Waste.
 

Hmmm...let's see. Which would I rather have: a signed piece of cardboard that's barely over ten years old from a guy who's barely over thirty years old, or a really nice house?

Wow, that is a tough choice.....

Can't buy or sell from your pocket.

$312k to the person who bought it might be like you spending $312.00

Scale of economy.

I had to get over that hurdle too being in the private aviation industry.

That's a sweet card and if anything, it helps bolster the sports card industry even further.

I think the most interesting part of that article is that the second highest price for a signed card is 50k for a signed Ruth. Crazy by comparison. That was probably also a 1 of 1, even if it wasn't marked as such. If I could have had either yesterday for the same price not knowing what this would sell for I easily would have picked the Ruth.

Im pretty sure that where ever the winner lives, there are no nice houses available for 300k. Although he could have bought a nice car for that.

In Fontana??? :D

Bubble

Lol, even in Fontana the nice ones go for 400k+ Out here in OC you can't even get a condo in a bad neighborhood for 300k.

Agree with the OP. It's stupid money. Manufactured scarcity is meaningless. And LeBron probably has signed hundreds if not thousands of cards.

The game used card market is one I never understand. This buyer could have bought LeBron's game used jersey from Game 1 of the 2016 NBA Finals for a fraction of the price ($52,591.99). A regular season jersey could be bought for below $5,000.

http://auctions.nba.com/iSynApp/auct...24#bid-history

"The card was sold to a basketball card collector only two months ago for an undisclosed sum. That collector told ESPN.com that he was motivated to buy the card after James won the NBA title. He said Goldin convinced him that he could immediately flip it for a much higher price."

Does a quote like this from the article make anyone else nervous given Goldin's association with Maestro and the number of times his name appeared on the documents?

Here's what I found shocking:

"The highest price previously paid for any James item was the $95,000 venture capitalist Bill Lee paid for a 2003-04 card of James' from Upper Deck's Exquisite Collection, which retailed for $500 a pack.

The card that sold Sunday morning was pulled from Upper Deck's Ultimate Collection set, which were sold for $125 a pack with only four cards in a pack."

Somebody has the gall to sell a new pack of cards for $500??!??!!!?

Old saying there's a sucker born everyday

Very surprised by some of these responses. You guys act like the guy who bought it is some average joe who spent his life savings on it, which is obviously not the case. Clearly some millionaire who has all kinds of cash to throw around. I also thought people had more understanding for modern card collectors. I've always been a vintage guy, but I'm sure some of the modern collectors wonder why in the world we buy cards of guys that we'll never see play or have the oppotunity to idolize. I do agree on how ridiculous it is that this card goes for 6 times what an entire game used jersey goes for... I'd take the jersey over this card any day of the week

And as someone already said, it's not like LeBron hasn't signed hundreds of thousands of items before. What is the difference between this "manufactured" card "product" and something signed by James during his rookie year?

I guess $300,000 is the answer.

That's just stupid -- and doesn't matter how much money you have....

Because it is clearly sane to buy cards with minor deviations. Different factory number. Missing bits of ink. 'Cause those are old. This whole hobby makes a clear case for beauty being in the eye of the beholder.

As a baseball card collector with a collection going from present day back to Old Judge and a baseball autograph collection with examples to the 1870s and other memorabilia, I have yet to grasp the allure of manufactured memorabilia and inserts and the understanding of why they sell for so much more at times than other available and appealing pieces of memorabilia .
But I figure like all collections it is a matter of taste and wants. I always wonder however will they ever recoup their money if they try sell it .

Octavio, you are slightly off - the old saying actually is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There%...n_every_minute
But in this day and age, I think the saying should be, "There's a sucker born every second."
Val

I say, "buy what you like, like what you buy, and leave the rest for everyone else."

If I had $300,000+ to spend on this hobby, it wouldn't be used to purchase a modern card of LeBron James. However, my acquisitions, whatever they might be, would likely be viewed upon as wasteful spending by a great many people.

Waste.
 

I wouldn't say he's a sucker or it's a waste of money, that's just ignorant. Sure, may be a waste for us but to them I'm sure it's pocket change.

Amazing the card sold this much without the patch even being game used.

qft

I think eminence came out at like 5k a pack a few months ago. Something like 7 cards...

Lebron has an exclusive with UD, panini had an exclusive with the NBA. He hasnt signed anything in uniform in a hot minute.

I'm not going to go into whether the Lebron card is actually worth 300+K too much. Like most everyone else, I think the card went much too high. I think the somewhat analogous comparison would be how much a complete Lebron James rookie game used uniform that he signed would go for. It seems reasonable to assume that the signed rookie uniform should go substantially more than the card.

Back to the card. It's not just any signed Lebron James card. It is a signed ROOKIE card. I don't want to get into a debate on why rookie cards should be much more valuable than other cards for a player. Let's just say that's the reality. (And I'm not going to go into those cases either where the card manufacturer issues the rookie card YEARS after the player's rookie reason. Not going there. Also not going into those cases where the jersey on the card wasn't even that player's jersey or wasn't truly game worn.)

I don't collect modern cards or modern rookie cards. However, from what I can tell, in a player's rookie year, there are tons of different cards that are released. Therefore rookie card collectors look for that player's "best" rookie card. (You can often try googling this: What is <player name> best rookie card?) Typically, these are the characteristics that go into the player's best rookie card:

(1) Manufactured scarcity: the lower the print # the better (I know ppl hate this, but that's the way it is.)
(2) Is there an auto on the card? (Extra points if the player signed on the card rather than on a sticker that is put on the card.)
(3) Is there a game used patch on the card? Extra points if the patch is multi-color/jumbo-size, has laundry tag or logoman, etc.

Cards issued by a major manufacturer (e.g., Topps/Bowman, etc) are more valued than from a minor vendor. TPG grade and eye appeal also play a smaller part.

Therefore, this card has some of the top characteristics that say that this is probably one of the top LBG rookie cards if not the top one. Again, whether this means the card is worth 300+K is another story ...

It sounds crazy, but there is a lot of product out there now that costs even more. And there are high end collectors that break multiple cases of various issues as soon as they come out. Out of my league, but someone I used to work with did it frequently. He sells most of the cards right away, and keeps a few here and there for his collection. Occasionally he would take a big hit but it was amazing how often he'd break even or turn a profit despite keeping a couple cards.

And those $500 exquisite packs from 03 now go for about 10k. If you can find one.

I'd rather just put 10K on red. Seems like that would be more fiscally responsible.

It has the miniscule game-worn NBA patch (Hi Jerry West!)

I'll second Charlie there.

One of the reasons that modern cards don't interest me is that they really are just a kind of gambling. Cardboard slot machines. There has always been some tomfoolery involved in baseball cards: think of the Goudey Lajoie; just skipping a number to get the kids to buy more cards is pretty sneaky. But, as far as I can tell, this is all that modern cards have become.

As for whether they'll hold their value, I don't know. But most collectibles that are made to be collectible are junk (think about things like the decorative plates that they sell on QVC). Vintage cards (this is actually a nice crossover point for another thread) weren't made to be collectibles, at least not in any modern sense, they were made to be children's toys. Bike spokes and all that. Now, it's permissible to think that adults shouldn't spend money collecting children's toys, but if there is a problem with it, it's not the same one as buying lottery tickets from Upper Deck.

I think the discussion over if the card is worth the price is similar to those asking if a PSA 10 63 Rose is really worth the 700k or whatever it sold for. For one it's irrelevant what we think, it was worth it to the guy who won it, and worth almost as much to the under bidder. It's a 1 of 1, and LeBron's most sought after rookie card. Or one of them. There are thousands of 63 Rose's out there, and perhaps 100s of thousands of LeBron rookies. But only one PSA 10 and only one 1 of 1 logoman auto.

I'd still rather have the signed 33 goudey ruth for 50k. But I wasn't bidding on either.

By your definition nobody in history has ever overpaid for anything, because it was "worth it to the guy who won it."

You guys were all over Golden auctions on the Wagner going 'below' estimate.

im assuming the lebron card blew away their estimate...

People over pay for things all of the time. My point is that it doesn't matter if we think he did. And that it's very difficult to say when your talking about the only one in existence.

I don't get your point. Nobody said it mattered what we think. If that was a requirement for having a discussion there wouldn't be many, would there?

As for 1/1s, I disagree. The LeBron is a 1/1 due to artificial, manufactured scarcity. Topps could print a million Jeter rookies and put a red dot on one of them and it would be a 1/1 too. So what? And Rose is one of 30 or so graded Mint. I would bet anything if you cracked out the 10 and the 25+ 9s you could not reliably pick out the 10. So again, so what? The 10 is an artificial grade and if it's a 1/1 that is, to me, artificial as well.

plus if bidding is legit....whatever the winning bid was...the underbidder may of just been a few hundred below them and another bidder a few hundred more.

so when talking thousands and thousands of dollars...maybe the winning buyer was willing to 'overpay' by 1-3 percent to win the card....to me thats just market price ...we expect to lose 5-10% on any card we buy at a huge auction and sell the next week in an auction.

Now on private sales i can see someone 'overpaying' when no one else would pay within 50% of what a guy paid to pry a card out of someone's hands...but still time will tell.

but again in a fair auction...noone is going to be paying 50% more than the market due to all the under bidders.....in a private deal , all you have is the seller saying 'i already have someone offering X for the card' thats not as legit as seeing a real bid in an auction..

I would never suggest to someone how he should spend his money, but if the buyer of the James card expects to redeem his investment at some point, I think he runs the risk of disappointment. I don't think that cards that are highly valued because of a contrived limited supply (like one of one) will retain their value over time. It's my guess that at some point collectors will recognize that there is little difference among autographed rookie cards of LeBron, or anyone else for that matter.

Two people or even three can get caught up in hype and hysteria just as easily as one. So to me a "legit" auction price is not at all inconsistent with the winner overpaying.

I don't see the point in criticizing someone for their purchase. Calling it a waste, him stupid, etc. He spent what he spent. I doubt anyone commenting in the thread even considered bidding. A modern card selling for 300k is worth mentioning on the board. Insulting the guy who bought it is in bad form, in my opinion.

right but theres a chance they werent caught up as well. There still were others willing to go very close to the sale price

when you do a private deal you have no way to know if someone else is even willing to bid close in a hysteria situation if thats all it was..

George Carlin hit the nail on the head:

“Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?”

I'm sure the guy who bought the James card said to his family and/or friends, "Sometimes you gotta say WTF" :D

I could not agree more

+1

Since manufactured scarcity is meaningless, does that apply to leaf Graziano, caramel McKinley and Lindstrom, and Goudey Lajoie? In my opinion these are all the same as the LeBron 1/1. Short produced to keep people purchasing their products. The only difference I see is the level of transparency.

You can take lajoie off the list as this was printed in response to collectors complaining... And anyone could have received this card free of charge all they had to do was ask. Theoretically there could be way more lajoies than any other card in the set...although this is obviiusly not the case.

You can take it off your list. I will keep it on mine. It IS a manufactured scarcity.

To be honest, I am not that familiar with this specific James card - is it part of a regular Upper Deck set or just a stand alone piece of memorabilia? Do you need the card in order to complete the set, as you would with the McKinley, Lindstrom, Lajoie, etc.?

haha...it is now off MY list!!!!!

Same with the George C. Miller Ivy Andrews.

Bidder probably already has a really nice house.

lol Pete.

Different IMO. At the time none of those cards, though scarce by design, were worth anything. They weren't short printed to create artificially valuable collectibles.