1984 STAR Jordan

[Dereth]

Originally Posted by 4barrel

I’m fully expecting dude to show up in the Jordan autograph thread to scold us all for talking about those cards instead of the Star 101. Lmao

It's borderline creepy, and he's not the only Star 101 shill that acts like that.

[Gary]

Originally Posted by Dereth

It's borderline creepy, and he's not the only Star 101 shill that acts like that.

Shilling probably isn't the reason.....the Star stuff (all of it) needs no shilling it far out paces everything else in dollar value....imo his problem is the RC/XRC issue and he's not alone a lot of collectors feel that way.....though not nearly as vocal as he is about it.The RC debate isn't just XRC look at today's cards...anything released in the RC year now is considered a RC..years ago it was the first release of a players card in a pro uniform.......so all those subset RC's and insert Rc's along with series 2 RC"s of today would never been called a RC decades ago....

Everyone has an opinion probably based on what the standard was when they first started in the hobby.....but over the years things evolve/change.....some collectors dont.the ones that dont just struggle with change......one thing that hasn't changed since the inception of the monthly beckett is the RC/XRC standards and while i disagree with the hobby on it i can do so without trying to shove my opinion down everyone's throat.....sometimes people just cant "let it go"

[ninjacookies]

Hellkeezy whenever there's a new #101 or TB Champ Ticket mention on vbulletin servers.

[Jeter1020]

As someone who has no figure in this fight I see it like this. MJ has 5 rookie cards you can choose from based off what you want and can afford

1986 Fleer #57
1986 Fleer Sticker #8
1984 Star #101
1984 Star #288
1984 Star #195


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Jeter1020

As someone who has no figure in this fight I see it like this. MJ has 5 rookie cards you can choose from based off what you want and can afford

1986 Fleer #57
1986 Fleer Sticker #8
1985 Star #101
1985 Star #288
1985 Star #195


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fixed. You are clearly putting yourself in the middle of the fight by misstating the year of the Star cards.

[Dereth]

Originally Posted by Gary

Shilling probably isn't the reason.....the Star stuff (all of it) needs no shilling it far out paces everything else in dollar value....imo his problem is the RC/XRC issue and he's not alone a lot of collectors feel that way.....though not nearly as vocal as he is about it.The RC debate isn't just XRC look at today's cards...anything released in the RC year now is considered a RC..years ago it was the first release of a players card in a pro uniform.......so all those subset RC's and insert Rc's along with series 2 RC"s of today would never been called a RC decades ago....

Everyone has an opinion probably based on what the standard was when they first started in the hobby.....but over the years things evolve/change.....some collectors dont.the ones that dont just struggle with change......one thing that hasn't changed since the inception of the monthly beckett is the RC/XRC standards and while i disagree with the hobby on it i can do so without trying to shove my opinion down everyone's throat.....sometimes people just cant "let it go"

I think that it's really weird in baseball how "rookie cards" have gone from the players first card to the first card after the player makes their ML debut. As someone that collected in the 90's and then left the hobby for a long time, it's bizarre that people care what MLB decided that that definition of a rookie card is.

With that said, if that's what the hobby has decided on, then so be it. What I have a problem with is when people try to retroactively change this stuff for cards that have been established for decades. A 1986 Fleer Michael Jordan is a rookie card, period. So is a 1985 Topps Mark McGwire and a 1951 Bowman Mickey Mantle. There is nothing about the XRC designation that makes the Star 101 any less of a card.

[JP333]

Originally Posted by Jeter1020

As someone who has no figure in this fight I see it like this. MJ has 5 rookie cards you can choose from based off what you want and can afford

1986 Fleer #57
1986 Fleer Sticker #8
1984 Star #101
1984 Star #288
1984 Star #195


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wouod argue that you need to add the 1985 interlake and Spanish merchante to the list. Prizm sticker also is 1985 (even tho I don’t like it)

[Gary]

Originally Posted by JP333

Wouod argue that you need to add the 1985 interlake and Spanish merchante to the list. Prizm sticker also is 1985 (even tho I don’t like it)

If you go by the year then every lic Star Co Jordan card is an XRC every one was printed before the fleer 57 card......(assuming you think of the 57 as the RC).this is part of the problem imo.....things get really grey when things are not just black and white.....most of this is just semantics as it really doesn't matter to most collectors....no XRC has suffered from that X....in fact most are more valuable.personally as long as there is consistency to it to me its a moot point...not once have i bought a pack,box,set,card thinking ewwww its an XRC.

[Archangel1775]

Originally Posted by Gary

If you go by the year then every lic Star Co Jordan card is an XRC every one was printed before the fleer 57 card......(assuming you think of the 57 as the RC).this is part of the problem imo.....things get really grey when things are not just black and white.....most of this is just semantics as it really doesn't matter to most collectors....no XRC has suffered from that X....in fact most are more valuable.personally as long as there is consistency to it to me its a moot point...not once have i bought a pack,box,set,card thinking ewwww its an XRC.

Wait, you mean there is a hobby standard so that it all makes sense? Maybe a standard that brings order to chaos? The RC/XRC has been the standard for roughly 40 years now? Once could call that consistent.

[Archangel1775]

Originally Posted by Dereth

I think that it's really weird in baseball how "rookie cards" have gone from the players first card to the first card after the player makes their ML debut. As someone that collected in the 90's and then left the hobby for a long time, it's bizarre that people care what MLB decided that that definition of a rookie card is.

With that said, if that's what the hobby has decided on, then so be it. What I have a problem with is when people try to retroactively change this stuff for cards that have been established for decades. A 1986 Fleer Michael Jordan is a rookie card, period. So is a 1985 Topps Mark McGwire and a 1951 Bowman Mickey Mantle. There is nothing about the XRC designation that makes the Star 101 any less of a card.

This is actually a great question. The problem was every manufacturer attempting to get the upper hand. Between, high series, late addition traded sets to "final update" sets it was highly competitive to get that first card out in a pro uniform. Topps was usually ahead of the game going back to 1981.In the early 2000's, it was all about who can get the auto "rookie" card with Topps leading the pack with their Bowman Chrome Autos, then Upper Deck and their USA boxed set in 2002. Then Donruss and Fleer with their Prospect Autos. Who really wanted a "Rookie Card" where the only designation would be stuck with a random set many years before they stepped foot in the majors? It was getting out of hand so in 2005 the MLB and MLBPA decided how to bring order to the chaos and now it all makes sense.

[Gary]

Originally Posted by Archangel1775

Wait, you mean there is a hobby standard so that it all makes sense? Maybe a standard that brings order to chaos? The RC/XRC has been the standard for roughly 40 years now? Once could call that consistent.

Exactly what i said......thanks for agreeing.

[duron]

Death, taxes, and hellcat

[2010GBPackers]

Originally Posted by Gary

All bags in the reg set were planned 5k print run.....some bags had printing/cutting issues the 84/85 bulls team bag had minor problems "short cut" but 3k ive never heard and the short cuts were released (or some were at least)short 101's have been well known for years.
.where did you hear 3k?.......post the source id love to read it.....the little things about Star interest me.

Most of the problems center around the 83/84 reg set the celtics,bucks,sixers,lakers,mavs team bags all have known problems with cutting....the mavs bag is est only 500 team bags were released.there were a few bags printed over the 5k....83 all star was 15k last i heard...the 84 bird 10k.....

Originally Posted by Archangel1775

He is making it up, trust & believe. There is no source.

Good call.




Chicago Bulls were in Series 2, and all sets were released in 1985. For the Jordan 101 specifically, the photo was taken in a Dec. 14th game vs. the Nets, so clearly released in 1985, though most sets that are released during a player's rookie year would be considered valid for a rookie designation. In this case, it was Jordan's rookie year - 1984-85.

[Gary]

You have any other ads you can post.....these little things interest me....thanks for posting.

[2010GBPackers]

No, not that specifically cites their stated print runs. If you go off population reports from BGS and PSA and apply any coherent approximation on crossovers and regrades, there is no mathematically logical way the print run was way over 3,000.

As far as the XRC designation, basketball cards were such a terrible sell for Topps (who willingly gave up their license) that the only way any manufacturer could make it worth their while was to sell them in the "team bag" format. The guy who founded Star literally walked into the NBA offices and bought the license for $10k; that's how terrible of a product it was for Topps. If not for Star, we would not have a Jordan rookie.

[Gary]

Originally Posted by 2010GBPackers

No, not that specifically cites their stated print runs. If you go off population reports from BGS and PSA and apply any coherent approximation on crossovers and regrades, there is no mathematically logical way the print run was way over 3,000.

As far as the XRC designation, basketball cards were such a terrible sell for Topps (who willingly gave up their license) that the only way any manufacturer could make it worth their while was to sell them in the "team bag" format. The guy who founded Star literally walked into the NBA offices and bought the license for $10k; that's how terrible of a product it was for Topps. If not for Star, we would not have a Jordan rookie.

doesn't have to be about print runs......anything from star is of interest.it wasn't just topps....it was fleer to.basketball cards were nearly worthless until the beckett came out.like 1989 or so... basketball itself wasn't popular until the early 80's.the magic/bird effect.......nba games were on tape delay even....but thats another topic.the "guy" was bob levin (star owner)

[Gary]

Originally Posted by 2010GBPackers

Good call.




Chicago Bulls were in Series 2, and all sets were released in 1985. For the Jordan 101 specifically, the photo was taken in a Dec. 14th game vs. the Nets, so clearly released in 1985, though most sets that are released during a player's rookie year would be considered valid for a rookie designation. In this case, it was Jordan's rookie year - 1984-85.

Just enlarged this....it must have been a early ad....as only series 1 was available.....the reg set says 295-300 cards it ended up 288......plus the other 85 subsets sets not listed with the team supers,lite,gat,cm last 11 bags

be nice to see an ad for those also....someone must have one they can post....
,

[Archangel1775]

Originally Posted by 2010GBPackers

Good call.




Chicago Bulls were in Series 2, and all sets were released in 1985. For the Jordan 101 specifically, the photo was taken in a Dec. 14th game vs. the Nets, so clearly released in 1985, though most sets that are released during a player's rookie year would be considered valid for a rookie designation. In this case, it was Jordan's rookie year - 1984-85.

Very well, I'm glad you got his back. Someone has to for the loudest and most obnoxious in the room. I am seemingly incorrect. What is that ad from? A newspaper, magazine, random handout?

Now that a "source" document has randomly appeared after 40 years, I'm curious to know how many are currently at auction. The usual source was Steve Taft and he's done numerous interviews on the subject.

[Gary]

It appears to be a pre order sheet for the master dealers.....my only question at this point is it is clearly an early on sheet given the est 295-300 cards statement.....it ended up at 288.......so the 3k statement.....did it end up 3.5k,4k or dd it remain 3k?i heard 4k so many times i took it as truth.....not sure anyone will ever know for sure but it sure is nice to see anything interesting on Star....but given this sheet id be ok with 3-4k as close enough to true.

[4barrel]

This is similar to the Upper Deck Authentic mail order products?

[2010GBPackers]

Originally Posted by Gary

It appears to be a pre order sheet for the master dealers.....my only question at this point is it is clearly an early on sheet given the est 295-300 cards statement.....it ended up at 288.......so the 3k statement.....did it end up 3.5k,4k or dd it remain 3k?i heard 4k so many times i took it as truth.....not sure anyone will ever know for sure but it sure is nice to see anything interesting on Star....but given this sheet id be ok with 3-4k as close enough to true.

That's correct. Again, there's no verifiable reason the print run was any higher than 3k. In fact, no one has to believe that sale sheet is real; however, you'd have to explain away these numbers:

Beckett's total population is currently 1,262 (which includes many regrades), and based on their records, they've been grading them for 17 years (2009).

PSA has been grading them for about 4 years now, and the total PSA pop is 568, with most likely 95% of the PSA pop coming from BGS cases.

While 3k were probably printed, I'm guesstimating there are fewer than 2k worldwide.

As far as the date on the flip, PSA grades them as 1984 Star (early flips say 1985 Star), which is consistent with historical precedent in the hobby. For example, 2012 Prizm Football was released in Jan. of 2013, but it's still identified as 2012 Prizm. There are thousands of other examples of this.

BGS identifies them as 1984-85 Star, which is fine, but PSA has never done that, even though the basketball and hockey seasons overlap into the next year.

[ReggieBush22]

Originally Posted by JP333

Wouod argue that you need to add the 1985 interlake and Spanish merchante to the list. Prizm sticker also is 1985 (even tho I don’t like it)

Yup.

The Interlake has an amazing photo of MJ. Tongue out, action pose wearing the original Js. But the 5x7 size definitely hurts it. It's super rare. Just never caught on like I think it should. I would guess if it was a normal sized card, the value would be higher.

But on the flip side, the 5x7 of Star MJs are very expensive, especially the Court Kings.

[JWBlue]

I had no idea about this...

Grading Bans: Due to the difficulty of distinguishing original cards from these "Type II" counterfeits and "Shop at Home" reprints, major grading companies like PSA stopped authenticating Star cards for decades.

Are the Type II reprints distinguishable for the original?


Has an unopened bag ever surfaced?

[bigdog2003]

Originally Posted by JWBlue

I had no idea about this...



Are the Type II reprints distinguishable for the original?


Has an unopened bag ever surfaced?

I saw an unopened bag in a National video a year or two ago

[CommomSensei88]

Originally Posted by Hellcat

Not his rookie man no matter how many times you say it MJ has one rookie the 101. I sure hope you don't tell people you have a Jordan rookie!

How can the star 101 be a main rookie when it was only in team bags purchased in back of magazines or in team only specific to one's city they lived at in those card shops sitting next to the minor league baseball cards that resembled each other, no one at the time took them seriously and they were not in retail packs for everyone to know about them. If you lived in New York or Texas, you probably never seen a Chicago team bag set plus how many really knew where or how to order them, most kids had no idea about those star cards. I understand the rarity of them being worth more. Since the 1986 fleer release mostly everyone had thought of that set as the main rookie cards because of availability and in retail packs.