- Thread starter
- #1
ArtVandelay
New member
- Jul 6, 2010
- 468
- 0
So effectively the purple refractors have slowly replaced xfractors (and this is specifically referring to Bowman releases). I personally hate the purple refractors. There is just something that detracts about owning a purple baseball card. I remember reading all the bitching about xfactors, but now that purple has crept from being retail only, to serial numbered, and now slowly evolved past regular refractors (in terms of print run) in this years 2011 Bowman release, what are your thoughts?
The only downside I could find with xfractors was the naming convention. This was a total sub set to search for on ebay (goes both ways for searching, and getting searched for increased sales/bids). If the terminology was something refractor related, the ref* search would yield all color versions. Should you search/list as X-fractor with a dash, xfractor without the dash, or try to use X with REF refractor?
In terms of value, I think the new changes have have given Topps the opportunity to capitalize on quantity and thus have diluted cards across the board.
2008: Super/1, Red/5, Orange/25, Gold/50, Blue/150 or 99, Xfractor/199 or 250, Refractor/500 or 599
2011: Super/1, Red/5, Orange/25, Gold/50, [thin out here] Blue/250, [now insert huge gap here & replace with larger quantity of small value inserts] Purple/700, Refractor/799
In a worst case scenario (using 150 blue, 250 on X, and 599 on Refractor), there are 1,080 refractor versions per player in 2008.
2011 is 1,830, a 69% increase in refractors, which is all coming from the low end of the spectrum. Quantity is not quality. It is becoming less exciting and financially taxing to open boxes of cards to walk away with a few purple refractors to go along with a base auto.
I tracked a few Harper refractor sales, and in some cases the ref/799 sold for higher than the purple/700. Does that support the idea they are less desirable even though they are technically more scarce?
Will Topps bring in green refractors to complete the rainbow next? Or will they begin to push the envelope on gold numbering...
[youtube:3nzx1fq3]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07pLGIgyfjw[/youtube:3nzx1fq3]
The only downside I could find with xfractors was the naming convention. This was a total sub set to search for on ebay (goes both ways for searching, and getting searched for increased sales/bids). If the terminology was something refractor related, the ref* search would yield all color versions. Should you search/list as X-fractor with a dash, xfractor without the dash, or try to use X with REF refractor?
In terms of value, I think the new changes have have given Topps the opportunity to capitalize on quantity and thus have diluted cards across the board.
2008: Super/1, Red/5, Orange/25, Gold/50, Blue/150 or 99, Xfractor/199 or 250, Refractor/500 or 599
2011: Super/1, Red/5, Orange/25, Gold/50, [thin out here] Blue/250, [now insert huge gap here & replace with larger quantity of small value inserts] Purple/700, Refractor/799
In a worst case scenario (using 150 blue, 250 on X, and 599 on Refractor), there are 1,080 refractor versions per player in 2008.
2011 is 1,830, a 69% increase in refractors, which is all coming from the low end of the spectrum. Quantity is not quality. It is becoming less exciting and financially taxing to open boxes of cards to walk away with a few purple refractors to go along with a base auto.
I tracked a few Harper refractor sales, and in some cases the ref/799 sold for higher than the purple/700. Does that support the idea they are less desirable even though they are technically more scarce?
Will Topps bring in green refractors to complete the rainbow next? Or will they begin to push the envelope on gold numbering...
[youtube:3nzx1fq3]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07pLGIgyfjw[/youtube:3nzx1fq3]
