311 Mantle - which would you rather have?

[raulus]

It's been a while since our last battle in the great 311 Mantle wars, so I'd say we're due. To that end, I give you the 311 Mantle Challenge.

These two 311 Mantles are currently for sale at a major auction house. Disclaimer: I'm not trying to out an auction! So please don't hate on me for it.

Looking at them closely, they seem to be in fairly similar condition. Maybe some very minor differences if you look reaaaaaaaaaally closely, including some registration differences. Of course, one is a Type 1, and the other is a Type 2, because why not.

Based on the pre-auction estimates, in the current market, one of these is expected to sell for $2M, and the other for $400k.

Can you discern which one of them will merit the ~5x premium?

Bonus question: Is the 5x premium really appropriate based on the differences here?

Bonus bonus question: Try to guess what they will actually sell for when the auction is finally closed.

[ullmandds]

i prefer the top one

[BobC]

#1 - No - $800K/$450K

[raulus]

Originally Posted by BobC

#1 - No - $800K/$450K

I guess we'll see if you're right on those final prices - certainly the AH expects a much bigger spread.

If it's helpful, they are both graded by PSA, and both received a lofty assessment, although they are 1 full grade apart. So there shouldn't be any potential for TPG splits to drive the pricing results.

[x2drich2000]

Based strictly on the fronts, I agree with Pete on the left/top one being nicer due to the lack of tilt, however, that card also has a noticeable red ink smudge/over printing and maybe a speck of paperloss (I can't tell for sure from the scan) on the back.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Based strictly on the fronts, I agree with Pete on the left/top one being nicer due to the lack of tilt, however, that card also has a noticeable red ink smudge/over printing and maybe a speck of paperloss (I can't tell for sure from the scan) on the back.

Interesting note about the differences in the backs. I must have missed it!

But here they are, since inquiring minds need to know. Ordering here is the same as in the original post.

[darwinbulldog]

I prefer the second one but only because the Type I/Type II differences impact the eye appeal more for me than the minor condition differences, but I would say the first one is in slightly better condition.

[rand1com]

Bottom card is nicer IMO even with the slight tilt. Just presents better overall to me. But there is not a million and a half dollars difference IMO either. First card will go way over $400K.

[tiger8mush]

maybe it's an optical illusion but with the two back photos next to each other, the one on the right appears shorter top to bottom than the one on the left.

[G1911]

Top. Bottom one makes Mantle look too red.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

maybe it's an optical illusion but with the two back photos next to each other, the one on the right appears shorter top to bottom than the one on the left.

I noticed that too, which confused me a bit. I wonder if the back printing area was slightly different between Type 1 and Type 2?

[G1911]

The Red line above "Major and minor league batting records..." is printed shorter on the top example.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by G1911

The Red line above "Major and minor league batting records..." is printed shorter on the top example.

I think the big red box at the top of the back is what is throwing me off.

And I think you're right that the red box is shorter on one version than on the other as well.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

Top. Bottom one makes Mantle look too red.

Assuming the scans are at the same settings then yes the bottom one has sort of an orange hue. I don't think that's common to the variation but maybe. Not a huge deal for me.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by raulus

I think the big red box at the top of the back is what is throwing me off.

And I think you're right that the red box is shorter on one version than on the other as well.

There's a lot of little differences like this on the 2 types that never get talked about or listed publicly when discussing them. I hadn't noticed before but the red bio box does appear to be printed slightly longer on the second example here as well.

It's probably a me thing, but I haven't ever understood why Topps went to such effort when DP'ing a card. Into the 70's Topps continued to evidently design many DP'd cards twice leading to slight variations, rather than just copying the same design work. Obviously they wouldn't care about creating a variant back then, but it seems to my printing and graphic-design-uneducated-ass be a lot more work to do it this way.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Assuming the scans are at the same settings then yes the bottom one has sort of an orange hue. I don't think that's common to the variation but maybe. Not a huge deal for me.

The hue's aren't type related, just the variance in ink in the well and how an exact sheet was run. Topps varied from slightly blue tint to red-looking tints all the way into the 70's. The top one just looks closer to 'correct'.

To me, proper coloring and toning makes a bigger aesthetic difference than how sharp a corner is. The one set I've built to a condition standard, I often pick a lower grade copy as my example for the coloring over a corner difference.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

There's a lot of little differences like this on the 2 types that never get talked about or listed publicly when discussing them. I hadn't noticed before but the red bio box does appear to be printed slightly longer on the second example here as well.

It's probably a me thing, but I haven't ever understood why Topps went to such effort when DP'ing a card. Into the 70's Topps continued to evidently design many DP'd cards twice leading to slight variations, rather than just copying the same design work. Obviously they wouldn't care about creating a variant back then, but it seems to my printing and graphic-design-uneducated-ass be a lot more work to do it this way.

Someone must have explained this somewhere. Levi Bleam almost certainly would know, as he has a special affinity for this card and its history, but others on the forum as well. The no line under the Yankees box on the second variation is especially strange to me although of course it makes them easy to spot.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by raulus

I noticed that too, which confused me a bit. I wonder if the back printing area was slightly different between Type 1 and Type 2?

Yes, there's a bunch of tiny differences in both black and red.

[Johnny630]

Strictly off these two 1952 Topps Mickey Mantles, it’s Type II top version for me, hands down.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by raulus

I guess we'll see if you're right on those final prices - certainly the AH expects a much bigger spread.

If it's helpful, they are both graded by PSA, and both received a lofty assessment, although they are 1 full grade apart. So there shouldn't be any potential for TPG splits to drive the pricing results.

Am making an educated guess, and thinking the better centering on the front of the #1/top card adds enough eye appeal to catch a little more attention (ie: money).

Having said that, the backs on both look pretty decent, with the #1/top card's back, though not perfectly centered, definitely more centered than the#2/bottom card. And there's also the very noticeable diamond cut on the back of the #2/bottom card, further detracting from it as well. Not sure about any paper loss on the back, can't really see it. And the fact you said PSA graded these two cards only one full grade apart pretty much tells me PSA didn't see any paper loss either.

One other thing did catch my attention though about the backs. Is it possible the #1/top card got slightly tilted somehow just when they ran the card through for the red ink run, creating a sort of diamond cut effect for just the red print on back, but not for the black print? To see what I'm talking about look at the print on back of both cards, at the bottom and middle of the cards, where the world "Field.", printed in black, sits just to the left of the word "RECORDS", printed in red. There's also a red line printed between those two words. Now look at the letters "l" and "d" in the word "Field.". On the #1/top card, those two letters look like they both touch that red line, but in the #2/bottom card, they don't. And then if you look to the left of the word "Field." you'll see the word "Avg.", also printed in black. Now notice how the bottom of the letter "g" in that word appears to just touch the black line next to it similarly on both cards #1 and #2? And no other letters in the same row as the word "Field." touches that red line on the #1 top/card, which is what got me wondering if the red printing on the back may have gotten printed at a very slightly different angle than the black printing on that #1/top card? Or is this just another difference between the two types of these '52 Topps Mantle cards that no one had mentioned yet?

[ClementeFanOh]

Two beautiful Mount Rushmore cards, everyone wins with these:

1) I prefer the Type 2 of these examples

2) I think the Type 1 will fetch the premium

3) Is the greater premium "appropriate"? If that means "deserved", then
the proper answer is that it's up to the competitors. We shall see.

I'd love to own the "second place" card

Trent King

[raulus]

Since the responses appear to be slowing down to a trickle, for anyone who hasn’t already figured it out on their own by digging around at the various auction sites, I guess I’ll reveal that the first example is in a PSA 7 holder, and the second is in a PSA 8 holder.

And if you want them badly enough, there’s still a few weeks left to bid in the auction.

Disclaimer: I don’t own a 311 Mantle, so this wasn’t an attempt to drive bids to my item. But they did seem so similar that it seemed like it would be good fun to see which one was favored by the group. And now we know!

[LincolnVT]

Damn it…I was planning on winning both of these until they were outed…now I refuse to bid.

Originally Posted by raulus

It's been a while since our last battle in the great 311 Mantle wars, so I'd say we're due. To that end, I give you the 311 Mantle Challenge.

These two 311 Mantles are currently for sale at a major auction house. Disclaimer: I'm not trying to out an auction! So please don't hate on me for it.

Looking at them closely, they seem to be in fairly similar condition. Maybe some very minor differences if you look reaaaaaaaaaally closely, including some registration differences. Of course, one is a Type 1, and the other is a Type 2, because why not.

Based on the pre-auction estimates, in the current market, one of these is expected to sell for $2M, and the other for $400k.

Can you discern which one of them will merit the ~5x premium?

Bonus question: Is the 5x premium really appropriate based on the differences here?

Bonus bonus question: Try to guess what they will actually sell for when the auction is finally closed.

[JustinD]

Definitely 1 should be higher as that tilt of the second would drive me insane. Personal opinion.

[irv]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Definitely 1 should be higher as that tilt of the second would drive me insane. Personal opinion.

It's an odd tilt as the image itself doesn't look tilted to me with my 58 yr old eyes, more the border, imo.
Both are definitely beautiful cards but I think I'd still prefer the 8 over the 7 grades aside.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by raulus

Since the responses appear to be slowing down to a trickle, for anyone who hasn’t already figured it out on their own by digging around at the various auction sites, I guess I’ll reveal that the first example is in a PSA 7 holder, and the second is in a PSA 8 holder.

And if you want them badly enough, there’s still a few weeks left to bid in the auction.

Disclaimer: I don’t own a 311 Mantle, so this wasn’t an attempt to drive bids to my item. But they did seem so similar that it seemed like it would be good fun to see which one was favored by the group. And now we know!

Interesting, I thought from the scans you posted that there might have been some more surface/printing imperfection issues with the top/#1 card, but expected the centering issues to override that. I don't send anything in for grading, and therefore don't pay attention to and keep track of which TPG is currently more centering obsessed.

For the minions in the hobby that don't follow and live by the "Buy the card and not the holder!" mantra, that means my original guess as to these Mantle's hammer prices is likely backwards. Oh well, just another reason to be glad I'm not so obsessed with grading then.

[raulus]

ICYMI, the PSA 7 sold above the estimate at $468k.

https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball-c.../50059-56369.s

And the PSA 8 sold below the estimate at $1.47M.

https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball-c.../50059-56370.s

[puckpaul]

Well, I am just seeing this, but the second looks way better to me and i was surprised people said they preferred the top one. I guess i am more mainstream on these, and its not a card i have been looking for (I mean as a collector it’s iconic, and i do own a 51 Bowman PSA 4 i bought in a lot and had graded), mostly because he is a Yankee and I am NOT a Yankees fan (make exceptions for Ruth and Gehrig moreso, they are even more iconic and I cant ignore them).

But the picture and color and registration on the second are just way better to my eyes. The first also has a spot of color loss on the upper right area, no? Or is that on all of them?

[BobC]

Originally Posted by raulus

ICYMI, the PSA 7 sold above the estimate at $468k.

https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball-c.../50059-56369.s

And the PSA 8 sold below the estimate at $1.47M.

https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball-c.../50059-56370.s

Seems to indicate this was more of a "buy the holder and not the card" situation to me. Would have expected the obvious diamond cut/print on card #2 to be a bigger factor otherwise. Both are still great cards though.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by BobC

Seems to indicate this was more of a "buy the holder and not the card" situation to me. Would have expected the obvious diamond cut/print on card #2 to be a bigger factor otherwise. Both are still great cards though.

Maybe a little bit of both? Meaning buyers were buying the holder, but also making adjustments for the fact that it was a nicer 7 and a slightly less nice 8. Maybe?

I sort of look at the fact that the PSA 8 sold for a bit less than expected, and the PSA 7 for a bit more. If they were both raw, then I agree that they would probably sell for similar prices, probably even inverted. But at the same time, the fact that the nice PSA 7 sold for more than expected is a sign that buyers aren't just buying the holder. And the opposite is probably true for the PSA 8 coming in a bit lower than expected.

But obviously the fact that the PSA 8 sold for $1M more than the PSA 7 is clear proof that buyers are first and foremost focused on the holder, and then adjust up or down based on what's inside the holder.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by raulus

Maybe a little bit of both? Meaning buyers were buying the holder, but also making adjustments for the fact that it was a nicer 7 and a slightly less nice 8. Maybe?

I sort of look at the fact that the PSA 8 sold for a bit less than expected, and the PSA 7 for a bit more. If they were both raw, then I agree that they would probably sell for similar prices, probably even inverted. But at the same time, the fact that the nice PSA 7 sold for more than expected is a sign that buyers aren't just buying the holder. And the opposite is probably true for the PSA 8 coming in a bit lower than expected.

But obviously the fact that the PSA 8 sold for $1M more than the PSA 7 is clear proof that buyers are first and foremost focused on the holder, and then adjust up or down based on what's inside the holder.

Exactly why when i guessed I did have the prices inverted. Frankly, though I'm not into grading, I'm still surprised card #2 got an 8 with that diamond cut, and off-centering, front and back. I was expecting card #1 to have the better grade with what I thought was a better overall appearance. Of course, I should know better when it comes to TPGs and how anal they can be in regard to technical grading issues. Old Judge cards are to me the poster children of one of what I feel are the obvious deficiencies of TPGs and their grading processes and standards, the failure to take the overall attractiveness/appeal of the card and image itself into consideration. Just look at the fading that naturally can occur with many OJ cards, and the grades they get. You often see some mid- or higher graded OJ cards where you can barely make out the player's image, or even the writing on the card. Meanwhile, you'll find tons of OJs graded 1s or 2s with absolutely stunning and clear images. In my mind, and I'm guessing in the minds of many other OJ collectors as well, that image for me will almost always trump going after the same card with a crappier image, but a higher technical grade.

[pokerplyr80]

I wouldn't have spent that kind of money on either personally. I'd much rather go big for a dead centered 6.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

I wouldn't have spend that kind of money on either personally. I'd much rather go big for a dead centered 6.

Hopefully you could get it for under $1.4M, although Snowman might bid it up that high if it’s truly 50/50 and not merely 51/49.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by raulus

Hopefully you could get it for under $1.4M, although Snowman might bid it up that high if it’s truly 50/50 and not merely 51/49.

Ha hard to say exactly but if an off center 7 went for 468k I'd assume 350 or so for a nice centered 6. Were it not for the resale value I'd rather have a centered 6 over the 8 personally at the same price. But at this level the grade means more than eye appeal.

[puckpaul]

Sure, but just dont forget eye appeal is subjective. I much prefer the bottom card of these two yet many above insist the top looks better to them. The rich color and sharper image of the bottom card work for me.

[robw1959]

I have no preference for either card. They both look stunning to me, and in my opinion there is no discernable reason for the 5X premium.