Standard Catalog pricing question

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike 

I'm not sure how the pricing works in this guide. For example, the 1914 Cracker Jack Christy Mathewson hasn't changed prices in like 5 years, yet there have been 3 sold over the past year. One on Ebay(ungraded) sold for $1500.00, another in Mastro's Aug. auction(SGC 3) sold for over $10,000 and now the one in Mastro's current auction (SGC 2) is over $7000.00. I just don't understand why a rare card like this doesn't change price when it's clear the price HAS changed. Any thoughts?

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian C Daniels

It's sales average consensus related and these grading clowns that put the price guide together for the plastic boss do not track the reality of market trends.............Example~

in 1975 David Festberg purchased an E-145-1 horizontal matty card in EX for $24.65

in 1979-93,maybe 50 times a few of these cards switched hands for $500-2900. I know for a fact. I bought one from John Spalding for $250 and one from Mr. Mint's auction of 1994 for $1775. Alan Silvers purchased one from Norm Showers four years ago for $2200 or so.


Sometime in 2003 one sold for $12,224.50. Instead of seeing a steady rise,they average the price realized with the

in late 2003,some guy with deep pockets and no concern for competition purchased one in Mastro's auction for $24,500 or some number like that in VG/EX

The fact that the greatest number of recorded sales were in 79-93,this brings the sales average way down to about $2000 in EX so there you go! The card is worth $2 in EX according to the "accurate" formula PSA for example will use. Can't speak for the other price guides. That is how the silly thing works. I guess it is assummed that if someone pays $50k for one next month it is a fluke and the one after that will sell for 12k again....NOT!

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

One thing I've learned in doing my book is that there is a great deal of difference between a guide and a report of results. I've offered for years to buy 1928 PCL Exhibits and Zeenuts HOFers for full book adjusted for condition--so far, no takers. The cards are valuable and rare enough that "book" is irrelevant. Just last week I had some jackass write me telling me that I was nuts to ask $1500 for an N162 card because it was a $200 common in the book. OF COURSE, THE CARD WAS IN SGC 86. I got my $1500 on the card because it is rare.

The Standard Catalogue is a guide to relative values--a range of information designed to keep you from paying $1,000 for a $10 card--it doesn't profess to record and report up to date actual prices on rare cards, with certain well known exceptions like the T206 Wagner. In that respect, it is useful. When it comes to rare cards, however, the market makes the card, not the guide, and you have to watch the market.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

The best thing about guides is how wonderful they are as checklists the following year! Just tear out a page and check away!

But they are also useful if you know like nada about a particular card or set, and want to know if the price someone has asked you is totally rip=off or dirt cheap. Thewy're usually within the ballpark, anyway.

For a few months...

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob Lemke

Any sales of 1914 CJ Mathewsons which occurred in the past 12 months canot possibly have been reflected in the 2004 book. Those prices "closed" almost exactly a year ago. We are in the process of assigning final pricing to the vintage section for the 2005 edition as we speak. It will be finished May 1 and while we might be able to sneak in a six-figure change in the weeks up to press date, virtually every price in the book is cast in stone as of May 1. The Lipset, Mastro and Lifson auctions will be reflected in the new book, but anything which happens in the market after May 1 will have to age a year before it's reflected in our pages.

[Archive]

Posted By: BcD

were directed at the "SMR". They reflect in no manner what you do.

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard

The book is really just a guideline for pricing. Throw it away when you are pricing the rare vintage cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: andy

on any rare item, regardless of when it was issued. i have a list longer than my arm of items 1982 and before that i would buy at twice book....anytime any quantity. i'm sure i'm not the only one.
regards to all

[Archive]

Posted By: Halleygator

The SMR could be a lot more accurate since it comes out every so often.

The Ruth rookie in Mastro has a current SMR of $75,000 ... but is already up to $105,000 (including the juice) with a whole week left in the auction.

Obviously the true "value" of the card should INCLUDE the 15% buyer's premium that someone was willing to pay for a card ...

but will the SMR make this simple change in their next issue?

Who knows.

[Archive]

Posted By: Davalillo

The SMR has become increasingly irrelevant as far as card prices are concerned which is too bad. When Joe Orlando focused on it, it was actually quite good, but it is clear that with his other responsibilities he spends no time on it now. He tells people to e-mail him with the changes, so the only time you have changes is when an enterprising collector sends them in. Having your customers do pricing is no mway to run a publication. Obviously, he needs to hire a full-time person to run this but apparently due financial issues he does not do this.

[Archive]

Posted By: Albie O'Hanian

It will be interesting to see what happens with the price in SMR of the Ruth. A "9" currently books at $110,000, and since this 8 is selling at that price I wonder if the prices will rise or if there will be a hand blurb at the bottom of the set stating that a PSA 8 Ruth sold for X amount of dollars.

The current Cracker Jack Mathewson in the Mastro catalog is listed as the only one SGC has graded. What happened to the other card? cracked out, being improved, crossed over?

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

The SMR has never been an accurate pricing tool. It started as a pure promotional scam by claiming to price based on actual sales while at the same time issuing fake prices on cards that did not exist and compounding the fraud by jacking them up every month to show the supposedly great returns from those non-existent PSA graded cards. See some of the early VCBC issues for details. In recent years, the SMR has gotten better at reporting auction results THAT FAVOR PSA PRODUCTS, but it still persists in (1) publishing prices for cards that do not exist or have not transacted in the grades designated and (2) publishing prices that are out of line with reality on "basic" cards. Sure, we see a lot of touting of $2,000 PSA 10 commons from tough sets and we are going to see a $100,000 Ruth rookie, but no reporting of myriad PSA 6-7-8 cards selling at a fraction of SMR prices. When was the last time that you actually paid SMR prices for a PSA graded card that was not a "monster" rarity?

For my money, I far prefer having a guide like the SCD book that is usually low on vintage materials than having someone quote me prices from "7-11" as the retail. Maybe in Bizarro World the SMR is accurate, but not in the real world.

Hal's point w/r/t auction vig is absolutely correct. The total package the buyer has to pay should be considered the sales price. I know I factor in the 15% when I bid.