High end Heritage lots, which would you rather have?

[pokerplyr80]

There were some interesting results and record breaking prices in the recent Heritage auction. Another Net54 member pointed out a couple of results to me and I thought it would make for an interesting poll question. One sold for 131k, and the other for 108k. If you could have either for free, but couldn't sell for a while, say a year or two, which would you pick?

Clemente: http://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/19...umbnail-071515

T206 Set: http://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/19...umbnail-071515

[Bicem]

Those my only options?

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Bicem

Those my only options?

I figured too many would select option 3 if there was a cash alternative.

[MR RAREBACK]

The set

[Sean]

The T206 set, even though it's only 520 cards.

[Leon]

The set. I picked up a Clemente rookie yesterday that will look 90% as good as most 8s for 1k. What is the pop of Clemente RC's? Probably about a million if they all get graded.

[rats60]

I would take the Clemente. If I didn't already have both, I would take the set. However, the Clemente would be an upgrade where the set would not. Value wise, does that set really have much upside? Clemente has really jumped, showing it has potential to go higher. Maybe it won't, who knows?

[irv]

Well, because I don't own a Cobb or any of the other earlier greats, I would take the set.

The Clemente is nice, no doubt, but like Leon mentioned, how many are out there?

[4815162342]

Holy crap!

[Scocs]

I want to know what moron dropped $50K on a mint 1971 Terry Bradshaw rookie card? Not to mention the fact that there are already twenty (20) OTHER PSA 9s out there!

I also want to know the other moron who shelled out over $33K on a gem mint 1979 Ozzie Smith rookie card when -- for the same price -- you could have acquied a 1938 Goudey high number Joe DiMaggio in NM-MT+!! Or would I rather have a gem mint Ozzie Smith rookie card or a brand new renovated kitchen (AND bathroom outside of NY)...? Are you kidding me?

Scott

[Scocs]

Oh, I forgot to add:

For the winner of the $50K Bradshaw card -- for an extra six thousand dollars, you could have won yourself one of the scarcest and most coveted pre-war cards in existence: a 1914 Cracker Jack Christy Mathewson in EXCELLENT (SGC 60) condition.

Maybe I can pick up a mint Joe Greene card for $40k to complete my million dollar 1971 Topps football set....

[ajquigs]

Originally Posted by Scocs

I want to know what moron dropped $50K on a mint 1971 Terry Bradshaw rookie card? Not to mention the fact that there are already twenty (20) OTHER PSA 9s out there!

I also want to know the other moron who shelled out over $33K on a gem mint 1979 Ozzie Smith rookie card when -- for the same price -- you could have acquied a 1938 Goudey high number Joe DiMaggio in NM-MT+!! Or would I rather have a gem mint Ozzie Smith rookie card or a brand new renovated kitchen (AND bathroom outside of NY)...? Are you kidding me?

For the winner of the $50K Bradshaw card -- for an extra six thousand dollars, you could have won yourself one of the scarcest and most coveted pre-war cards in existence: a 1914 Cracker Jack Christy Mathewson in EXCELLENT (SGC 60) condition.

Maybe I can pick up a mint Joe Greene card for $40k to complete my million dollar 1971 Topps football set....

Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
I think it would be pretty easy to find a huge Ozzie fan who would be baffled that anyone would care about what he views as some goofy cartoon card from the 1930s. Even easier to find a football card collector who doesn't care about baseball cards at all.
I think it's inevitable, and good for the collecting hobby, that individual interests cover such a wide spectrum.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Frank Robinson 9 around 50K. Gibson 9 around 45K. Seriously. And the 7 Mantle on Goodwin is over 200K on day one.

[MetsBaseball1973]

I think it's pretty poor form and really low sportsmanship to try and put down what some fellow collector spends his money on. Certainly doesn't create an inviting environment.

Perhaps a die hard Ozzie Smith fan could not care two licks about Mathewson. Yet we don't see the Smith fan railing against the Mathewson purchaser.

[Scocs]

Listen, I love Ozzie Smith and Terry Bradshaw. I love filet mignon too, but I wouldn't spend $33K on a piece of it.

Breaking price records is one thing but what was the price of the last one to sell? What is the SMR? How many 1979 Topps cards are out there? How many unopened packs still exist? I am just saying there is no logic behind a purchase like that.

You think a price like that will be sustained? A guy is now going to sell his PSA 9 Smith for ONLY $5k?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by MetsBaseball1973

I think it's pretty poor form and really low sportsmanship to try and put down what some fellow collector spends his money on. Certainly doesn't create an inviting environment.

Perhaps a die hard Ozzie Smith fan could not care two licks about Mathewson. Yet we don't see the Smith fan railing against the Mathewson purchaser.

I think you can say what you want to but if you are going to give an opinion of someone else's thought you need to have your full name in your post. Nothing personal...same rule for everyone and it's at the top of every page in bold print.

It's a chat board. If someone thinks someone else is acting crazily they can address it, with their name being next to their thoughts. No worries at all...

[ullmandds]

Personally I think a much more interesting "what if" would be the $20,000 plateau from REA .

[glynparson]

I have heard a lot crazier prices than either the bradshaw or the Ozzie. I could easily see the Ozzie selling for more. I would have guessed probably 25- 35 on the bradshaw but in this hot of a market 50 doesn't surprise me at all

[Hot Springs Bathers]

I have looked at the site, but am too stupid I guess to see the final price on the T206 set. What did it sell for?

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Hot Springs Bathers

I have looked at the site, but am too stupid I guess to see the final price on the T206 set. What did it sell for?

I think you have to sign in to see prices for closed auctions on Heritage. But the set sold for 108k and the Clemente 131k.

I agree with those who said we shouldn't be calling fellow collectors morons for what they're spending their money on. High grade HOF RCs are exploding right now apparently. I was just as surprised as everyone else by a lot of the prices but that Ozzie in a 10 has a very low pop. They don't come up very often.

[botn]

Originally Posted by Scocs

I want to know what moron dropped $50K on a mint 1971 Terry Bradshaw rookie card? Not to mention the fact that there are already twenty (20) OTHER PSA 9s out there!

I also want to know the other moron who shelled out over $33K on a gem mint 1979 Ozzie Smith rookie card when -- for the same price -- you could have acquied a 1938 Goudey high number Joe DiMaggio in NM-MT+!! Or would I rather have a gem mint Ozzie Smith rookie card or a brand new renovated kitchen (AND bathroom outside of NY)...? Are you kidding me?

Scott

Buyer is far from a moron. He just increased the value of his Bradshaw and Smith rookies that he is sitting on so when he dumps them onto the market he will have a nice pay day.

[Republicaninmass]

. Buyer is far from a moron. He just increased the value of his Bradshaw and Smith rookies that he is sitting on so when he dumps them onto the market he will have a nice pay day.


Provided there is a great fool.

The t206 set is far from complete, in fact it is missing the toughest and most expensive cards. Why is that aspect so difficult for people to grasp. No other set would be considered complete missing cards, but it's fine in the t206 case. I never understood it, and it's deterred me from collecting the set

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by botn

Buyer is far from a moron. He just increased the value of his Bradshaw and Smith rookies that he is sitting on so when he dumps them onto the market he will have a nice pay day.

I just looked up the population for PSA 10 Ozzies. Total pop is 4. Do you honestly believe the guy who won this card owns the other 3 and was trying to run the price of this card up to increase their value? That seems very unlikely.

I have heard the rumors of this pump and dump strategy. The cards this might make this strategy pay off are cards like the 86 Jordan, 55 Clemente, and 52 Mantle that have a high enough population and still hold some value at lower grades. Not 70s rookies with single digit PSA 10 populations.

[gnaz01]

Originally Posted by Leon

What is the pop of Clemente RC's? Probably about a million if they all get graded.

EXACTLY!!!! Couldn't have said it better myself, LL.

[Peter_Spaeth]

What's the point of owning a 10 anyhow? It's just a number on a flip assigned somewhat arbitrarily. Speaking as a collector not an investor of course.

[4815162342]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What's the point of owning a 10 anyhow? It's just a number on a flip assigned somewhat arbitrarily. Speaking as a collector not an investor of course.

The real question is when will we see the Pristine 11 grade? SGC and BGS already have Pristine grades - when will PSA follow suit?

It helps if you pronounce "11" with a British rocker accent.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by 4815162342

The real question is when will we see the Pristine 11 grade? SGC and BGS already have Pristine grades - when will PSA follow suit?

It helps if you pronounce "11" with a British rocker accent.

I think a 10.5 would logically come first. Why isn't there a PSA 9.5 by the way, if there is a half step between every other pair of grades there should be one between 9 and 10?

[4815162342]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I think a 10.5 would logically come first.

There isn't a 9.5.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by 4815162342

There isn't a 9.5.

Right, but why not? Mint plus but not quite Gem Mint. Same logic as Near Mint to Mint plus no?

[Hot Springs Bathers]

Thanks Jesse!

[BeanTown]

A majority of us starting collecting as kids. As we learn and start to earn more income, our taste change. For me, I started back in the 70s. Next thing you know I'm buying 60s and 50s issues. Then I start on the "type cards" from the 50s (Red Heart, Dan Dee, Meyer, etc..) Next thing you know I'm buying pre war cards. What's after that? 19th century and rare type cards of early 20th century. Now, what? Let's start buying HOFers and rookie cards. Plus, let's look for market nitches like Post Cards, Supplements, newspapers, etc..

Never wanted to collect autographs, bats, gloves, jerseys, etc... As they seemed more like social status items for the wealthy to display.

So, my hunch is that there are many new collectors/investors entering into the hobby with money. I think in time they will get more educated on all the items above, and their taste will change. No doubt the HOFers from the 50s are red hot now, and I think it's only the beginning. Population reports should be used more on many issues and supply and demand will ultimately prevail.... The question is when?

Many advanced collectors do not like to share knowledge which actually hurts the long term value of super rare items and it limits the number buyers when a piece comes up for sale. It's also nice too see advanced collectors write articles and books to educate people and most of the time it's after they are done with their collecting of the subject matter they discussed.

I think Leon (Hi Leon) would have gained 50% more off his auction proceeds had he wrote an book a year or two earlier on type cards and scarcity. He probably would have labelled it "Its too rare, for its own good". Samething with Terry Knouse (Hi Terry) if he wrote a 19th century book and the title might be "Last I checked, they are not making anymore of these".

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What's the point of owning a 10 anyhow? It's just a number on a flip assigned somewhat arbitrarily. Speaking as a collector not an investor of course.

As a collector I suppose not much unless you have a lot of money and are the type of collector who wants the best possible example of every card in your collection. There seem to be enough of these to sustain the high prices for cards that are rare for the grade.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

As a collector I suppose not much unless you have a lot of money and are the type of collector who wants the best possible example of every card in your collection. There seem to be enough of these to sustain the high prices for cards that are rare for the grade.

There is an assumption there that 10s are better than 9s. In some cases, perhaps, but as a rule, no. Tons of 10s are just bumped 9s. Most 10s would not regrade 10 if cracked out and resubmitted that's just the nature of the process. There is a fair amount of arbitrariness and percentage game about it IMO.

[botn]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

I just looked up the population for PSA 10 Ozzies. Total pop is 4. Do you honestly believe the guy who won this card owns the other 3 and was trying to run the price of this card up to increase their value? That seems very unlikely.

I have heard the rumors of this pump and dump strategy. The cards this might make this strategy pay off are cards like the 86 Jordan, 55 Clemente, and 52 Mantle that have a high enough population and still hold some value at lower grades. Not 70s rookies with single digit PSA 10 populations.

You are being a bit too literal. Was applying a widely known concept to the two rookie card examples. I did not look up pops. You and i are in different realities when it comes to the current move of the market. You feel it is entirely spirited bidding. I know it is not.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by MetsBaseball1973

I think it's pretty poor form and really low sportsmanship to try and put down what some fellow collector spends his money on. Certainly doesn't create an inviting environment.

Perhaps a die hard Ozzie Smith fan could not care two licks about Mathewson. Yet we don't see the Smith fan railing against the Mathewson purchaser.

Trolling isn't allowed. You registered with the wrong info and wrong name ..... I don't understand it, as I think I know who you are, but it is what it is. Buh bye.

[botn]

Originally Posted by Leon

Trolling isn't allowed. You registered with the wrong info and wrong name ..... I don't understand it, as I think I know who you are, but it is what it is. Buh bye.

Not sure who he is but thank you. Overly annoying.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by botn

You are being a bit too literal. Was applying a widely known concept to the two rookie card examples. I did not look up pops. You and i are in different realities when it comes to the current move of the market. You feel it is entirely spirited bidding. I know it is not.

Fair enough. That would have to be a pretty elaborate plan to lift the entire market up artificially but if whoever is responsible has enough money I suppose it's possible. I just think that Smith with such a low population could be a legitimate sale.

[botn]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Fair enough. That would have to be a pretty elaborate plan to lift the entire market up artificially but if whoever is responsible has enough money I suppose it's possible. I just think that Smith with such a low population could be a legitimate sale.

Oy...As I have stated here and privately to you, there are guys who are legitimately bidding too who do not know or care that there is artificial bidding taking place. And no it is not that elaborate or hard to do.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by botn

Not sure who he is but thank you. Overly annoying.

Being annoying isn't against the rules or I would frequently have to ban myself. However, posing as someone you aren't is against the rules. I hope I keep getting good, anonymous tips too. I appreciate them.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

There is an assumption there that 10s are better than 9s. In some cases, perhaps, but as a rule, no. Tons of 10s are just bumped 9s. Most 10s would not regrade 10 if cracked out and resubmitted that's just the nature of the process. There is a fair amount of arbitrariness and percentage game about it IMO.

This debate seems to come up often and I agree with this for the most part. The difference between a 9 and 10 can seem arbitrary at best, especially when viewing scans online. But I'm sure a lot of people have tried to bump their 9s to 10s and many of these type of cards 9s out number 10s by huge ratios, 285 to 4 in the case of the Smith. Even with the 86 Jordan it's about 2400 to 240. A lot of 9s may have been bumped to 10s, but several times more have likely tried and failed.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

. Buyer is far from a moron. He just increased the value of his Bradshaw and Smith rookies that he is sitting on so when he dumps them onto the market he will have a nice pay day.


Provided there is a great fool.

The t206 set is far from complete, in fact it is missing the toughest and most expensive cards. Why is that aspect so difficult for people to grasp. No other set would be considered complete missing cards, but it's fine in the t206 case. I never understood it, and it's deterred me from collecting the set

If the collector says it is complete at 518 or 520, who is to say he is wrong? Do you have to have every error and variation to have a complete Topps set? Do you have to have both #66 Williams and Piersall to have a complete 54 Bowman set? The great thing about t206 is that it can be collected any way you want. We can argue about what makes it complete, but unlike a modern set where one of each number is needed, there is no right answer.

I know in the 80's when the hobby took off, the Big 3 (4) were not considered to be part of the set. Beckett listed a complete set price as 520 cards with sperate prices for the others. So, saying it is a complete set of 520 is a valid opinion, everyone knows what you are talking about.

[botn]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

There is an assumption there that 10s are better than 9s. In some cases, perhaps, but as a rule, no. Tons of 10s are just bumped 9s. Most 10s would not regrade 10 if cracked out and resubmitted that's just the nature of the process. There is a fair amount of arbitrariness and percentage game about it IMO.

Can't the same apply to 8s and 9s? I see a great deal of 8s that go to 9s. So is the 9 grade pointless too?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

This debate seems to come up often and I agree with this for the most part. The difference between a 9 and 10 can seem arbitrary at best, especially when viewing scans online. But I'm sure a lot of people have tried to bump their 9s to 10s and many of these type of cards 9s out number 10s by huge ratios, 285 to 4 in the case of the Smith. Even with the 86 Jordan it's about 2400 to 240. A lot of 9s may have been bumped to 10s, but several times more have likely tried and failed.

Smith is a bit unusual because of centering issues. For many cards though, there is more going on than just the strict merits of the card.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by botn

Oy...As I have stated here and privately to you, there are guys who are legitimately bidding too who do not know or care that there is artificial bidding taking place. And no it is not that elaborate or hard to do.

I get what you're saying. I think where we disagree is exactly how much influence this group is having on the hobby as a whole. Time will tell if these new prices are sustainable or will continue to rise even more, or if they will come crashing back down to the level of a couple of years ago.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by botn

Can't the same apply to 8s and 9s? I see a great deal of 8s that go to 9s. So is the 9 grade pointless too?

Particularly with the very strict grading now I agree there are some 8s that look like 9s. But that said, I think I could tell an 8 from a 9, in general, a lot easier than I could tell a 9 from a 10.

[botn]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Particularly with the very strict grading now I agree there are some 8s that look like 9s. But that said, I think I could tell an 8 from a 9, in general, a lot easier than I could tell a 9 from a 10.

Makes sense.

[aro13]

The buyer of a PSA 9 Clemente RC for $36,000 in 2006 was called a moron then as well. He is not so much of a moron now that a PSA 9 Clemente RC sold for $310,000 last year and $478,000 this year.

If someone can afford to spend $40,000 on a Terry Bradshaw RC good for them.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Leon

Being annoying isn't against the rules or I would frequently have to ban myself. However, posing as someone you aren't is against the rules. I hope I keep getting good, anonymous tips too. I appreciate them.

I was incorrect and Metsbaseball isn't who I thought it was. He is registered with, and uses, a middle name. No harm no foul. We just had a nice conversation. Carry on..

[Scocs]

I was hoping someone would make a This is Spinal Tap reference. You could always call the card "None More Mint.

I guess part of my resentment/sarcasm comes from the fact that many of us have bought into the idea that there is something better than mint, like the cliche of giving "110% effort."

These are pieces of paper when it comes down to it -- there is no intrinsic worth, unlike gold. Just because someone bought a mint Bradshaw rookie for $50k and another bought a gem mint Ozzie rookie for $33K doesn't make them WORTH that much money. When two more Smith 10s are slabbed and another five Bradshaw 9s are slabbed, will the value tumble like it should....? But these are investors playing with Monopoly money here, not collectors.

In the end, does it really matter that you have the #1, #3, or #6 set on the PSA Registry....? It's like a bunch of middle school kids except they're using real cash.

Scott Segal

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Scocs

I was hoping someone would make a This is Spinal Tap reference. You could always call the card "None More Mint.

I guess part of my resentment/sarcasm comes from the fact that many of us have bought into the idea that there is something better than mint, like the cliche of giving "110% effort."

These are pieces of paper when it comes down to it -- there is no intrinsic worth, unlike gold. Just because someone bought a mint Bradshaw rookie for $50k and another bought a gem mint Ozzie rookie for $33K doesn't make them WORTH that much money. When two more Smith 10s are slabbed and another five Bradshaw 9s are slabbed, will the value tumble like it should....? But these are investors playing with Monopoly money here, not collectors.

In the end, does it really matter that you have the #1, #3, or #6 set on the PSA Registry....? It's like a bunch of middle school kids except they're using real cash.

Scott Segal

IMO PSA is going to contribute to the madness by not slabbing any more. Since a 10 is an arbitrary grade anyhow, not hard to bring that about.