When I was collecting, I always read the write-ups very closely. Prior to the grading of cards, the write-up was all we had to discern whether or not we wanted to pursue what the seller or auctioneer was offering. The 80s - 90s SCD auction photos were postage stamp-sized and grainy, but we made due because at the time, they were "cutting-edge" tech. The masterpiece of my collection was won with this type of photograph in an SCD auction.
You've all made good points about needless overall history of the given player. However, I thought it was good to succinctly present the historical significance of the year the card was produced, in relation to the player's season.
No doubt some of you would be better experts of many of the cards than the auction house writer.
Be that as it may, presenting pertinent facts from PSA / SGC population reports is always a good idea. Calling out glowing characteristics of the given card is vital, particularly when any of those characteristics are quite uncommon for the issue. Finally, if a given card does not come up for auction very often, and especially if it is indeed "rarely", the auction house had better present this valuable information, and explicitly state such. They owe this to the consignor, as well as to all potential bidders.
Remember, many collectors are not as knowledgeable as you, and newcomers are babes in the woods. I mean, you'd be surprised how many collectors don't know what the hell they're looking at in an auction catalog, and the significance of the piece. Granted, some of the verbiage is outlandish, cheesy, unnecessary, and immature.
Regardless, good auction write-ups influenced me, along with good crisp photos / scans. Obviously, the latter, along with the grade, is the most essential to of all to us.
--- Brian Powell
|