The trend in Wagner cards
 

As we've discussed Wagner cards already were soaring to unheard of levels, but even in that context the Memory Lane sale of a PSA 3 Blue M116 for over 50K nevertheless seems astonishing. Do people think it was a one off fluke, or is this sort of pricing sustainable? Part of my question is admittedly driven by self interest as I have each of his M116s in 5 and while I've always thought of them as untouchable, at those prices I'd have to seriously rethink it.

Thoughts?

You could always post them on eBay at those absurd museum prices you love to hate and see if you get any bites.

Feels like the portrait Wagner cards are drafting off of his T206. While there has always been demand and always will be demand for his cards, the uptick seems like it cannot be sustained. Then again I felt the same way about the 52T Mantle as it started to reach new highs.

Then again, if you had called BS on the Jordan rookie prices two years ago, you would have been absolutely right. Tough to know. But Wagner selling for 20x Johnson or more just seems crazy to me.

Whenever I see a huge bump in price like we are seeing on the Wagners and as you point out the 86 Jordan (however in that case it was 100% manipulation), I feel it is a temporary state but prices have stuck for the 52T Mantle. I think the 33 Ruth also underwent a similar surge in price and believe those have held up too.

All I know is that I would not be a buyer at this point on the Wagners because I can't be. If I held any I would certainly be tempted to sell. If you do not need the money I would not consider selling. If they drop back down to 2020 levels it is a paper "loss". Sure ya might kick yourself for not getting out but presumably they are in your collection because you like them regardless of value.

If you feel the prices are overheated, you can sell the card now. If you really miss it, you can always buy it back. That is tougher to say on cards that are super rare and may not pop up for years, but not for cards that sell more frequently.

There are a total of 62 M116 Blue Wagners on the combined PSA/SGC population report. That really is not a huge number, especially considering how many are in collections and not available for sale. By contrast, there are over 2,500, 1952 Topps Mantles on the combined PSA/SGC population report; and I am sure there are many more 52 Topps Mantles than blue M116 Wagners out there not reflected on the pop reports. It seems there are 2-6, 1952 Mantles in every auction.

According to VCP, the average price for a PSA 3, 1952 Topps Mantle is $66,500 (with sales ranging from $50k-$85k). While I acknowledge the 1952 Mantle dwarfs the blue M116 Wagner in importance/cache, is it so odd that a card of Honus Wagner, which is 40 years older and way more scarce, sells for $13k less than the average sales price of a like-graded 1952 Topps mantle?

I understand that does not answer your question, but it’s interesting to consider.

Way too many instances in the hobby were scarcity plays no role in the eventual value of a card. It always comes down to a demand for that card. Maybe this new price point is just that--establishing a new demand for the M116s and other Wagner portrait cards.

Wagners are hot in my opinion. You really can’t go wrong keeping or selling, but I always have said that when the market trend have you thinking of selling a card, the time is probably right to do so.

The demand is obviously there. My point is the supply is scarce. I bet there are more graded 1952 Topps Mantles than all graded cards of Wagner combined. Wagner is a popular and desirable player- maybe bc he is a first 5, maybe bc of the t206, maybe bc he is one of the all time greats, and likely all 3. It’s tough to own a Wagner and tougher to own a Wagner portrait. Add that the sharp rise in value leads to Fomo - get one now or they will be out of reach- and bam, a value explosion. Will it continue? No clue. But I am not looking to sell mine bc I want them. But if I had a better use for/needed the money, I would sell given the sharp increase.

Peter, your blue Wagner is likely worth $70k+ based on the last sale. Do you want $70k+ or a blue Wagner? They both sound pretty nice.

M116 Wagner
 

In the perfectly insane world of card collecting in 2023, the prices for the Wagner portraits make perfect sense to me. They have very low pops, and I have actually been surprised at the relative 'undervaluation' of both the M116 and E90-2. Very few of us can have THE card, so why not "settle" for the next best thing, which is, currently, somewhat obtainable (or used to be).

I am biased on this issue, but my prediction is that they will either stabilize or continue to climb. (Note: my name is not Warren Buffett, so caveat emptor).

Ryan when you put it that way, my initial reaction is I would rather have 70K+ in more Ruth cards, especially as I had the good fortune to also buy a pastel Wagner many years ago. Appreciate everyone's thoughts.

Trobba
 

IMHO it's Trobba pumping the prices...Jerry

The price surge looks to be affecting other issues as well. Seems like Wagner E-cards are experiencing healthy increases as well. I'm curious as what a really scarce issue like Nadja, Croft's Cocoa or Croft's Candy would fetch these days.

I created the attached Wagner card total POP (PSA, SGC, Beckett) Excel analysis earlier this year*. May have changed since or perhaps I missed some issues, but should be directionally accurate. Please let me know of needed edits or additions.

By this count as of last edit, there are 3,576 total graded Wagner cards (exceeds Mick’s 1952 Topps total graded POP). Of total graded Wagner cards, there are 451 inverse facing portrait cards, which is 12.6% of the total POP. Of graded Wagner cards, there are 345 Carl Horner original facing orientation portrait cards, which is 9.6% of the total POP. Of these, there are 126 in color, with 64 from 1910 Tip Top Bread, 55 from T206, and 7 from 1910 W-UNC, equating to 3.5% of the total POP.

This Excel summarizes graded cards by right facing portrait in color (blue highlight), right facing in non-color (gold highlight), left facing (green highlight) and batting/throwing/other (no highlight), as well as by grand total # and %.

*For most up-to-date POP report, please visit respective grading websites, which supersedes this Excel summary.

Great list Brunswick, thanks for posting. Wagner also has cards in the E94 & E98 set.

Thanks! Added those into total, etc.

Wagner
 

Brunswick, did you create that list manually, or do you have a trick for integrating all the TPG data? I'd love to know.......

I did a similar Joe Jackson playing days card POP analysis, manually. There’s definitely a way to code it, I just don’t have the time to write the program :).

Wagner
 

That is what I was thinking. I know some guys who could probably do it pretty quickly, too, if they had time.

Do you have the Colgan”s square proofs accounted for in your totals? I think this subset if you will often gets overlooked when people look at the regular round Colgan’s cards.

I'm tempted to sell some of my cards too, Peter, but when I factor in the cost of sale and the taxes that temptation fades away. Between 10%-20% of market to the auctioneer, 28% of the profit (and a sale of a highly appreciated asset would be nearly all profit) to the IRS if a capital gain or my marginal Federal tax rate if via a business, and my marginal tax rate to the state, a $50K profit becomes a $25K-$30K profit. Nice, but annoying. Hold until after I retire, and the picture changes. Hold until I die and my kid gets a stepped-up to FMV basis and she can sell it and pay nothing in taxes.

If I want to buy one again, the picture is even worse. I need a 50% drop in value to get back in at no extra cost. How often has that been the case over the last 40 years? Now, i guess I could invest the profit but making up a 50% hit like that is a very ambitious plan.

The SGC pop on the T206 Wagner is 18.

It’s funny, never thought about it before much, but i dont have many Wagners (well, except for some important premiums or supplements) because he is not in the T3, T205, T207, (T206 except the ONE), the key early sets i have collected. I branched into E90-1, and only have a few key CJs, but didnt buy a Wagner yet as his cards exploded and i havent chased (yet). So collecting him is a little specialized and different compared to his contemporary greats (Cobb, Matty, Wajo, Lajoie, and many other HOFers from those eras).

Taxes suck no question. But your reasoning leads to a Yogi-like result, does it not? I can't afford to sell that card, it's gone up too much in value. :)

Not the Horner portrait but still one of my favorite images of Wags. I paid $1,000 for this once upon a time:

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...c0a949c2df.jpg

Great spreadsheet!

It's missing the SGC pop on the E105 Mello-Mints - there are 13 batting pose and 1 throwing currently listed in their pop report.

The Colgan's Chip Honus Wagner has the T206 image. And is relatively scarce in nice grade, PSA pop only about 20 in PSA 5 or higher, so you seem them offered less frequently than you might think. This Colgan's has often been referred to as a much less expensive alternative with the famous image. How has recent sales pricing been for this issue - big upswing or ?

Fun Wagner list. Another set Wagner is in is the E91C American Caramel. Not a popular card for collectors since the facial artwork is actually that of Joe Tinker, but it should be included.

Brian

No doubt about it!

I think the challenge with the knock-on effects when you give up ~40% of the proceeds to taxes (not to mention the selling costs also taking a piece) is that if you’re going to sell for the cash, it’s because you really want to get out of a piece, with really no plans to realistically get back into it, barring a complete collapse in prices.

Think about how many cards Ty Cobb, Walter Johnson, and even Eddie Collins have by extending their careers into the 1920s

Wagner thus doesn’t have all of those caramel issues and exhibits that other stars have.

The timing of his career plus the T206 make any Wagner that much more in demand. Not enough options to go around.

Here is my lone Wagner which SGC reholdered at the 2023 national

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...da4176b307.jpg

...and the fact that the only tobacco card sets that include Wagner are the T200 set (team set), T206 (the word iconic was created because of this card), and the scarce T216 sets, and you have one tough top tier HOF player with relatively limited card options.

Brian

Someone should overpay me for this one, I can handle the taxes.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...01d580ce_c.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...9dbe80b0_z.jpg

Interesting that the blue Wags has recently outperformed the Cobb. In most sets, I believe, the Cobb fetches a higher price. I have always liked the E94 & E95 Wags and when the the next one comes up for auction, I bet they do well.

That's pretty good. Taxes on profits are the sort of problem you want to have.

I have 0 Wagner cards, sold them all before the “explosion”. BUT I do have these labels and to me they’re the most beautiful Wagner portraits in the hobby

You are missing many of the M101-4/5 back variations. They won’t add much to the population total but they should be mentioned.

Cards have been around 100 years. Now all of a sudden there is a tremendous surge in demand. People just found out baseball cards exist, or new buyers are speculating user the greater fool theory. This doesn't count the 1% on the board of which money is basically no object.

Saw quite a few of my cards get silly prices in memory lane, only to be sold at half or less via goldin weeks/months later

Congrats on getting out at the top!

Certainly astronomical silly prices give us a lot more to think about when all of that sweet bread could buy a lot of other exciting things, but only if we're willing to part with some of our cardboard, potentially forever.

How many of these were Wagners? I am not sure all cards/players are equal and, thus, may not all follow the same trends. I am not saying Wagners won’t be worth half in weeks/months, but I really doubt they will be.

Same thing happen, if I recall with his Jackson list. Good effort but...

Can you or others explain the FMV basis? Or direct me to a website?

I though the act of inheriting someone was tax free, but if you sell it down the road, you would have to pay taxes on that sale?

when inheritance changes hands...the recipient is assessed the value of the inheritance on that transfer date as the value so if they sell that day they will pay no taxes.

What about 6 months from that date?

Unless you have a very clear and compelling path for the funds, I’m not flipping a baseball card, losing 40%, and putting it in another baseball card. Just not worth it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Losing 40 percent? Flipping? Not sure where you're coming up with that. I've owned mine for many years and bought it at a tiny fraction of what it would realize even after fees and taxes. Not that I am doing it...

if sale price is greater than value on date of transfer...that is the amount you pay taxes on.

Maybe said another way, the person (or persons) who inherit the assets will step up their basis to fair market value on the date they inherit. So if you bought it for $100, and then die when it's worth $1,000,000, your heirs will have a basis of $1,000,000.

So if they sell right away, in theory there should be no gain or loss, because the sales price should be equal to the fair market value ($1,000,000 in this case), which is their basis.

If they wait to sell, then any appreciation after that date would be taxed when they choose to sell. I suppose the recipient could also choose to pass it down again when they die, in which case it gets stepped up again, at least under current law.

A few years ago, there was a proposal to start to tax gains that hadn't been taxed in the last 90 years. But that proposal hasn't gone anywhere so far, so in theory the inheritance tax benefit process could continue for as long as your heirs continue to not need the money.

Much clearer!!!

Well, since your cost basis is so low, so you sell a Wagner for 50 you’re only going to net 30 to buy a 30 K Ruth, or mantle, etc. That’s the trade I would be unwilling to make personally. Your purchasing power reduces if you make a move..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

By that logic one could never sell a card that has significantly appreciated, because there are always going to be taxes and probably transaction costs that take part of the nominal value. If I keep the Wagner, how does that confer purchasing power on me? We are right back to Yogi.

Right… unless there is a very compelling use of the funds, I do not advise selling a (historically) rare, appreciating asset just to have less spending power on a similar asset.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OK I understand that.

Hypothetically, do you know what the process would be like here?

- A person dies, and an old photo album gets distributed to a relative. Basically, "Hey, we're cleaning out the house. You want this?"
- Nobody searches through it for 10 years.
- Finally, they look through it, and find a T206 Doyle error card glued to a page.
- They consign and sell the card for 1 million.

Is there like a retroactive appraisal assessment for when the person received the album 10 years ago? Then, you subtract that 10-year-old value from the 1 million, and that's what you pay the gains on?

Or are you just paying on the 1 million since it was never appraised at the time?

-

And what about if the item was truly unique to the hobby with no past market value?

If there was a retroactive appraisal, would they just pull an educated estimate out of their butts that was smaller than the present day value from selling it?


(Sorry if this is derailing the thread a bit.)



Back on topic, Wagners are cool. I wish I had one.

I’d like to know the answer for that myself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No Wags, but Much lower pops, wasn't that one reason the last one sold so high? [emoji848]


I just can't fathom why all of a sudden sportcards around for 100 years are going ballistic. If wagners dropped 50% I'm sure plenty of people would pick up the pieces as there is demand.


When you look at a piece of cardboard vs. A porsche or a Tuscan villa, whatever floats your boat, it puts life in perspective. I don't know everyone's end game, but at some point either we or our family sell. I guess if one has it all, why not. Buy what makes you happy.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

"Is there like a retroactive appraisal assessment for when the person received the album 10 years ago? Then, you subtract that 10-year-old value from the 1 million, and that's what you pay the gains on?"

I believe this is correct, although I'm not a trust/estate attorney I did stay at a Holiday in Express last night...

Right, the question is the step up basis at time of transfer, and where there is no contemporaneous appraisal or documentation, one would need to do a good faith estimate based on whatever information is reasonably available.

If this is your situation, it’s time to hire a CPA who does this stuff every day. Most of these exciting fact patterns boil down to facts and circumstances and trying to document stuff. And even then, there’s going to be a lot of gray area, so it will come down to a question of how much you want to play in the gray area.

Back to the OP, which is whether the recent surge in Wagner prices is sustainable, as it could impact one’s decision whether to sell an M116 Blue Wagner….

Personally, I think Wagner cards, along with numerous other pre war players, have been very undervalued for a long time, and I think the recent surge is a reflection of that. Additionally, I think Wagner, for the reasons stated earlier, is in a unique group of transcendent players, who will remain desirable to future generations (Ruth, Cobb, Jackson, Gehrig, Mantle, Mays, Robinson, Aaron). Add the relative rarity of Wagner cards (100+ years old, played a bulk of his career in the early 1900s before the rise of most T, D, and E cards, and very few tobacco issues), and I think you have a nice recipe for stability and perhaps additional appreciation. One last factor is that, I bet, most people buying Wagners at these prices can afford to hold them, which means there is unlikely to be a dumping of Wagner cards that leads to a value spiral.

Now, the question of whether now is the time to sell…? That is personal question that I think depends principally on whether you have a better use for the after-tax proceeds.

That is correct, we've done it with houses in my business before. I'm assuming searching Wagner values of 10'years ago would yield pretty solid information.

Agreed. It seems to me there has been an incredible amount of rare high quality Ruth cards available in the last few auctions, any thoughts on the seller(s)? Doesn't seem to be a top but damn, some folks were selling a lot of great Ruth cards.

Ryan, why is it that there aren't any pitchers in your list of transcendent players? :confused:

Young and Mathewson? :cool::eek:

Good question. I don’t think pitchers get the same respect/hold the same value as hitters. But if you were to list pitchers, I think we would have Young, Johnson, Mathewson, Koufax, and Nolan Ryan.

Nice recovery, Ryan! :D

Thanks for the additional cards noted. I’ll add them to the in-progress list and update the data. Happy to contribute a consolidated view for ease of reference and use/action by our hobby.

I too am amazed at the price for some of the portrait cards. Here is a much cheaper version (I think I paid 10.00 or less) that I like much better than almost all of Wagner's baseball cards. It is a page from a 1910 Baseball Magazine issue. I also included my two other Wagner items, a Baseball Magazine premium from 1914 and a weird postcard (picture of a picture?).

Alan

Or you hire a whore, er, an expert to appraise the item. Not needed if the card is a routine seller. There are enough sales of a 1954 Aaron in almost every grade so that you can pin down a value for most any period from any number of data scraping services. Lections Ruth, not so much.

Besides, who are we kidding? When one of us nutcase collector types die the wife or kids will fall all over themselves cashing out the collection as quickly as possible (I can definitely see my wife telling my daughter to "get those f***ing baseball cards out of my house"; she says it now, while I am still here), so post-death appreciation is not going to be an issue for them.

With the IRS estate threshold (I forget what it is these days, $4M?) you would have to have a really valuable collection or be asset rich in other areas to be faced with a large inheritance tax. Or have I got the wrong end of the stick here?

For 2023, the threshold is $12.92M.

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small...yed/estate-tax

States are typically much lower though. In Taxachusetts, for example, it's 1 million.

CA has no estate tax. 0%

I promise this isn't political, but...

I have a hard time believing it will stay that way forever. Of course, it's been that way for a while now, so maybe you'll get lucky.

I don't think it is going back. We have too many large ranches, orchards, vineyards and farms. At worst, we might go back into lock step with the Federal standard, which is pretty much what we do with similar taxes that have high thresholds.

What do ranches and orchards have to do with it, don't follow?

They’re worth a lot of money and they’re usually family businesses, so they get passed down. And therefore it’s a hot button issue for estate taxes.

OK. But not clear to me why those people would object more to estate taxes or have any more political clout than the countless other wealthy people in the state.

My sense is that family farms have long been the poster child for the anti estate tax movement. It’s a very appealing approach optically, and no politician wants to be seen as being against farmers, small businesses and cute farm animals.

There are also two different 1911 T5 Pinkerton Cabinets poses. If I am reading the pop reports correctly, PSA has one of pose 853 (vertical, fielding) and one of pose 872 (horizontal, batting) and SGC has four of 853 and one of 872.