely overwhelmed with all the sets and cards. So I turned to what I remembered from my youth, Topps (chrome), and those were the cards I bought. Having fully come back in 2020 and learned more, I now enjoy a greater diversity of brands. But the Topps brand power is a real thing, and it had its influence on me for sure!

Yup, Fleer really wasn't sure what direction to head at the time so they tried new things, not realizing that in the long term, this was a bad move.

I think Panini has learned the lesson of brand continuation far better than any non-Topps company did. They aren't going to risk the next Prizm design not looking enough like Prizm. Once they have a thing that works, they stick with it. Boring, but wise.

I'll be interested to see what other sets, and what years of sets catch fire. I fully expect the '96 Ultra to put money toward other Ultra, but will it push it toward the years that don't have the cursive names? Maybe it will get to them last?

Flair I'm less sure about. I think we all agree it's high quality, but always seemed to have less "hooks" into it for collectors than other sets, and the fact that we're actually seeing Ultra sell higher than Flair hurts.

[FT35]

Originally Posted by Browns1981

I just wish I'd ignored people here saying Shaq's 92 Topps is junk wax, nobody cares about Tim Duncan, etc. Because I could have cleaned up,!

Ha! Right?! A lot of bold opinions that’s for sure. One thing to keep in mind, Topps is the backbone of the hobby—rookies are always heavily chased. Put them together and it’s very easy to see why Topps Rookies are a thing and always will be whether it’s the go-to basketball brand or not.

The basketball folks are getting used to Prizm and many forget the convos that happened when Topps/Chrome went down—literally people mocking all things Panini about how it would never be close to Topps. Now we’re wondering why Topps values are exploding because no one likes Topps?? Before Panini, it was a Topps Chrome world. It’s just that now, paper is along for the ride. No surprise here.

[sebreg]

Originally Posted by Tallboy

Yup, Fleer really wasn't sure what direction to head at the time so they tried new things, not realizing that in the long term, this was a bad move.

I think Panini has learned the lesson of brand continuation far better than any non-Topps company did. They aren't going to risk the next Prizm design not looking enough like Prizm. Once they have a thing that works, they stick with it. Boring, but wise.

I'll be interested to see what other sets, and what years of sets catch fire. I fully expect the '96 Ultra to put money toward other Ultra, but will it push it toward the years that don't have the cursive names? Maybe it will get to them last?

Flair I'm less sure about. I think we all agree it's high quality, but always seemed to have less "hooks" into it for collectors than other sets, and the fact that we're actually seeing Ultra sell higher than Flair hurts.

Possibly advantage for Fleer Ultra is that it feels closer to Fleer brand than Flair. Plus Ultra has a bit of a longer history than Flair, I feel Flair really had three phenomenal years (96-98). But given ultra's tighter feeling connection to Fleer, and the Fleer brand history, maybe this is what makes it easier for broader base to connect with Ultra over Flair? For me, one of the absolute coolest cards of all time is the 97 Kobe Ultra Gold Medallion, an unbelievable action shot/pose, and the gold makes the purple warm-up and shoes absolutely pop. I still need to pick one up, but this card has caught fire. I'm a little bit less of a fan of the 96 Ultra parallels (too close looking to the base), but the base cards look phenomenal in their own right. In general, I'm a bit of a fiend for 97 and 98 ultra golds (would get platinum if I could but gets VERY pricey). I actually also like 06 and 07 Ultra gold, it's different but kind of a neat look imo. I like that those two years have design consistency with one another.

Panini is smart. They know they have a good broad-base thing going with flagship Prizm. So they don't screw around with that one, but have enough other brands on the periphery where they may feel they have more room to experiment. That said, some of the upper tier brands like Flawless, Immaculate, etc all look the same to me, year after year...

[Friars]

Originally Posted by lseecon

most of you who dont understand why classic base topps rookie cards are the preferred choice of most collectors and investors clearly dont invest in vintage and likely are younger collectors. The so called new money being referenced is not new money but old money that has come back in the hobby with a vengeance. guys age 40-60 who have deep pockets that want a 1963 Topps Pete Rose, a 1969 Kareem, a 1975 Topps Brett, a 1980 Topps Bird/Magic rookie, a 1996 Kobe Topps PSA 10, a 2003 Topps Lebron PSA 10, a 1986 Fleer Jordan. They want the traditional easy to recognize, liquid, highly coveted rookies. Most vintage and older collectors dont care about an RPA Zion numbered to 49 that was pulled out of National Treasures case by some breaker. Not saying that card isnt cool or isnt super valuable, but its not going to be as popular or as collected as a 2019 Topps base Zion (yes i know there is no 2019Topps basketball so what took its place is Prizm base for now so a 2019 prizm psa 10 zion is today's equivalent of a 1989 UD Griffey PSA 10 or a 2003 Lebron Topps PSA 10).

Despite all the misinformation and conspiracy theories, right now demand for these cards exceeds supply. There are less than 3,000 Kobe topps psa 10 rookies. I can assure you there are more than 3,000 people who would love to have that card. Will the card stay at $10,000? I dont think so, because prices go up and prices go down. Its been that way for 50 plus years in the card hobby. Cards get hot, then they cool off. Then they got hot again. Prices may fall by 50% but then they may get hot again and break new highs on the next surge.

Topps base rookie cards are not a fad. If you think they are, you really dont understand card collecting. They have been coveted and collected from before most of you were born. While the price appreciation we have seen is crazy, its just demand overtaking supply. Whats likely to be more of a fad is the thousands of numbered, parallels, shiny stuff that didnt exist 10 years ago. Those have "fad" written all over them. silvers, holos, blues, greens, disco. I mean they are nice and limited but I still dont see them taking the place of the traditional base rookie card for the majority of collectors. Those cards are likely to be purchased "in addition" to the traditional base rookie cards of stars and HOFers, but not in place of.

There are only 359 2009 Topps base PSA 10 Stephen Curry rookies. that is nuts!!! And Only 900 graded PSA 9. Yes, a base card. And dont give me some BS excuse that there are thousands waiting to be graded. There arent. That card has been valuable enough to have been graded for many years, but there just arent that many around. Demand far outstrips supply. Just like there arent thousands of 1996 topps kobe rookies waiting to be graded PSA 10. There may be lots of Kobe topps waited to be graded, but very few will be graded a 10. Plus if you have some you think will grade a 10, you would pay $500 right now on a two day turnaround service get them graded a 10 and have them sold for $8,000 to $10,000 within a week. But thats not happening with Kobe base rookies or Lebron base rookies or Curry base rookies, because that many more dont exist that will grade 10.

So many clueless posts on this board.

Prices may not be sustainable but demand and interest in topps "bass" rookie cards will always remain high despite the naysayers and newbies who dont understand traditional collecting and investing in sports cards.

For the newbies who cant understand the importance of topps in the hobby, name the top 10 most iconic HOF rookie basketball cards and tell me which brand or manufacturer has more cards in that list than topps.

I agree with the vintage but couldn't disagree more with 90s topps base. It is the 40 year olds who wonder why they are so valuable not newcomers becomes we have all most likely handled hundreds of these cards in their time and never saw them as valuable because of it, not to mention, none of us 40-45 year olds were rushing to the always stocked stores to pick up Topps new release. Only reason I have so much 90s topps is my dad bought them, he wasn't very good at shopping for my teenaged clothes either. But that does bring the point and separation between today's 40s and 60s, maybe my dad found nostalgia in the topps logo, or they were what caught his eye when shopping. In 1987 we were fine with topps as fleer wasn't as available.

So for whatever reason, many cards many of us have not seen as valuable due to it being so common or whatever, there has been a shift in the market and it is natural to question whether it was organic or had some assistance.

[Tallboy]

Originally Posted by sebreg

Possibly advantage for Fleer Ultra is that it feels closer to Fleer brand than Flair. Plus Ultra has a bit of a longer history than Flair, I feel Flair really had three phenomenal years (96-98). But given ultra's tighter feeling connection to Fleer, and the Fleer brand history, maybe this is what makes it easier for broader base to connect with Ultra over Flair? For me, one of the absolute coolest cards of all time is the 97 Kobe Ultra Gold Medallion, an unbelievable action shot/pose, and the gold makes the purple warm-up and shoes absolutely pop. I still need to pick one up, but this card has caught fire. I'm a little bit less of a fan of the 96 Ultra parallels (too close looking to the base), but the base cards look phenomenal in their own right. In general, I'm a bit of a fiend for 97 and 98 ultra golds (would get platinum if I could but gets VERY pricey). I actually also like 06 and 07 Ultra gold, it's different but kind of a neat look imo. I like that those two years have design consistency with one another.

Panini is smart. They know they have a good broad-base thing going with flagship Prizm. So they don't screw around with that one, but have enough other brands on the periphery where they may feel they have more room to experiment. That said, some of the upper tier brands like Flawless, Immaculate, etc all look the same to me, year after year...

I think the closer adjacency to base Fleer can help, but I also just think that the Ultra cursive design has more "flair" than the Flair cursive design, and that's a potentially a huge problem.

Piggy backing on your point about the high-end brands, to me, most of the super high-end seems patterned off of '98-99 SP Authentic with a clean white background. The interesting thing is that is more analogous to Flair than Ultra, which should be a good thing, but that the "look of the super-high-end" just really doesn't look like Flair, which makes sense given how "loading" these cards with patches and autos benefits from whitespace.

I have a hard time getting a handle on the Panini high end. To me those sets are mostly interchangeable with NT seeming to be the preferred choice simply because it came first. Makes me think the modern high end collector really wants something that screams "This is high class!" and doesn't tolerate variance that much, but again, I'm a stranger in a strange land here.

[ConcordXI]

Originally Posted by jbball50

Of course they would, quick turn around times so they can try to make a quick buck rather than wait 9 months hoping the hobby doesn’t tank.

Agree.

Originally Posted by Spacemanspif

Just wanted to say I agree with JeremyNick, and the notion that "it's because new money doesn't know better" and "collectors are OCD" are fine as hypotheses, but...
1) those statements contradict each other, because is it new money, or is it collectors with OCD that also somehow didn't want these cards at $100 but now need them at $1000?
2) is easily dispelled. Now, I suppose the only way to actually know would be to call up every auction winner and survey them on why they bought the card, but the way to at least poke holes in these hypotheses:

Recent search results for "1992 shaquille o'neal topps psa 10"
a) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/27...p2047675.l2565
b) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/14...p2047675.l2565
c) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/12...p2047675.l2565
d) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/25...p2047675.l2565
e) https://www.ebay.com/bfl/viewbids/20...p2047675.l2565

feedback scores of 194, 194 (same person), 1316, 834, 426. so, definitely not new ebay accounts. were these "new money amateurs" all buying bath robes and replacement light bulbs on their ebay accounts until now and just decided to jump in to cards that have already exploded? is the guy buying multiples of the same card so OCD that he needs to buy Topps everything but doesn't mind buying PSA slabs with different labels? or the simplest explanation... it's people following the money.



If I were to assume the worst (that all these markets are being manipulated), I think the strategy would be: target highly available, highly liquid cards of star players that don't sell for much. specifically, those with high print runs but low POP counts, because the raw are so cheap they generally didn't justify being graded.

Furthermore, you can easily manipulate price of specific players / cards with low volume of cards on ebay relative to their POP. Now I hope nobody actually does this, but I'm going to throw out an example of something that has already exploded so I don't think it's as feasible to manipulate: 2007 Kevin Durant Topps Chrome PSA 9. There are only 18 of these for sale via BIN on ebay out of a POP of 1169. It's entirely feasible that someone has a stack of 10-20 of these. If they had deep enough pockets, they could wipe out the 11 cards listed in the $3-4k range (probably using 2nd accounts to NPB for some as well), and then there's very little price support in the $4-6k range (only 4 listings). so by eliminating 15 listings, they effectively doubled the market price for the cards they just bought and could now flip, as well as the 10-20 they already owned. The SCI / Card Ladder algorithms would pick it up and mark it as a "hot" card, and youtubers and podcasts all over would be talking about it. Again, I don't think it would be feasible given the price range, but you get the idea and I think it's definitely being done on the lower price ranged cards. Momentum and the prospect of making money is all that is driving the market these days, not any intrinsic value of the cards themselves.

Great post.

This IS the strategy. We're seeing the idea of "market inefficiency" (particularly the allocative concept) being considered now more than ever. With a brand as widely produced and previously maligned among collectors as Topps base, there's a large number of opportunities to buy in not just low but in large quantities in many cases.

In terms of "market" trends (not necessarily ones that "collectors like us" buy into, but the flipper mindset) this is what is going on with these. It will likely then shift to other brands, then when that well runs dry, it's on to the next.

We saw this with retro video games in the past decade, first it was NES, then when that market was largely depleted, it moved on to SNES, then N64, then Gamecube as Nintendo was the most prominent name in that industry. After those mines were emptied, then it was Sega Genesis and Playstation and died out once people were trying to flip XBox games. The cycle is repeating itself, it's just a matter of how many different brands there are to go through. There are a lot of different brands (well, probably "lines" more than brands) of cards in that 90's era so it's likely to drag out for a while.

[chetb]

An outsider's perspective, for what it's worth:

I left the hobby in 1992 and only recently started collecting again. My first impulse when I returned was to start with Fleer, since Fleer was king when I was a kid.

But as I surveyed the flagship Fleer sets I had missed over the years, I didn't love what I found. I always thought there was a tasteful simplicity to the early years of Fleer, but a lot of the subsequent years missed the mark for me. As others have said, other Fleer products like Ultra had some great sets, but I'm talking plain jane, flagship Fleer.

Couple that with the fact that there wasn't even a flagship Fleer set by the time LeBron came around (you have Tradition, Showcase, Platinum, Focus, Mystique, Flair, and others I'm forgetting but no plain "Fleer" that year), and I started to look for another entry point.

On top of that, the maximalist design arms race that really took off in the mid 90s, which I totally missed, was not for me. Nor the penchant for making every card shiny and glittery. I just wanted something simple, consistent, and more restrained, which is how I remembered those early Fleer years.

Enter flagship Topps. Not every year will win a beauty contest (though 2003–09 I think has a good chance). But it's consistently tasteful and fairly timeless. And, important to my OCD, it was continuously produced from 92 until Panini took over. First thing I did was buy every Topps Lebron base card, then I went back to the 90s for the Jordans and Kobes.

But for me it's bigger than just Topps pushing my personal preferred aesthetic buttons. It's something emotional about the brand. To me, Topps is pure Americana. It's Coca-Cola, as someone else pointed out. I don't want a special Coca-Cola. I don't want Coca-Cola in a fancier shiny bottle, or with a new flavor added. I want the same old Coke that anyone can get anywhere. It doesn't matter to me that it's not rare. I'm reminded of the old Andy Warhol quote about Coke:

"You can be watching TV and see Coca Cola, and you know that the President drinks Coca Cola, Liz Taylor drinks Coca Cola, and just think, you can drink Coca Cola, too. A coke is a coke and no amount of money can get you a better coke than the one the bum on the corner is drinking. All the cokes are the same and all the cokes are good. Liz Taylor knows it, the President knows it, the bum knows it, and you know it."

Will my tastes eventually expand? I think so. But for now, I want a Coke.

[sebreg]

Originally Posted by chetb

An outsider's perspective, for what it's worth:

I left the hobby in 1992 and only recently started collecting again. My first impulse when I returned was to start with Fleer, since Fleer was king when I was a kid.

But as I surveyed the flagship Fleer sets I had missed over the years, I didn't love what I found. I always thought there was a tasteful simplicity to the early years of Fleer, but a lot of the subsequent years missed the mark for me. As others have said, other Fleer products like Ultra had some great sets, but I'm talking plain jane, flagship Fleer.

Couple that with the fact that there wasn't even a flagship Fleer set by the time LeBron came around (you have Tradition, Showcase, Platinum, Focus, Mystique, Flair, and others I'm forgetting but no plain "Fleer" that year), and I started to look for another entry point.

On top of that, the maximalist design arms race that really took off in the mid 90s, which I totally missed, was not for me. Nor the penchant to make every card shiny and glittery. I just wanted something simple, consistent, and more restrained, which is how I remembered those early Fleer years.

Enter flagship Topps. Not every year will win a beauty contest (though 2003–09 I think has a good chance). But it's consistently tasteful and fairly timeless. And, important to my OCD, it was consistently produced from 92 until Panini took over. First thing I did was buy every Topps Lebron base card, then I went back to the 90s for the Jordans and Kobes.

But for me it's bigger than just Topps pushing my personal preferred aesthetic buttons. It's something about the brand. To me, Topps is pure Americana. It's Coca-Cola, as someone else pointed out. I don't want a special Coca-Cola. I don't want Coca-Cola in a fancier shiny bottle, or with a new flavor added. I want the same old Coke that anyone can get anywhere. I'm reminded of the old Andy Warhol quote about Coke:



Will my tastes eventually expand? I think so. But for now, I want a Coke.

Great answer, thanks for sharing your perspective on it. I can def see the appeal when it's put that way. Comes down to brand lineage and relative consistency of design which helps reinforce the brand's historicity and roots in the culture. A set might be new, but the designs callback to the earlier decades, bringing out the old notes and flavors which works well given the centrality of nostalgia with all this.

03-09, yes! My favs are 08 and 09, just love those two Topps years. Basic brand Fleer in the 90s was an absolute trainwreck imo! 87 Fleer prob my fav in terms of basic Fleer design.

[Tallboy]

Originally Posted by chetb

An outsider's perspective, for what it's worth:

I left the hobby in 1992 and only recently started collecting again. My first impulse when I returned was to start with Fleer, since Fleer was king when I was a kid.

But as I surveyed the flagship Fleer sets I had missed over the years, I didn't love what I found. I always thought there was a tasteful simplicity to the early years of Fleer, but a lot of the subsequent years missed the mark for me. As others have said, other Fleer products like Ultra had some great sets, but I'm talking plain jane, flagship Fleer.

Couple that with the fact that there wasn't even a flagship Fleer set by the time LeBron came around (you have Tradition, Showcase, Platinum, Focus, Mystique, Flair, and others I'm forgetting but no plain "Fleer" that year), and I started to look for another entry point.

On top of that, the maximalist design arms race that really took off in the mid 90s, which I totally missed, was not for me. Nor the penchant for making every card shiny and glittery. I just wanted something simple, consistent, and more restrained, which is how I remembered those early Fleer years.

Enter flagship Topps. Not every year will win a beauty contest (though 2003–09 I think has a good chance). But it's consistently tasteful and fairly timeless. And, important to my OCD, it was consistently produced from 92 until Panini took over. First thing I did was buy every Topps Lebron base card, then I went back to the 90s for the Jordans and Kobes.

But for me it's bigger than just Topps pushing my personal preferred aesthetic buttons. It's something emotional about the brand. To me, Topps is pure Americana. It's Coca-Cola, as someone else pointed out. I don't want a special Coca-Cola. I don't want Coca-Cola in a fancier shiny bottle, or with a new flavor added. I want the same old Coke that anyone can get anywhere. It doesn't matter to me that it's not rare. I'm reminded of the old Andy Warhol quote about Coke:



Will my tastes eventually expand? I think so. But for now, I want a Coke.

Very well said and yay, someone else on the Coca-Cola wagon!

I think what's happening here is that new people are comin into the hobby with a taste that just differs from what dominated immediately before, and there's an impulse among those who were there first to say "That's not how things are." Quite understandable, but there isn't only one way.

I might say we're talking about new rivers feeding into a growing pond.

[Tallboy]

Originally Posted by sebreg

03-09, yes! My favs are 08 and 09, just love those two Topps years.

Indeed, really feels like I'm finding kindred spirits here!

[drobfan8]

This Topps run up reminds me exactly of the 90/91 Fleer MJ run up.

Then everyone will send for grading and there will be a dip.

I would be selling if I could ever find the effing base I had from the box I broke.

[mc1]

What a difference a year makes.