Any statement made in this forum is of the posters opinion, as for the word Vintage, it is defined as "representing the high quality of a past time".
Additionally, a 1920's collector may scoff at the term vintage used for a 1960's collector etc..., so how do we satisfy the masses.
In my opinion, anything prior and up to 1989-90 is a significant time to put the word vintage. At this point in time we have a minamum of 18 years gone by, which is the age that most officially turn into men. (funny thing is, I am 44 and still don't know what I want to do when I grow up...hehe)
Just "A" suggestion which is similar to the comic classification in this order of their respective vintages.
1910 to 1950 - Bronze Vintage
1951 to 1971 - Silver Vintage
1972 to 1989 - Gold Vintage
1990 to present - Platium Vintage
Each of these era's are significant in thier own right, I feel most of the forum is within the Silver age (not necessarily related to turning grey haired... but close).
The second maybe tied between the Bronze and Gold era's.
Lastly the Platium is possibly the lease collected era that visit this forum, however that is not to say that some of the other era collectors' don't collect new cards, many do so for autographs and such, so lets face it, it is still hockey, something we will always have a love for.
Any opinions are more than welcome.
Here is a VINTAGE photo of me and my brother in 1973...
This message has been edited by BobbyBHockey on Aug 23, 2008 11:52 AM This message has been edited by BobbyBHockey on Aug 23, 2008 11:47 AM
I sometimes feel guilty about my 70's opc posts because they are so far removed from Paulins and the like, but I proceed because I think most people are receptive, so I like your concept of clarifying eras.
Not to crazy about colour/metals as symbols of eras- How about trying to find a player from each era that represents it? Sort of like the NHL awards concept. We could have a online poll for each era.
As for years, I would dispute just one of your eras. 1968 expansion and the revival of the opc brand is in my opinion the start of a new era.
Although I might agree about the medals as classification however it would be too difficult to use a player who span throughout each era presented.
The 1968 expansion is a definate significant turn in NHL history but the revival of the OPC brand is not to me. OPC had been making the cards, packs and wrappers since at least 1958 as I have talked to with an old-timer OPC employee and he remembers going to the printers and picking up the cards and boxes/wrapper as early as I have stated.
Actually this gentleman from OPC was the very man who picked up the 1954-55 Topps product in a large truck from the train station which was shipped up from Topps NY, but everything was packaged and distributed here in Canada.
So OPC has been making the card since that time but only under the Topps licience. 1968 being significant as it was, Topps actually had the Test issue prior to that in 1966-67. Even in the 68' split of the two brands, topps still owned the licencing.
Realistically, the split between the years should be from 1951 to 1963-64 especially with the league split between Parkhurst teams and Topps teams.
In 1964-65 all 6 teams we back together in one set finally. And the tallboys were a great new start with those wonderfully large colourful cards.
i think this forum as a whole will prosper and gain more opinions from more hockey collectors if the span of the vintage forum is from 1910 to 1989-90.
why---well this was the age of simplicity,wax packs,a few food premiums and just an insert once in awhile in a true WAX pack.
we all know after 1990 all kinds of company's came into the hobby and it become more of which company can make the most money,also just to many products and inserts just does not make it simple enough for new collectors to stay in the hobby since 1990.
my vote for vintage topics would be to hear and see threads on this forum about 1910-1989 products as this was the golden age of simplicity and buying the cards for the joy of the hobby!!!
I don't have a problem with the definition of vintage as pre-1990. In fact, I collect up to 1990 nowadays. However, let me ask this-in 30 years, is a Proset 1991 card going to count as "vintage?" Say it aint so!! My bias is that 1990 cards-forward should not be treated. in the same manner as pre-1990 cards. Obviously, they will be "old" cards, but "vintage"?
What do you folks think? Will we need some phrase to distinguish pre-1990 cards from (per Charlton) "the boom years" cards?
I was a small time card dealer during 1989-93, even though I was a teenager and had little more than Lindros, Modano, and Bure rookies as inventory. Anyone who put cards on the table could clean up in those days...
And those Ken Dryden rookies were only 18 years old in 1989, and were just as out of reach as they are today for the average collector.
Last month I bought a 18 year old Martin Brodeur lot of ten score rookies for $10, and ungraded I'm sure many of you wouldn't think I got a deal.
That wave of 1990's cards that rode the crest of that improbable card boom will never be rare, but I gaurantee you in due time there will be more nostalgia for 1990-91 Upper Deck and Score than you might expect.
We are always fond of tangible cards that link us with our past selves, and for a legion of us, the cards from the "post-vintage" boom will become that collectible reminder. Thank goodness it won't cost as much to possess.
As it is convenient that 1989-90 is the 18 year cut off point, the sports card boom start basically then, so anything after that was certainly mass produced. 1989-90 should be the last for the vintage year classification, even 50 years down the road, there will still be more supply than demand.
The sports card companies bragged that they were running their presses 24/7 and people thought they were doing good, but they printed themselves out of business...can't blame them, I blame the League for letting licensing go that far.
I still like to collect hockey cards from the Bronze age but more-so from the Silver age...(is it catching on?)
For reasons mentioned above by donald, to me the vintage era of hockey cards is anything produced from 1910-11 to 1989-90. I agree that I'd have a hard time considering a Brian Leetch '89-'90 RC a vintage card, but it was still produced in the vintage era of hockey card production, as far as I'm concerned. For your reference, I'm 28 and I started collecting cards with the 1987-87 OPC set (only a few packs though - I was more into stickers). I can see a difference between the categorization of the era in which a card was produced and the card itself though. For instance, I can't explain why, but in my mind, a vintage card is a card that can't be more recent than the 1978-79 set. Maybe it's because I was born in 1980? I don't know... But even though I wouldn't consider a Grant Fuhr '82-83' RC a vintage card, I would recognize that this card was produced during the vintage era...
Oh well, it probably doesn't make a lot of sense, but I don't care. I just collect what makes me happy anyway.
I usually consider vintage as they do in automobiles anything 20 years or older..However Donald and the other members do make sense when considering the over production of cards starting in the late 80's..I personally would consider anything from 1987 or older as vintage as after this year is were over production began..As for classification I beleive there should be some kind of classification?? pre-war etc..
1910-1940 (PREWAR ERA) 1910 is the 1st Montreal Canadiens game.
1951-1967 (ORIGINAL SIX ERA) 1967 Coincides with last OPC-TOPPS merger.
1967-1972 (EXPANSION ERA) 1967 NHL doubles in size.
1972-1989 (MODERN ERA) 1972 the WHA arises.
1989-today (EUROPEAN ERA) 1989 the 1st russian plays in NHL.
Note how the NHL historical dates match with all your dividing tries.
I am new to this forum and I am doing alot of reading to catch up. I think the easiest way to tell a vintage card apart from everything else is to look when the card producers started over producing with the parallels and special incert and so on and so on. late 80's early 90's Grab any beckett or other card collecting book. All the cards pre 85 will be listed in the first 10% of the book and the remaining 90% is from 1985 and onSo since cards or card related items started in the early 1900s the first 95% of the years is less then 10% of the total card market that is collectable. Come on 2507 different ovechkin rookie cards would cost you $92,000.00. I cant make that up that is how many varieties of ovechkin rookie cards are available. Look at the rookies One man one rookie card....when did that change? there is the definition of a vintage.
I like Mark M opinion on the classification categories...
In antiques and cars, I always thought that 25 years and older was considered vintage. I notice that Darren says it's 20 years, maybe it's a different number from an area to another? In Montreal 25 years has always been the reference.
At the Toronto show last week-end, I saw a person going from one dealer to another trying to sell his box of old cards, they were 1990's Pro Set!!! The words old, vintage, rare, unique... can have a very different definition from one person to another.
Everyone agrees that 1989-90 is the cutoff. If only because it was the last year that Topps/OPC was the lone set produced. But that set was over-produced, leaving a brilliant group of rookie cards - Sakic, Leetch, Fleury, Linden - worth just a few bucks.
Personally, I consider the 1990-91 OPC Premier set the last OPC set worth owning. From the card blitz of 1990-91, that sets still stands out. Two seasons worth of rookies, no Topps version, and the cards are gorgeous!
The trend in the years since is to produce cards with a built-in, manufactured rarity. I've never understood this as a business model. I mean, who cares if a Gretzky card produced in 2006-07 with a slice of jersey attached is a 1 of 1. Every year there are a hundred of those. But obviously someone is buying them - at least from the companies.