[nomis23mj]

I've been collecting cards for a while now, and I've always used the Beckett to get an idea for the value on my cards. However, I've never really understood one thing.

For some cards, they are serial #d to less than what's listed. Rather than listing every possible numbering for every possible card, they just list at the top that certain cards are ".4x to 1x" or ".8x to 2x" base value. What exactly does that mean? A lot of times it's said 2x base value, and I've always took that as double the value. So a $10 listed card, that is #d lower than what's listed, so the Beckett says 2x, would be $20. But then what do you do for something that is .5x or so? Surely if a card is #d / 500 and $10, the same card #d to 350 can't be $5?

Any help or input on this would be really appreciated. Thanks.

[mackalack]

i honestly havent used a paperback beckett in prob 10 years..opg will give you the best value

[branesergen]

your assumption is correct or atleast its what ive always thought. Your numbering question on how can a lowered numbered card be valued less is often seen in the Magic set I am building. The autos are various numbers so I'll pick Chad Ochocinco for arguements sake. His base auto is numbered to 50 where his Chrome is numbered to 10. His 50 card is more valuable because it is more sought after. More people collect base sets than insert sets. The /10 is not as sought after. I run into this constantly because people dont understand market drives the value. Just because Chads /50 books for $50 doesnt mean his Chrome version is worth 4x base its instead worth .5x base because there are 100 people trying to build the base set and only 5 who want the parallel. Hope this helps.

[OTBulldogs]

I've been collecting cards for a while now, and I've always used the Beckett to get an idea for the value on my cards. However, I've never really understood one thing.

For some cards, they are serial #d to less than what's listed. Rather than listing every possible numbering for every possible card, they just list at the top that certain cards are ".4x to 1x" or ".8x to 2x" base value. What exactly does that mean? A lot of times it's said 2x base value, and I've always took that as double the value. So a $10 listed card, that is #d lower than what's listed, so the Beckett says 2x, would be $20. But then what do you do for something that is .5x or so? Surely if a card is #d / 500 and $10, the same card #d to 350 can't be $5?

Any help or input on this would be really appreciated. Thanks.

The price guide gives a range for the base card with a low and high value. It then gives a multiplier range for any variations, such as serial #'d cards. In order to find the range of the serial #'d card, you just multiply the original HI value by the multiplier range. For example, if a base card was worth between 5 and 20 dollars and the multiplier range for the #'d card was 0.5x to 2x, then then #'d card would be worth between 10 and 40 dollars. Does that help?

[StylinDylan7]

And I believe we have a winner in OTbuilding

Bran heres a question. How could you ever think a card serial numbered to say like /5 be worth less then say one outta /99. Yes mor people may work on that set simply because theres more copies but alot of the value is in the scarcity factor. if you only have 5 copies in the world it means only 5 people can have it. Means extremely scarce and hard to find. Which means people will pay alot more for it. Js. By your logic a 1/1 would be worthless js. Not trying to be mean but come on, its logical

[c squared]

And I believe we have a winner in OTbuilding

Bran heres a question. How could you ever think a card serial numbered to say like /5 be worth less then say one outta /99. Yes mor people may work on that set simply because theres more copies but alot of the value is in the scarcity factor. if you only have 5 copies in the world it means only 5 people can have it. Means extremely scarce and hard to find. Which means people will pay alot more for it. Js. By your logic a 1/1 would be worthless js. Not trying to be mean but come on, its logical

I bolded what you have wrong. No, people will not pay a lot more for something they do not want. Set builders don't typically plunk parallels into their sets and the actual real-world market reflects this. I keep tabs on the 2000 Autographics and Sign of the Times sets and the only parallels that outsell the base versions are highly-collected players (Brady, Emmitt, etc)... parallels of common players do not typically sell at a premium over the base version, despite their scarcity. I have purchased several extremely low-numbered parallels for less than their base set counterparts because nobody is building the hard-to-find parallel sets.

Icing on the cake (with 20 years of precedent) - there are scores of low-numbered parallels to base rookie cards that sell for less than their higher-numbered true rookie counterparts. While hot players like Brady break this rule, by and large, collectors want true rookies, not non-base, non-rookie parallels. The same goes for set builders.

[StylinDylan7]

No no I dont agree with that one bit. I have paid more for every lower numbered parallel then higher numbered. And the same for what I have sold. Not too mention the lower numbered parallels book higher on here then the higher numbered ones.

By that definition why would anyone ever want to pull an insert or a sp, an auto or a 1/1. Since the commons would obviously be the most valuable cards in the box. No scarcity plays a key role in making these more valuable. The more common the less scarcity the less value

[c squared]

No no I dont agree with that one bit. I have paid more for every lower numbered parallel then higher numbered. And the same for what I have sold. Not too mention the lower numbered parallels book higher on here then the higher numbered ones.

By that definition why would anyone ever want to pull an insert or a sp, an auto or a 1/1. Since the commons would obviously be the most valuable cards in the box. No scarcity plays a key role in making these more valuable. The more common the less scarcity the less value

Nobody is saying a 2017 Score Tom Brady base card outsells an autographed 1/1 parallel - you are refuting a point nobody is making.

There are literally thousands of circa-2000 rookie cards with scarcer parallels that book and sell for less. The True RC moniker has existed longer than the concept of parallel cards because true base rookies carry an inherent value boost.

[StylinDylan7]

Ok ill do you a favor. Ill trade one base card for one rarer card. Since the base are so much more valuable and ill even sweeten the pot and make them early 90s cards

[djohn]

Ok ill do you a favor. Ill trade one base card for one rarer card. Since the base are so much more valuable and ill even sweeten the pot and make them early 90s cards

I think you are missing his point. He wasn't saying ALL cards are this way, just that in some cases the value isn't completely related to the print run. Here is an example:
2000 Private Stock rookies are numbered out of 278, but the gold parallels are numbered out of 181. Yet the book value for the gold parallel is half of the book value for the base. Even the Premiere Date parallel which is numbered to 95 books for less than the base card.
I agree that this doesn't seem logical, but that's what Beckett has dictated in their price guides, and the reason that the original post was asking about 0.5x multipliers for cards which shorter print runs. It's also one reason why I don't always agree with Beckett's pricing on some cards.