Which one is more likely the next PMG?

[Yankees2020]

2020-22 Topps 206

[BigSeph]

Originally Posted by Spacemanspif

I've sold off whatever base diamonds I have because they've gone up due to people looking for the next thing to pump, and there's no reason for me to keep them because they're simply not cool looking cards. People trying to create narratives around what a true RC is and what people will want down the road are overthinking it. After all the Prizm pumps, and rare insert pumps, and whatever else comes up, people will fight over stuff that looks cool. Go look up the Patches and Patch autos for your favorite players and notice the price discrepancies between the 4 color patches to /25 and 2 color swatches with no stitching to /10. Nobody cares what the numbering is on the card, they will pay more for the one that looks better.

OR

Some people think diamond Flawless cards are cool, and true rookie cards serial #d to 20 are cool, and it has nothing to do with pumping anything.

Do you think you have some sort of perfect idea of what's cool and what's not?

Do you know what is objective and not subjective?

Rarity.

[tjforce]

Originally Posted by BigSeph

The hobby is littered with examples of what might not be super popular out of the gate overtaking the "cool thing" over time.



Did anybody think that Shaq's most valuable rookie card would be Topps Gold instead of the Upper Deck trade card in 1993?



Did anybody think Kobe's Topps Chrome RC would skyrocket past his Topps Finest RC?



How many Prizm parallels are there now? 40? There's a lot to be said for a player's rarest base true RC, serial#d and all. It will appeal to a lot of people down the road.

Originally Posted by Spacemanspif

I've sold off whatever base diamonds I have because they've gone up due to people looking for the next thing to pump, and there's no reason for me to keep them because they're simply not cool looking cards. People trying to create narratives around what a true RC is and what people will want down the road are overthinking it. After all the Prizm pumps, and rare insert pumps, and whatever else comes up, people will fight over stuff that looks cool. Go look up the Patches and Patch autos for your favorite players and notice the price discrepancies between the 4 color patches to /25 and 2 color swatches with no stitching to /10. Nobody cares what the numbering is on the card, they will pay more for the one that looks better.

There's some truth to what each of you are saying.





My question is this: even though the sharps know which of these are true rookie cards, will enough people care about that to definitively chose them over what's seemingly considered the top Non-NT RPA?

[BigSeph]

Originally Posted by tjforce

There's some truth to what each of you are saying.





My question is this: even though the sharps know which of these are true rookie cards, will enough people care about that to definitively chose them over what's seemingly considered the top Non-NT RPA?

I think the issue is that the Flawless "RPA" isn't an RPA at all.

If you look at Upper Deck Cup RPAs, they are actually RPAs - numbered as part of the base set.

It's a rookie patch autographed card.

The Flawless Doncic above could be called a "Rookie year patch autographed card" but isn't really a rookie card.

It's card# SP-LDC. Whereas a Connor McDavid Cup RPA is numbered 197 on the base set. A Flawless diamond Luka Doncic from 2018 is numbered 81 in the base set. There are 99 McDavid Cup RPAs in the world not counting parallels. There are 20 Luka Flawless RCs in the world not counting parallels.

I can see a day in the future when much of the "RPA" hype dies down (especially when it's a rookie-year patch auto, not an actual rookie card) and people start looking at rarity and not what's "cool." I mean look at what Panini is putting on the back of LaMelo Ball NT RPAs now-

"The enclosed officially licensed material is not associated with any specific player, game, or event."

It can literally just be a piece of an official NBA jersey where they cut out the name or number for a nice patch. Doesn't even have to be worn by the player!

On the back of Zion NT RPAs at least it said "player worn" so maybe he put on the jersey for a second and took it off. That goes all the way back to 2012 NT RPAs. On the McDavid Cup RPA it says he wore the jersey at a rookie photo shoot (when they layer like 20 jerseys on a guy and then he's done). What's the big draw for the "patch" part? And in the case of Flawless RPAs, they don't even have the "rookie" part. It's just a rookie-year card even though the patch/jersey portion is allegedly from actual games.

So my take, and I'm sure I'm in the minority on this, is that any real long-term value growth isn't going to be found in a card that isn't an actual rookie card, it isn't going to be found in a card that has a random swatch of material that a player put on for 10 seconds at a photo shoot, it's going to be found in true rookie cards where hobby turds can't replace a patch with a better one, a player's mom can't sign his name, and the rarer the better.

Which pretty much puts Flawless diamond /20 cards as the rarest, most consistently produced true rookie card available over the last 10 years.

In a hobby where people like to claim they own this or that, imagine saying you are one of 20 people on earth with X player's rarest true rookie card.

[tjforce]

Originally Posted by BigSeph

I think the issue is that the Flawless "RPA" isn't an RPA at all.

If you look at Upper Deck Cup RPAs, they are actually RPAs - numbered as part of the base set.

It's a rookie patch autographed card.

The Flawless Doncic above could be called a "Rookie year patch autographed card" but isn't really a rookie card.

It's card# SP-LDC. Whereas a Connor McDavid Cup RPA is numbered 197 on the base set. A Flawless diamond Luka Doncic from 2018 is numbered 81 in the base set. There are 99 McDavid Cup RPAs in the world not counting parallels. There are 20 Luka Flawless RCs in the world not counting parallels.

I can see a day in the future when much of the "RPA" hype dies down (especially when it's a rookie-year patch auto, not an actual rookie card) and people start looking at rarity and not what's "cool." I mean look at what Panini is putting on the back of LaMelo Ball NT RPAs now-

"The enclosed officially licensed material is not associated with any specific player, game, or event."

It can literally just be a piece of an official NBA jersey where they cut out the name or number for a nice patch. Doesn't even have to be worn by the player!

On the back of Zion NT RPAs at least it said "player worn" so maybe he put on the jersey for a second and took it off. That goes all the way back to 2012 NT RPAs. On the McDavid Cup RPA it says he wore the jersey at a rookie photo shoot (when they layer like 20 jerseys on a guy and then he's done). What's the big draw for the "patch" part? And in the case of Flawless RPAs, they don't even have the "rookie" part. It's just a rookie-year card even though the patch/jersey portion is allegedly from actual games.

So my take, and I'm sure I'm in the minority on this, is that any real long-term value growth isn't going to be found in a card that isn't an actual rookie card, it isn't going to be found in a card that has a random swatch of material that a player put on for 10 seconds at a photo shoot, it's going to be found in true rookie cards where hobby turds can't replace a patch with a better one, a player's mom can't sign his name, and the rarer the better.

Which pretty much puts Flawless diamond /20 cards as the rarest, most consistently produced true rookie card available over the last 10 years.

In a hobby where people like to claim they own this or that, imagine saying you are one of 20 people on earth with X player's rarest true rookie card.

You are literally preaching to the choir here.

I spent about a year trying to convince people in the Mahomes thread that the Base Diamond card is the real rookie, but the mob has spoken: the RPA is the card to have.

I liken it to the LeBron Limited Logos from 2003 Exquisite. Not a rookie card, but outsells probably every non-RPA base rookie.

Plus, I hate to say it.... which card do you think would win a poll of what looks 'cooler' between these two?"

Will that change one day? Maybe. Maybe not

[BigSeph]

Originally Posted by tjforce

You are literally preaching to the choir here.

I spent about a year trying to convince people in the Mahomes thread that the Base Diamond card is the real rookie, but the mob has spoken: the RPA is the card to have.

I liken it to the LeBron Limited Logos from 2003 Exquisite. Not a rookie card, but outsells probably every non-RPA base rookie.

Plus, I hate to say it.... which card do you think would win a poll of what looks 'cooler' between these two?"

Will that change one day? Maybe. Maybe not

I think if Mahomes had a diamond card that looked like this-

https://www.ebay.com/itm/25599863251...Bk9SR7ih94CTYg

I would own it.

I hate that they went off script that year for the diamond cards and did a horizontal w/ auto for the top guys.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by BigSeph

I think the issue is that the Flawless "RPA" isn't an RPA at all.

If you look at Upper Deck Cup RPAs, they are actually RPAs - numbered as part of the base set.

It's a rookie patch autographed card.

The Flawless Doncic above could be called a "Rookie year patch autographed card" but isn't really a rookie card.

It's card# SP-LDC. Whereas a Connor McDavid Cup RPA is numbered 197 on the base set. A Flawless diamond Luka Doncic from 2018 is numbered 81 in the base set. There are 99 McDavid Cup RPAs in the world not counting parallels. There are 20 Luka Flawless RCs in the world not counting parallels.

I can see a day in the future when much of the "RPA" hype dies down (especially when it's a rookie-year patch auto, not an actual rookie card) and people start looking at rarity and not what's "cool." I mean look at what Panini is putting on the back of LaMelo Ball NT RPAs now-

"The enclosed officially licensed material is not associated with any specific player, game, or event."

It can literally just be a piece of an official NBA jersey where they cut out the name or number for a nice patch. Doesn't even have to be worn by the player!

On the back of Zion NT RPAs at least it said "player worn" so maybe he put on the jersey for a second and took it off. That goes all the way back to 2012 NT RPAs. On the McDavid Cup RPA it says he wore the jersey at a rookie photo shoot (when they layer like 20 jerseys on a guy and then he's done). What's the big draw for the "patch" part? And in the case of Flawless RPAs, they don't even have the "rookie" part. It's just a rookie-year card even though the patch/jersey portion is allegedly from actual games.

So my take, and I'm sure I'm in the minority on this, is that any real long-term value growth isn't going to be found in a card that isn't an actual rookie card, it isn't going to be found in a card that has a random swatch of material that a player put on for 10 seconds at a photo shoot, it's going to be found in true rookie cards where hobby turds can't replace a patch with a better one, a player's mom can't sign his name, and the rarer the better.

Which pretty much puts Flawless diamond /20 cards as the rarest, most consistently produced true rookie card available over the last 10 years.

In a hobby where people like to claim they own this or that, imagine saying you are one of 20 people on earth with X player's rarest true rookie card.

BigSeph, I know you're smart, so I know you already know what I'm going to write, but here we go: RPA's are high-end cards depicting a rookie that feature their signature and a patch from a jersey they wore. Those three things have a long history of being highly valued in the sports memorabilia and collectibles spaces. Stupid manufactured diamonds do not.

Yes, the patch may only be player worn or not even worn at all. The autograph may have been signed by a spoiled athlete's mom. The rookie designation may not mean the card is a "true rookie card". But that's not how the market generally perceives and treats these cards. The problem isn't the idea of RPA's -- it's their execution.

Manufactured diamonds are just imitation diamonds. They aren't highly valued like real diamonds.

[BigSeph]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

BigSeph, I know you're smart, so I know you already know what I'm going to write, but here we go: RPA's are high-end cards depicting a rookie that feature their signature and a patch from a jersey they wore. Those three things have a long history of being highly valued in the sports memorabilia and collectibles spaces. Stupid manufactured diamonds do not.

Rookie cards predate patch cards or pack-pulled autographed cards by a century.

Yes, the patch may only be player worn or not even worn at all. The autograph may have been signed by a spoiled athlete's mom. The rookie designation may not mean the card is a "true rookie card". But that's not how the market generally perceives and treats these cards. The problem isn't the idea of RPA's -- it's their execution.

Manufactured diamonds are just imitation diamonds. They aren't highly valued like real diamonds.

Rare rookie cards are highly valued.

The reason a T206 Wagner is so expensive isn't because he was such a great player, and it certainly didn't have his signature or a piece of his jersey in the card. It's because it's rare.

There are fewer than 60 authenticated T206 Honus Wagners in existence.

There were 90 red PMG Jordans.

There are 20 2018-19 Luka Doncic Flawless RCs in existence.

There were 10 green PMG Jordans.

The shortsightedness of your post on this and other topics is that you are spiking the football 1 minute into a game and acting like you just won. There's a lot of time left to go. I bet you could have had a 1986 Fleer Jordan for a reasonable price in 1996, or a 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle for a reasonable price in 1957.

I'm not saying you are wrong today. I don't care about today. I care about tomorrow.

Even on this thread about PMGs you might want to keep in mind that a green PMG Jordan from 96-97 could be had for less than $500 in the early 2000s.

That was a lot of money, for sure, but the rarity is what drove prices through the roof.

So imagine how dumb a post on this forum would look from 2000 where a guy says "I don't care about cards with weird cartoony stuff on them, people want chromium cards like Topps Finest, that's what everybody values."

At the time he would have been right.

But 23 years later, it looks so............ dumb.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by BigSeph

Rookie cards predate patch cards or pack-pulled autographed cards by a century.



Rare rookie cards are highly valued.

The reason a T206 Wagner is so expensive isn't because he was such a great player, and it certainly didn't have his signature or a piece of his jersey in the card. It's because it's rare.

There are fewer than 60 authenticated T206 Honus Wagners in existence.

There were 90 red PMG Jordans.

There are 20 2018-19 Luka Doncic Flawless RCs in existence.

There were 10 green PMG Jordans.

The shortsightedness of your post on this and other topics is that you are spiking the football 1 minute into a game and acting like you just won. There's a lot of time left to go. I bet you could have had a 1986 Fleer Jordan for a reasonable price in 1996, or a 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle for a reasonable price in 1957.

I'm not saying you are wrong today. I don't care about today. I care about tomorrow.

Even on this thread about PMGs you might want to keep in mind that a green PMG Jordan from 96-97 could be had for less than $500 in the early 2000s.

That was a lot of money, for sure, but the rarity is what drove prices through the roof.

So imagine how dumb a post on this forum would look from 2000 where a guy says "I don't care about cards with weird cartoony stuff on them, people want chromium cards like Topps Finest, that's what everybody values."

At the time he would have been right.

But 23 years later, it looks so............ dumb.

The main point I was trying to make was RPA's feature three separate elements that have long been valued in the hobby -- manufactured diamond cards do not, aside from ones that are also rookie cards.

Honus Wagner is considered the best shortstop in MLB history. His T206 was extremely limited. Those two factors combine to make it one of the most iconic and expensive baseball cards in history.

Yes, manufactured diamond rookie cards could grow to become more popular and valuable -- I'm not discounting that possibility. I just don't see a persuasive argument for why that would happen. Just because they are limited in quantity doesn't make them particularly unique. Are they maybe undervalued? Sure. But maybe they don't particularly appeal to collectors and investors. I mean, it's not like manufactured diamond cards haven't been around for several years. Flawless had them in 2012.

[jzx1103]

I can see the folks arguing Flawless diamond RC one day blowing up having a case. In reality the hobby changes with every new wave of collectors or investors. Heck 10 years ago Topps Chrome RC were considered one of the players low end RC. Today many folks call them flagships lol. There was also a period of time in the 2000s when refractor or parallels were basically dead and everyone mainly targeted auto RC. With only 20 made, it wouldn't take much for these Flawless diamond RC to suddenly get pumped to the moon one day.

[Kobefan]

Originally Posted by jzx1103

I can see the folks arguing Flawless diamond RC one day blowing up having a case. In reality the hobby changes with every new wave of collectors or investors. Heck 10 years ago Topps Chrome RC were considered one of the players low end RC. Today many folks call them flagships lol. There was also a period of time in the 2000s when refractor or parallels were basically dead and everyone mainly targeted auto RC. With only 20 made, it wouldn't take much for these Flawless diamond RC to suddenly get pumped to the moon one day.

You're right, it's definitely a possibility. Back in 2005, I don't think anybody would have guessed that Lebron's Topps Chrome rc gold refractor would ever worth more than his Sp Authentic, Spx, or Ultimate rc auto cards.

[minnesotachill]

PMG Greens are by far, the toughest cards for player collectors to acquire.

Many of the most hardcore collectors have gone 10, 20 years and still don't have it for their PC



Now, look at Panini products and think about what the most difficult to acquire card might be for the player collectors.

The 2012 Prizm Gold clearly stands out as the toughest. They've followed the same pattern as the '97 PMGs
They were once pretty plentiful, but just over the past few years you can see the top players are getting tougher and tougher to find.

[2010GBPackers]

A few things that killed the Flawless diamond base /20 were:

1) Increasing amounts of parallels year to year. (What are we up to now, 26 parallels?)

2) The designs are awful now. Peak Flawless designs were 2012-14 - three years. Since then, they've lost their identity. The cards should be on a blank white canvas with holofoil inlays and scrolls. It's too bad, too. They had a good thing going.

I do agree with BigSteph that I'd be very weary holding a post-Exquisite RPA. I'm not sure they're actually ending up in collectors' hands, which means it's still just a game of hot potato.

[nbatopshot]

Originally Posted by minnesotachill

PMG Greens are by far, the toughest cards for player collectors to acquire.

Many of the most hardcore collectors have gone 10, 20 years and still don't have it for their PC



Now, look at Panini products and think about what the most difficult to acquire card might be for the player collectors.

The 2012 Prizm Gold clearly stands out as the toughest. They've followed the same pattern as the '97 PMGs
They were once pretty plentiful, but just over the past few years you can see the top players are getting tougher and tougher to find.

Agree

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by jzx1103

I can see the folks arguing Flawless diamond RC one day blowing up having a case. In reality the hobby changes with every new wave of collectors or investors. Heck 10 years ago Topps Chrome RC were considered one of the players low end RC. Today many folks call them flagships lol. There was also a period of time in the 2000s when refractor or parallels were basically dead and everyone mainly targeted auto RC. With only 20 made, it wouldn't take much for these Flawless diamond RC to suddenly get pumped to the moon one day.

Refractors have been a staple of the hobby since the 90s. They have a long lineage and good brand recognition and awareness.

Flawless diamond RCs are niche and not widely known. That's why they're being compared to PMGs. But the difference is 90s PMGs were undervalued when they were released due to getting lost in the mix of all the other card brands. They also had quirky designs that were meant to appeal specifically to kids. Flawless diamond cards have been produced for over a decade in the era of Panini's exclusive licensing. They are designed and intended to be high end cards.

[Kobefan]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

Refractors have been a staple of the hobby since the 90s. They have a long lineage and good brand recognition and awareness.

Base rookie cards were staples in the 80s and earlier as well. Refractors were hugely popular in the 90s, but had faded away in popularity in the 2000s and weren't considered staples or iconic in the 2000s. I'm not sure there were much recognition in refractors at the time, collectors were much more focused on auto and auto game used cards, that's why Topps were playing second fiddle to Upper Deck. It's popularity was revived in the early to mid 2010s.

[dengbang]

Gold > Diamond
Golds Ref/Prizms will always be the prized RC. Diamonds in general are a sham, I don't know anyone who thinks that adding a diamond to a card would make it more valuable.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by Kobefan

Base rookie cards were staples in the 80s and earlier as well. Refractors were hugely popular in the 90s, but had faded away in popularity in the 2000s and weren't considered staples or iconic in the 2000s. I'm not sure there were much recognition in refractors at the time, collectors were much more focused on auto and auto game used cards, that's why Topps were playing second fiddle to Upper Deck. It's popularity was revived in the early to mid 2010s.

80s rookie cards were just a handful of base cards a year. Nowadays you have so many rookie cards that manufactured diamond cards are purported to be "true" rookie cards. The simplicity and uniqueness of rookie cards have long been lost. So what would really make diamond cards stand out are the designs, which have yet to grab hold in the market.

Refractor cards may have lost popularity for a period of time due to the rise of autograph and game used cards. But they continued to be produced year-after-year by Topps. The tradition was maintained. I am able to buy gold refractor parallels from any year since 2001. I have several refractor parallels from the 2000s that I love.

[BigSeph]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

Refractors have been a staple of the hobby since the 90s. They have a long lineage and good brand recognition and awareness.

Serial #d cards have been around longer than refractors. Are Flawless diamond cards serial #d?

Flawless diamond RCs are niche and not widely known. That's why they're being compared to PMGs. But the difference is 90s PMGs were undervalued when they were released due to getting lost in the mix of all the other card brands. They also had quirky designs that were meant to appeal specifically to kids.

I just don't get this steamrolling of basic logic.

Everybody knows Flawless diamond cards are encased and part of the featured card "hits" in a case of Flawless - no matter the sport. How are they not widely known? They have Flawless diamond basketball, baseball, football, hockey, soccer, etc cards. It's present across every sport where there's been a Flawless release.

Flawless diamond cards have been produced for over a decade in the era of Panini's exclusive licensing. They are designed and intended to be high end cards.

And also - rare.

Let 25 rich guys fight it out over a player's Flawless /20 rookie card, and see what happens to the price.

[BigSeph]

Originally Posted by dengbang

Gold > Diamond
Golds Ref/Prizms will always be the prized RC. Diamonds in general are a sham, I don't know anyone who thinks that adding a diamond to a card would make it more valuable.

Get out and meet some people.

[BigSeph]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

80s rookie cards were just a handful of base cards a year. Nowadays you have so many rookie cards that manufactured diamond cards are purported to be "true" rookie cards. The simplicity and uniqueness of rookie cards have long been lost. So what would really make diamond cards stand out are the designs, which have yet to grab hold in the market.

Refractor cards may have lost popularity for a period of time due to the rise of autograph and game used cards. But they continued to be produced year-after-year by Topps. The tradition was maintained. I am able to buy gold refractor parallels from any year since 2001. I have several refractor parallels from the 2000s that I love.

Uhh........ do you think Flawless will start releasing without diamond cards?

The very mechanism by which you claim refractors reclaimed lost esteem (consistent production in new releases) is literally the same thing as Flawless continuing to contain diamond cards.

Honestly I hope people like you and others continue to downplay the appeal of Flawless diamond /20 RCs. I can continue to accumulate a player's rarest true rookie card at a fraction of the price of "RPAs" that aren't rookie cards, contain a patch "not from a particular team, player, or event" and might have their mom's autograph.

Keep sheeping!

[dengbang]

Originally Posted by BigSeph

Get out and meet some people.

Figured that would be your reply. Keep on pumping them diamonds lol

[drobfan8]

Originally Posted by dengbang

Gold > Diamond
Golds Ref/Prizms will always be the prized RC. Diamonds in general are a sham, I don't know anyone who thinks that adding a diamond to a card would make it more valuable.

Pretty simplistic view.

I own 0 Flawless Rookies. But it's pretty clear that the diamond is about adding to the aesthetic appeal of the card. Scarcity is what makes it valuable.

Like it or not, the Flawless Base Diamond RC is a chase card. And will only go up in value for the key guys.

[dengbang]

Originally Posted by drobfan8

Pretty simplistic view.



I own 0 Flawless Rookies. But it's pretty clear that the diamond is about adding to the aesthetic appeal of the card. Scarcity is what makes it valuable.



Like it or not, the Flawless Base Diamond RC is a chase card. And will only go up in value for the key guys.

Cards are simple if you are a collector.

Eye appeal, player selection, and nostalgia makes up for the majority of decision making when it comes to collecting cardboard.



Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk

[BigSeph]

Originally Posted by dengbang

Figured that would be your reply. Keep on pumping them diamonds lol

Not pumping - I can buy more if they stay cheap.

Figured that would be your reply too. If anybody dares think outside the box or look for undervalued/underappreciated assets, the people who are most bothered are the folks buying status quo because "it's cool" or "that's what everybody else wants."