|
OK, in an attempt to get back to the Cobb/Cobb.....
One aspect of the Goodwin Cobb that seems to have been missed here is the fact that this one appears to be only the third example to not have a glossy surface (out of ~15 total examples known of the Cobb/Cobb back. So.....~12 copies with a glossy surface - 3 copies without a glossy surface. Could the price for the Goodwin example be due to the lack of the glossy surface? And could we be seeing a differentiation price-wise between the two variations? Just something to think about. Edited to add that the Goodwin example has what I believe is the best surface condition of any example I can remember seeing. The blood-red background is immaculate! The only "problems" with the card are the four corners, and perhaps extremely slight registration issues with Cobb's image. I can't remember seeing any example of the Cobb/Cobb back that didn't have some creasing or general surface damage/wear. This by itself, could be another reason for a higher-than-normal bid. Put this together with the rarity of the non-glossy surface..... Steve |
Excellent point!
|
Quote:
I think it would be easier to give credit to the lack of gloss had this price been realized in another auction. |
It is absurd to compare the price of REA's at this point (6 days before the completion of the auction) to Goodwin's final price. Goodwin's was at 35K plus the juice the night before the auction ended.
|
Quote:
|
In defense of Goodwin and his auction (again)
for you Goodwin bashers with plenty of time on your hands, were you aware that most of the American Beauty cards were the AB 460 and not the AB 350 of either type???....
And that many of those AB 460's were not only the highest graded since PSA started identifying the backs , but in some cases the ONLY one ever graded.... And in the recent threads here about back scarcity no one disagreeed with the #9 ranking of that back---that is higher than Carolina Brights OR Hindu Brown according to several of the back experts (I am not one of them) And finally, I was either the underbidder or darn close to it on almost all the AB auctions--last time I checked I was not a shill for Bill Too many people here jump to conclusions a little too quickly when it comes to his acutions IMHO cheers Bill Latzko |
It only takes two guys with too much money to escalate a card to beyond an acceptable level. Sad part is, we will all pay indirectly in the future. It saddens me when rich folk create a market the average Joe can no longer afford to play in.
If i ever struck it rich, i could have seen myself shelling out 15k for a nice example but justifying 150k, id need to beat myself with a hammer to think this was a good idea. |
This is the genius of the auction system. As Mastro is quoted as saying in Mint Condition, put two guys head to head and let them beat the bleep out of each other.
|
Or put one guy up against Bill Mastro's computer. Either way.
|
Quote:
D'oh!! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The Cobb/Cobb back is more of a "niche" card. Really, only die-hard Cobb and T206 back collectors are interested in it. Everyone else, while I'm sure wouldn't mind owning one, can pretty much live without it. Steve |
So, there is only fifteen known cards of the Cobb/Cobb?
|
Quote:
JimB |
Quote:
JimB P.S. I actually know where eight of them are and four of the eight are neither T206 back collectors, nor Cobb collectors. |
No matter which side of the debate you are on regarding the Cobb with Cobb back, one thing that is undeniable is it is a great baseball card rarity. If it has in fact become the next six figure card, it is because of its incredible demand and very high profile. Maybe some owners are adding it to their T206 back sets, and maybe some don't even collect T206. Doesn't matter any more, it's now attained the status of one of the great vintage baseball cards, and always will be.
|
This particular Ty Cobb back card......
having seen it at the March Philly Show, I was stunned at the price it sold for. Obviously, it's not one of the better examples
of this very rare/very high demand "T206" type card, so this sale has set a new precedent for future scenarios of this card. I anticipate more Ty Cobb back cards will now come out of the woodwork....both REAL and professionally FAKED ones. It begs this question.....will the Professional Grader's be able to tell the difference ? ? TED Z |
There have been aberrational auction prices before, so I think the jury is still out on the Cobb/Cobb.
|
Ted - I got to handle the Goodwinn example at the Chicago show. Although the cobb/cobb in Goodwin may have been graded a 1.5, it presented in VG. It is one of the nicer examples I have seen.
|
scans for comparison (although the Goodwin scan is not very good)
Goodwin... http://www.goodwinandco.com/LotImages/16/Lot1a_med.jpeghttp://www.goodwinandco.com/LotImages/16/Lot1b_med.jpeg REA... http://bid.robertedwardauctions.com/...em_13091_1.jpghttp://bid.robertedwardauctions.com/...em_13091_2.jpg |
cobb/cobb
With Barry S., the Cobb/ Cobb is an exceptional beauty which is finally getting its due!!
i am most pleased to see this. a T206 rarity,indeed! congrats JimB and the other 14 lucky ones. best, barry |
Quote:
Also, I am certainly no Cobb expert and have especially limited knowledge on the Cobb/Cobb. I just find it a bit odd that this particular card is a new find and one of the super rare "no gloss" cards. The super-sized scan leaves me thinking why the borders are bleeding and the blood red background seems to lack any pixilation. Dunno...perhaps it's just me but it just doesn't look right. Even the Cobb named seems to be strangely aligned when compared to the other Cobb/Cobb's. Hell, I just don't know. |
Are you implying the Goodwin card is not authentic?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
JimB |
Had a nice talk with Bill Goodwin today who gave me a call. Bill just wanted to take sometime to try to explain the recent prices without going into details of who was bidding etc.
While I appreciated the call I'm still beside myself on some of the prices as I told Bill. He understood and tried to give me as much detail as he could. He told me he wanted to make an effort to reach out to me as a bidder to try an ease my concerns if I had any. Bill also told me he also extends that same courtesy to anyone else who may have questions or concerns. Just thought I would pass on to the folks here. John |
Goodwin PSA one
Personally, I don't care for the overall look of the one in the PSA holder. Besides what has been mentioned what the heck is going on with that front, top left (as we are looking at it) part of the frame that is around Cobb? It's not square. That PSA card looks a lot different, to me, than the SGC one. :eek: I am NOT saying it's not real or anything like that.....but if I were buying it I would certainly want to get a 2nd and 3rd expert opinion. The "look" is probably due to the lack of gloss that the others have, but I am in no way sure of it. regards
|
Quote:
|
I disagree
Quote:
|
|
imo
It's real..... and it's spectacular.
|
Quote:
I dont see a problem with discussing a high profile card's legitimacy. Its not much different than people here talking about the "sheet cut" 2.8 mil Wagner....is it? |
The top left part of the frame not only is not square, it appears to be missing altogether? Are there other examples of this type of printing error on other T206s? It probably is related to the bleeding, and probably is just one of those things...
|
Methinks someone has some spaining to do. :confused:
|
paper loss
In speaking with another hobby veteran about that upper left corner he believes it's just a little paper loss. I probably concur on that one point. regards
|
People that own a Cobb/Cobb card are going to say that the price was fair and the card was legit -- because it affects them financially. People that depend on Goodwin's auctions for financial reasons are gong to say the same thing -- because it affects them financially. Follow the dollars and you'll find out motivations of posters.
As for the auction, I'm not saying that it wasn't legit. I'm also not saying that if it wasn't legit that Goodwin was at fault. I just would say that the price was a joke because a) it has no gloss (which to me is a problem, not a positive); the bleeding issue is weird; c) the left corner issue is weird; d) the registration of the card is weird. I'm no expert on Cobb/Cobb but these issues are troubling and I've never seen issues b) and c) on any Cobb/Cobb before. These are red flags to me and surely should not cause the price of the card to triple in value. The card very well may be real but, again, the red flags are troubling and do not serve to enhance the card's value. I've bid on Cobb cards up to 100K; I can tell you that I wouldn't have bid 30K for this card. Just my opinion. |
I agree with everything that Jeff just said...except I've never bid 100K on a cobb/cobb card:)!
|
Quote:
Hi Leon, I have already had my day in the sun regarding my SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper Red Cobb and I don't mean to hijack this thread or be busting your eggs too hard. However you seem to have no trouble jumping on board and voicing your skepticism of this Cobb/Cobb card (one I am assuming you have not seen in person but maybe you have) but were unable to commit an opinion to a card which was in your possession which also possessed an anomaly which I provided numerous close up pictures. Could that have anything to do with the Cobb/Cobb not having been auctioned by you or that it is PSA graded versus being SGC graded? With respect to Goodwin's example I do see the differences which Kevin pointed out and wonder if those can be attributed to the non glossy version as the image quality or registration of the two cards is quite different. Anyone here have pictures of the other non glossy Cobb/Cobb? Greg |
Greg...c'mon now....
Quote:
|
Hey Leon,
So now I am a liar or is it simply that you now know all my intentions? No I really did not want to hijack the thread but found it odd that you would so freely render an opinion on a PSA graded card which you have not seen and one you were not the seller of. I could have brought my thread back up to the top and copy and pasted your statement but thought it would be out of context. I can't control where I call shenanigans nor can I control the fact that my comment related to a certain issue I had. Feel free to edit these posts and put them on my T206 Cobb thread and we can duke it out there. I certainly don't mind my thread being pulled back up from page 5. And again for the record and to continue to hijack this thread, I told you privately in emails and PMs as well as on the thread that I appreciated your gesture and it was entirely unnecessary as you are not the one who issued the grade on the T206 Cobb I won from you. Thank you, Greg |
well...
Quote:
|
Maybe my eyes are not so good but that does not look like paper loss to me?
|
In my opinion, and i am by no means an expert, the top left of the PSA card would be enough to make me not want to purchase it. It looks odd. I am more protective of what i spend my money on. I would have an issue spending $1000 on an odd looking card let alone 150k. Thats just me.
But i am a little confused.... Guys want a Cobb with no gloss?? I thought gloss usually meant is was printed more recently and that original T206's had no gloss. So is this card different? or am i back half asswards? |
Quote:
The large scan just raises more question in my mind; such as why do the corners (other than the paper loss) on the front and back seem whiter than the card and why all the stray fibers? Could be my eyes but when the super-large scan is enlarged even more it becomes evident...IMO. Guess these are questions I would ask or at least throw out before I spent over $100K (or less) on a card. Perhaps the buyer did just that, I don't know. Like Leon said, second or even third opinions. I think for $100K I would fly down with someone to look at it....but that's just me. Yes, the card may very well be real and I know very little about the Cobb/Cobb but there appears to be red flags when compared to others. At least enough to be discussed....again, just my opinion. |
I agree, it doesn't look like paper loss on the hi-res scan. The other thing i notice is all 4 corners are evenly rounded... not alot of cards have uniform perfect rounding on all corners.
just my two centavos worth |
Quote:
I'm sure there are at least a couple of people in this hobby with the ability to spend $100k on a card and not really know a lot about the card other than what they're being told. And as I've said before, once they own it getting a second opinion has no upside. Edited to add: I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the Cobb/Cobb in question, but one would think a more solid example would bring the price realized. IMO |
I've been making a side-by-side comparison of the Goodwin Cobb with the REA Cobb, and have made an interesting observation. Take a look at the following scans, giving particular attention to the placement of the comma after "Cobb" in the caption, in relation to the seam in Cobb's jersey. Notice how in the Goodwin Cobb, the seam lines up directly above the comma. In the REA Cobb however, the seam is halfway between the "b" and the "D", and not directly over the comma. Also, in the Goodwin Cobb, the "D" is directly under the buttons.....in the REA example, it is not. It additionally appears that the caption on the Goodwin Cobb has narrower font than on the REA Cobb.
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8...ackGoodwin.jpghttp://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8...obbbackREA.jpg I don't know what this means, but it is interesting. Steve |
The comma definitely is in different positions on each card. The SGC Cobb looks exactly as you would expect it to look; the PSA one does have a bit of a different feel to it. The "D" on one is very gray, and black on the other.
These are of course just observations, I also don't know what to make of the discrepancies. |
The REA Cobby is looking right at me...the Goodwin Cobb is looking up and to the left.
|
Those are 2 very distinct faces....anyone else see that?
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:14 PM. |