[s1020]

"There is no rule or law that states a player must be on a licensed product for it to be considered a rookie." The quoted sentence above is absolutely false. The market and consumer decide what they buy, true, but they are not the group that determines a RC card from a first year card. There are absolute facts in terms of what a RC card is and is not to think otherwise flys in the face of the foundation of this hobby. The definition of what is a Rookie Card was made by the almighty BECKETT. They determine what is and is not a rookie and since UD lost their license, they do not list Upper Deck products as Rookies any longer. As far as the value of the Michael Jordans currently, the Star company Michael Jordan from 85-86 Gem Mint graded 9.5 can be bought for $695. I would love to buy a Gem Mint graded 9.5 BGS 1986-87 Fleer Jordan RC for $695. By the way, age has little to do with being correct, but for the record, I too remember Classic (not rookies) and have been collecting 10 years longer then you.

Gem mint Jordan Star RCs cannot be bought for $695. There were several Jordan cards in 1984-85 Star that can be bought for that price but the one that is considered the RC sells in the thousands. Look it up on Ebay, I just did. And as far as BECKETT goes, all they do is track sells of cards and make their "Price Guide" based on those figures. They list players that are getting hot or cold, list big pulls and do product reviews but they have no authority to decide what is and is not considered a rookie. Period, if not they could sue UD for putting "Rookie" on any of their products that have players in college jerseys because Beckett says that they are not rookies. Its all up to personal opinions. And maybe I did get a little carried away with the classics comments, they were "prospects" and or "draft class" they never said rookie on the card.