Top 100 Record Collector Pages Scans

A

Anonymous

Guest
Just looked through the new top 100 list, I'm sorry to say this but this list is so far off from the real world it's untrue. Why not produce a list that reflects "rarities" as the title suggests, if that means 60-70 test pressings fill up the top 100 then so be it. No.1 should be the rarest then work backwards.So much of this new list is cobblers, blue vinyl panic at no.100, that would struggle getting in a top 200 for me, common as muck!!
On another note, where do these prices come from? There are quite a few here that you can easily double and you would still do well to get, No.s 93,77,73,65,64,63,50,46,43,39,36,29,27,24,23,21......I will gladly buy any of these off anyone at these new prices. We really need a list that gives collectors the true picture of the Smiths market, not one that includes pretty sleeves just to make it look nice.
 

Stoned

Oh well...enough said
Thanks a million for posting.

Cheers Moz
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Record collector 2014 price guide states the Hand in glove test press(1983) is worth £1800, record collector Smiths top 100 states £1500. This kind of thing is unlikely to give much collectors much confidence in either publication's credibility.
 

Stephane

Pashernate member
Just looked through the new top 100 list, I'm sorry to say this but this list is so far off from the real world it's untrue. Why not produce a list that reflects "rarities" as the title suggests, if that means 60-70 test pressings fill up the top 100 then so be it. No.1 should be the rarest then work backwards.So much of this new list is cobblers, blue vinyl panic at no.100, that would struggle getting in a top 200 for me, common as muck!!
On another note, where do these prices come from? There are quite a few here that you can easily double and you would still do well to get, No.s 93,77,73,65,64,63,50,46,43,39,36,29,27,24,23,21......I will gladly buy any of these off anyone at these new prices. We really need a list that gives collectors the true picture of the Smiths market, not one that includes pretty sleeves just to make it look nice.
You see this is why I've declined putting together those lists before. A real Top 100 would not be very sexy to publish. It would be filled with acetates, test pressings, white labels and in-house tapes and cd-rs. Very few items with a picture sleeve or on coloured vinyl would end up making the list.

And there's always people to complain about the presence of this and the absence of that. I didn't even put together this list and I'm still getting complaints of that sort (because PJLM is credited at the end people think I've had something to do with it).

In the end we should all take this with a grain of salt and not let it affect the pleasure of collecting. Keep an eye on Popsike.com for a truer idea of the worth of collectibles.

Stéphane
 

9timesfined

Junior Member
Exactly !
You see this is why I've declined putting together those lists before. A real Top 100 would not be very sexy to publish. It would be filled with acetates, test pressings, white labels and in-house tapes and cd-rs. Very few items with a picture sleeve or on coloured vinyl would end up making the list.

And there's always people to complain about the presence of this and the absence of that. I didn't even put together this list and I'm still getting complaints of that sort (because PJLM is credited at the end people think I've had something to do with it).

In the end we should all take this with a grain of salt and not let it affect the pleasure of collecting. Keep an eye on Popsike.com for a truer idea of the worth of collectibles.

Stéphane
 

terrancestamp

Active Member
It always puzzles me how the dead format of a cassette can fetch such high prices. I just don't buy into it unless they have something special on them. Like a different mix or extended version. Other than that you can keep them. I hope the always disrespected Japan doubles make the list this time. Those things are very rare and never make the list.
 

surewhynot

Member
Looks like we've waited almost a decade for nothing. Not that they were terribly accurate in '05 either. Perhaps the standardization of a m-solo based list (voted upon) is in order? I think the results would speak for themselves and references to the RC publication would gradually taper off.

- #11 on the list went for less than half the stated value today.
- yet another $1000+ mayking sold online. is it on the list? nope.
- would you pay 200 pounds for a rank blank? i think i know a few people who might pay 1200.

Perhaps I've answered my own question in observing such sharp contrasts in actual vs. publicized. Good going, people!
 
Last edited:

Stephane

Pashernate member
References to the RC publication would gradually taper off.
They've already disappeared from "Passions Just Like Mine". I started adding the new rankings and realized how bananas they were. So I just took everything out. What baffled me was the number of descriptions including words like "don't miss the rarer black vinyl edition which is worth more", but the latter more valuable edition was not even in the list!

Perhaps the standardization of a m-solo based list (voted upon) is in order?
That would be great and not that complicated to do. Someone with database knowledge could compile the most recent auction prices for those items, average them then rank them. It could even be done simply with an Excel spreadsheet. It doesn't need to be done for the whole catalogue, just for items that sell for 100$ or more (for example). The list could be constantly kept up to date, or re-done every year.

If anyone did this, I'd gladly put it up on "Passions Just Like Mine".

Stéphane
 

surewhynot

Member
Sounds like a great idea. I will start to compile a list. It requires fairly extensive research, but I will do as much as frequently as possible!
 

Sidwell4

New Member
They've already disappeared from "Passions Just Like Mine". I started adding the new rankings and realized how bananas they were. So I just took everything out. What baffled me was the number of descriptions including words like "don't miss the rarer black vinyl edition which is worth more", but the latter more valuable edition was not even in the list!

Stéphane

Isn't this issue explained at the beginning of the article whereby it states: "in order to ensure some variety and interest remains, we've corralled some rarities with common characteristics into one or two entries, allowing for the inclusion of a lot more new treats"?

I guess it's similar to the point about the list being sexy (or not), again...
 
Top Bottom