Skip to main content

Want list vs. have list

My terribly incomplete want list is exactly that: "A Want List."

I know many bloggers also list "have lists" in their want lists. It's a convenient way to address sets in which you're far from your completion goal. Who wants to type in all those numbers?

But I can't help but think that no one calls up a want list to see "haves". They want to see "wants"! What does this dude want!

A "have list" is actually no strain on the person viewing the list. All he or she needs to do is eliminate those "have" card numbers when they're searching through cards. It feels a little backwards when I'm looking at "have lists," but really it's no sweat. Often it's a lot more fun than attacking a "want list" because the "have list" collector needs so many cards!

Still I have a difficult time creating a "have list" on my main "want list." I'm not sure of the reason why. Maybe I'm too much a stickler for the literal meaning of the title at the top. It says "WANT list," man. It's supposed to be full of wants. What happens if you start mucking it up with ownership and possession and nine tenths of the law? Airing your haves? It's all so boastful.

A "want list" is not braggy. It's vulnerable. It's a child four weeks before Christmas, writing out a list to Santa. "Here is what I want." Here is what I do not have." Yes, I don't have a lot of cards. I admit it. I want a lot of cards. I admit that, too. Here are my many lists. I am needy. I'm not afraid to say that.

So, yeah, I type out all the numbers. If I'm going for a set of 600-plus cards and I need 400 of them, I'll type out every card number I need. Either that or I just won't put up a want list yet. If I haven't obtained close to half of them, can I even claim I'm trying to complete it?

So there is just one set on my want list that's actually a "have list." That set is my collection of 1975 Topps buybacks.

Because I started from zero with this buyback set and it seemed like such a quixotic mission, I made an exception for it. Normally I wouldn't bother putting up a list at all. With just 15 or 20 or 25 percent of the set completed, it's kind of audacious to think I could complete that.

But my excitement over finding another way to collect my favorite set of all-time -- and for actually finding a use for these ridiculous buybacks that makes sense to me -- caused me to put up a "have list."

And it's been a "have list" since I announced I was collecting all the '75 buybacks I can.

Just the other day I received eight more '75 buybacks in the mail. And I added them to the "have list." I now own 41 percent of the set (there I go bragging), but I need 59 percent more of the set (I have so little).

When do I change the '75 Topps buyback "have list" into a "want list"?

Well, with the acquisition of the Ron Cey '75 buyback I am tempted to change it right now. This is definitely a milestone in my journey to "complete" this set. Wouldn't that be a nice way to commemorate it?

But I won't do it just yet.

I think I'll wait until I've completed exactly half of the '75 set, when I get to 330 cards. That will likely be more than half of the buyback set as who knows how many that actually is -- something less than 660 most likely. But in fantasy land, 330 will be half and that is good enough for me to air my '75 buyback wants out in the open.


Old Cards said…
I wish you the best, but the appeal of a set of identical looking cards with the exception of a stamped logo on the card escapes me.
Scott Crawford said…
May you be at this long enough to have changed multiple '75 buyback sets (because, when you finish this one, it's gonna start nagging at you that they're from however many buyback sets you Frankensteined it together from) from have lists to want lists.

Do you have a breakdown yet of how many cards you have from each buyback year, or are you trying to block that out?
I use both (haves and wants) for the very reasons you stated. I am slowly but surely converting them. You see if you type out the numbers once (on each page) and keep it at the bottom then all you have to do is copy and paste the numbers.
night owl said…
There's a lot about collecting that escapes you, Bill
night owl said…
I don't recognize the different kind of stamps. I'm not that dedicated.
Old Cards said…
I deserved that and you're right. I am hopelessly stuck in the 60's and early 70's. Enjoy your blog!
Commishbob said…
I've never posted a 'have list'. Wantlists just seem easier.

But looking at it my '61 Stamp list is both, have list AND want list. But in my defense it's a weird 'set' to be chasing since there are more stamps for some teams than places to glue them.
Bubba said…
My reasoning for want lists over have lists is the simple joy of being able to cross things off or delete them.
Fuji said…
I might be wrong... but I think the last time I had a "haves list" was the last time I marked up my Topps checklists (sometime in the early 80's).
Nick Vossbrink said…
My Google Sheets checklists function as both want and have lists. I do link to those from the blog but I also use them to generate blog-based want lists because it's easy to run a filter and copypasta the results.
GCA said…
If it's a big base set, I keep a number grid printout until it gets down to a typable amount of numbers.

Otherwise, I'll group big batches together in the list "295 thru 342" etc. I don't like typing out more than eight or ten consecutive numbers. It can be kind of a pain if you only get one card in the range later. Then you have to separate them into two ranges.

On inserts that are more than 25 or so, especially those that only show up a couple at a time, I'll make a Have list until I get over half of them, then switch it over to a need list. To me it's easier to look at "HAVE 3 6 12 24" than "1 2 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25"

I do make all my Have lists a distinctly different color and preface them with "HAVE", otherwise, people will send me cards on the list even though it says HAVE.
AdamE said…
I wish that when I started my want list I had just crossed off the cards that I got rather than deleting them, that way I have both a want list and a have list at the same time.
Robert said…
The last time I updated my want lists, I went strictly to the want list format such as you have. I had too many people sending me cards that I had on the have lists.

I'm sure it was confusing.

By the way, every time I put up a new want list, I use a set of typed numbers between 1-800 I have on a spare page on the blog. I just copy and paste and edit as needed. I saw someone else out there with it (DFG maybe?) and thought the idea was great so I copied it.

Popular posts from this blog

This guy was everywhere

It's interesting how athletes from the past are remembered and whether they remain in the public conscious or not.

Hall of Fame players usually survive in baseball conversations long after they've played because they've been immortalized in Cooperstown. Then there are players who didn't reach the Hall but were still very good and somehow, some way, are still remembered.

Players like Dick Allen, Rusty Staub, Vida Blue and Mickey Rivers live on decades later as younger generations pick up on their legacies. Then there are all-stars like Bert Campaneris, who almost never get discussed anymore.

There is just one memory of Campaneris that younger fans most assuredly know. I don't even need to mention it. You know what's coming, even if Lerrin LaGrow didn't.

But there was much more to Campaneris than one momentary loss of reason.

A couple of months ago, when watching old baseball games on youtube hadn't gotten old yet, I was watching a World Series game from…

Some of you have wandered into a giveaway

Thanks to all who voted in the comments for their favorite 1970s Topps card of Bert Campaneris.

I didn't know how this little project would go, since I wasn't installing a poll and, let's face it, the whole theme of the post is how Campaneris these days doesn't get the respect he once did. (Also, I was stunned by the amount of folks who never heard about the bat-throwing moment. Where am I hanging out that I see that mentioned at least every other month?)

A surprising 31 people voted for their favorite Campy and the one with the most votes was the one I saw first, the '75 Topps Campy card above.

The voting totals:

'75 Campy - 11 votes
'70 Campy - 4
'72 Campy - 4
'73 Campy - 4
'76 Campy - 4
'74 Campy - 3
'78 Campy - 1

My thanks to the readers who indulged me with their votes, or even if they didn't vote, their comments on that post. To show my appreciation -- for reading, for commenting, for joining in my card talk even if it might …

Return of the king

(If you haven't voted for your favorite Bert Campaneris '70s card in the last post, I invite you to do so).

So you've been away for a few years and want everyone to know that you're back.

How do you do that?

Do what The Diamond King did when he returned to card blogging last month: Bombard readers with contests and giveaways! Well, you've certainly gotten MY attention, sir!

I'll start with the giveaways first. Since he returned, the Diamond King has issued multiple "Diamond King 9" giveaways, straight out of the chute and rapid fire in the last month-plus. As I've said before, I am very slow to get to these "first come, first serve" giveaways. I used to think "I spend too much time on the computer" and now I realize "I don't spend enough time on the computer at all!"

But I was able to nab two cards out of the many giveaways.

I won this key 1981 Fleer Star Sticker of The Hawk. I have since acquired several more &#…