Goodwin pick-ups

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

It goes without saying that "you're all winners." That being said, did anyone pick up some prizes from Goodwin's auction last night?

Ironically, I got a Nap and also will need one later, thanks to the nearly 5 a.m. ending time of the auction.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark T

?t=1196438590

?t=1196438604

?t=1196438619

?t=1196438634

[Archive]

Posted By: BcD

http://www.psacard.com/set_registry/display_cards.chtml?rsetid=84357&alltime=no&rank=4&tied=0&requesttimeout=9999

I know JK bid on it!

BcD

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

I managed to pick up the last card I needed(62T Witt 287) in psa 8 to complete my 1960-68 Topps run in psa 8 or better. Paying $7,500 for the two toughest commons in this set was something I questioned doing but someitimes you just have to pay up.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Jim- I thought you swore off auctions?

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric

I picked up the three low grad N172 Old Judge's

ARLIE LATHAM - PSA 3
FRED PFEFFER - PSA 2
PATSY TEBEAU - PSA 2

Very happy with the purchase!

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Barry,

Certainly for star cards or cards over a certain price but for lower price cards where it is the only way I can get the card then I will bid.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I wish I had the luxury of calling two commons for $7500 lower priced cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: jeffdrum

Barry,
I had the same reaction when I read Jim's follow up post. Certainly gives me a different perspective on lower priced cards. In any event, Jim congrats on reaching the end of this quest!

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Has Kevin S approved these yet?

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

Jim,

I was going to bid on one of those cards, but I was pretty sure it was trimmed, so I stayed away. Best of luck though!

James

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Certainly for star cards or cards over a certain price but for lower price cards where it is the only way I can get the card then I will bid.

The above post by Jim illustrates exactly why the hobby will never be "cleaned" up as Jim would like it. Not saying Jim should not have bought the card but given his adamant new stance on buying, it took less than 2 weeks before he made a concession and deviated from his plan.

My point being that the desire to acquire and collect always seems to be larger than that which drives our principles. Congrats to Jim on his set run. And yes those holders can get expensive.

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Leon, Greg

As you will recall I said I would not buy any card over $10K without having it looked at by Kevin. I was not referring to commons from the 1960s that I need to finish my sets.

I am referring to stuff like 33 Goudey Ruth psa 8s, or 34-6 Diamond Star card #1 etc.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Jim- I'm with Greg on this one.

I think it's poor form to speak so disparagingly about auction houses, and their refusal to offer refunds, and then come on the board to say you just bought a multi-thousand dollar card from Goodwin. You're free to buy it, and to enjoy it, but I would have kept that one under my hat.

Didn't you foresee the can of worms it would open?

[Archive]

Posted By: jeffdrum

What's the difference in pre-45 and post-50? Have you deemed one much more susceptible to hanky panky? WOuldn't all sets where the registry is @ play be equally susceptible to chicanery?

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Barry,

No--I said that any card over $10K I would send in to Kevin. Also send I would try to avoid auction houses. Don't see your point. Hard to avoid them all together if you are trying to build over 100 sets in psa 8 or better.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

My point is you said numerous times that you would no longer participate in auctions. My response is auctions are a perfectly good avenue to obtain cards and they need not be boycotted. That's all.

[Archive]

Posted By: JK

BCD -

Its a beauty - but what makes you think I was bidding

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

the two toughest commons in this set

Apologies for being slightly OT but besides Witt, what is the other tough card? It's been so long since I collected these that it's probably worth my while to unclip mine out of the spokes!

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

JimCrandall said,
"In fact probably any card I buy over $5,000 that I have a doubt about I would have the sale contingent upon Kevin's seal of approval."

Well either his $ number went up to $10,000 for requiring Kevin's services, or he now has greater trust in auction houses than a few weeks ago.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

Nice job, JimB.

Barnaby Jones-like.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

JimB,

Whoops--I meant $5,000--

Thank you for pointing that out.

Abner,

The other ultra tough one is Don Landrum.

Barry,

Are you sure I said that "numerous" times--I am trying not to buy cards from auctions. You tend to be a little loose around what I have said in the past. My recollection is I am trying to buy my high dollar cards directly from dealers and that is a preferable business model for me as I have the flexibility to have them reviewed by an expert.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Jim- you have emphatically said on numerous occasions you will not buy from auction houses any more. Personally, I don't care who you buy from, but I am not misstating your words.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

There are a number of prices for star cards in this auction that make absolutely no sense to me. For starters, $1200 for an ugly 62 Topps Spahn 8, a card that according to VCP has sold for an average of $150? Over $3000 for a 62 Koufax 8, a nice one granted, but still. Close to $400 for a 65 Topps Banks 8, a card that is incredibly easy to find for $150 or less? What a great racket this auction biz is.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

"on numerous occasions"

Prove me wrong Barry and I will be the first to admit it--otherwise admit that once again you are misstating what I have said.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Well Jim, I don't have the computer skills to find your old posts, so you win this battle by default.

Perhaps someone else can find them.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brad

Up Grade!

[Archive]

Posted By: marty quinn

decided last second not to go for the 34 green gehrig psa 7, sorry i did, on another note....for all of you that got the catalog, lot #1 the tim keefe psa 8, is it me or does the corners look slightly rounded on at least 3 of them??? the more i look the more they do look rounded, if so a psa 8??? holy cow...did anybody see this card in person?
with respect to goodwin i did not view it on-line, maybe it is much better than the cat. picture, sure hope so...

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

I think anyone who pays that much for a common is insane!! Jim, I suspect you would agree, but congrats on completing your set.

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul S

I'm still trying to figure out what makes the 62T Witt and Landrum so tough. Is it just a current scarcity? (I don't have any recent sales data).They are listed among the least expensive in the SCD; no short print, no high series. I know 62T's edges easily show wear, but still...[scratches head in bewilderment]

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

I'm wondering who picked up the E125 Clarke. It seems like a real steal to me at about $800, considering the last one sold for $8,000 in REAs auction. This one was missing one of the tabs, but a 10-fold difference when only two copies are known seems a bit extreme.

I thought long and hard about buying it, but decided it just wasn't a priority for me even if it seemed like a good deal.

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

I don't really have the time to do all the research necessitated by the challenge, but I believe Barry was referring to comments like this one:

"I realize auction houses are not set up to operate like this at the present time so it makes me unlikely to buy cards sight unseen at auctions."

From this thread:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/message/1195335892/last-1195399429/Re-+www.AlteredCards.com

It's not really a big feal, but it's just that JimC's behavior tends to bely his own convictions about reforming the hobby (e.g., not having his current collection reviewed, only new pickups; not having these new pickups reviewed; continuing to use auction houses, etc.). Frankly, I could care less how JimC collects, but while he's on his soap box he might want to act a little bit more like he preaches.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Don't try to figure out why Witt, Landrum, or any other normally available common in the 1962 Topps
set are garnering such ridiculous $$$$. All it is, is a figment of those who "live & die" by POP #'s.

These cards are perfect examples of how the POP #'s tend mislead when it comes to COMMON cards,
whether they are 1962 Topps or T206's. Common sense will tell anyone who cares to apply it.....why
such cards have Low POP #'s. Most Collectors/Investors don't give a crap for many of the commons
in a given set. The majority of the cards they submit for grading are stars and HOFers. The commons
fall by the wayside....hence, a lot of them invariably have Low POP's. But, that does NOT really make
them scarce.

I've put together 2 complete 1962 Topps sets....one in Ex condition, and a 2nd one in NrMt condition.
And, I never found any card in this set that scarce or unavailable that I would pay "big bucks" for it.

T-Rex TED

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Ted, respectfully I don't think you are entirely right here, there has been enough demand for commons for enough years now that I believe the pop reports are at least somewhat indicative of the difficulty of finding certain commons in NM/MT and MT condition, rather than just a fortuity. My guess is that the issue for all these difficult commons that are not short prints is something to do with sheet placement.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Respectfully, I cannot agree with your premise regarding......"there has been enough demand for
commons for enough years now that I believe the pop reports are at least somewhat indicative
of the difficulty....".
The demand for HOFers and Stars far outweighs the demand for Commons. Especially, in this cur-
rent environment. The type collectors far out-number the set collectors (in the 1980's and early
'90s the converse was true). This is so, nowadays, because of the prohibitive cost involved in
putting together a complete set.

Having said that I completed two 62T sets, believe me there was no difficulty in finding these 2
cards. Furthermore, being a dealer now for 26 years I have bought and sold 1000's of 62T cards
and have helped collectors complete their sets. And, these two cards never raised any "red flags"
on their wantlists.

Regarding placement of cards on their uncut sheets, I happen to also collect uncut sheets. I have
pre-war W-type, Leaf, many Bowman, Topps, and Fleer uncut sheets. I don't have a 62T sheet;
however, I have seen several Low # uncut sheets of this set. And, there are no situations where
any of these cards were subject to even minor damage.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

If these existed in high grade, there is a HUGE incentive for dealers and collectors to submit them because of the crazy money they bring. So assuming even a semi efficient market over a long period of time, there just has to be significance to the fact that certain cards remain relatively scarce in the pop reports.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Lot 725 1962 Topps Maris/Cepeda PSA 8. Nothing rare about it as far as I know, and one just sold on ebay for 168 bucks. Goes in Goodwin for FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS.

http://goodwinandco.com/LotDetail2.aspx?lotid=3293>


EDIT TO ADD link to ebay auction:

http://cgi.ebay.com/1962-Topps-Roger-Maris-AL-NL-Homer-Kings-401-PSA-8_W0QQitemZ290186240094QQihZ019QQcategoryZ55922QQs sPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Now, here you make a very good point.....
"If these existed in high grade, there is a HUGE incentive for dealers and collectors to submit them
because of the crazy money they bring."

Studying the POP reports in the past 2 years, I have seen a trend where high-end Commons seem
to be "coming out of the woodwork". And, as you say the incentive is there if there are "big $$$$"
to be made, more of these Commons will start showing up on the POP report.

I've been downgrading some of sets where I have common cards that I think will grade high. And,
replace them with Ex cards. I'm no fool, I will take advantage of this "crazy" market while it lasts.

But obviously, the problem that results is.....say a particular high-end card has been identified in
the POP report is as one of a kind. Inevitably, 1 or 2 more of this card will eventually come out of
the woodwork and grade the same. The poor sucker that paid those big bucks is screwed. But, as
I said you can "live or die" by these POP #'s.....it's a risky game, at best.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Abner,

The Landrum and Witt are worth what they are because they are legitimately scarce in high grade. If anyone had a nrmt-mt example they would send it in. The toughest 2 cards of any of the Topps sets in the 1960s.

As I have said before the price of cards is all about the pops.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

I agree with you, and I did not mean to suggest for example that a pop 2 would stay that way forever, only that I think enough data and incentive exist so that it says SOMETHING about relative scarcity if a really low pop still exists and that it is not just a random occurrence. I have stated before I do not think low pop PSA 8 commons are good investments precisely because others WILL come along.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve Clark

Peter again brings a great example of this craziness. One has to wonder whether $5k for the Maris/Cepeda is legitimate considering what one could buy the card on eBay for, don't you think?

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Pops are a great measure of relative scarcity. Sure they can change but enough cards have been graded so that the low pops of today will generally be the low pops of tomorrow and continue to command a significant premium over other cards in the set.

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric Brehm

Forgive the post-war digression, but that was a real exceptional 1962 Topps PSA 8 set that Goodwin sold. The cards looked like they were pulled straight out of packs. Most had near perfect centering too. Whoever put that set together really had a good eye for quality. That's the only explanation I can see as to why those cards did so well in the auction. Most of the star and rookie cards brought 2X to 5X SMR value, or higher. And the scarce commons and starter lots all brought very strong prices as well.

The Maris/Cepeda card that Peter S. pointed out sold for over $5000 is hard to fathom. VCP shows eight sales of that card in PSA 8 in the last 13 months at an average price of $171.33. (SMR value is $175.) The card is offered frequently for sale at about book price -- so why would bidders want to run up the price for this particular one like that? Just one of those crazy things that happens in auctions once in a while, I suppose.

Does anyone have a feel for how the pre-war material (e.g. T3's, Cracker Jacks, M116's) did in the Goodwin auction, generally speaking, price-wise?

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

across the board, although the 1915 CJ Alexander PSA 7 went for less than I thought it would.


Here's my only comment on the 1962 Witt. Attached below are two scans of a 1962 Witt card. One is a PSA 7, one is a PSA 8. The price difference between the two is approximately $2,900. Although the scans were made by different people (and thus the color is off), I have endeavoured to make the sizes precisely the same, and have cropped out the flips. Can anyone tell me with 100% certainty (without checking Goodwin's website) which one is the PSA 8?

Marc

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Evanov

I would say the top card looks more like an 8 to me.

Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

Way too much chipping around the edges of the bottom card for it to be an 8. The top one must be the 8.

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Mark, I hope the top one is the 8.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve Murray

the top one "should" be the 8 but I fear we may be wrong. If so