Legendary Auction Preview

[bcbgcbrcb]

Surprised that nobody has mentioned the online preview is now up, auction begins in one week.

All I can say is WOW!!!

[sycks22]

There were about 50 items that I'm interested in. Pretty amazing stuff in there including the Brunner's Cobb in a PSA 4.5.

[ullmandds]

WOW is right...lots of interesting stuff you don't see every day...this may be shocking to my savings account!!!!

[canjond]

Not sure if anyone from Legendary still reads the board, but the Sweet Caporal pack being described as "Circa 1910s" is most certainly not. It's actually closer to 1920-25 (and at least 1918 based on the tax stamp).

So, a description that reads "we can only assume that a trading card is safely entombed inside as well, though whether it pictures a bird, fish, flag or baseball player is anyone’s guess" is very misleading.

Not trying to single Legendary out here, but they didn't do any diligence on this lot. I'd also be happy to scan the appropriate pages from Springer's Cinderella Stamps guide if they would like verification of tax stamp date.

[thekingofclout]

Originally Posted by canjond

Not sure if anyone from Legendary still reads the board, but the Sweet Caporal pack being described as "Circa 1910s" is most certainly not. It's actually closer to 1920-25 (and at least 1918 based on the tax stamp).

So, a description that reads "we can only assume that a trading card is safely entombed inside as well, though whether it pictures a bird, fish, flag or baseball player is anyone’s guess" is very misleading.

Not trying to single Legendary out here, but they didn't do any diligence on this lot. I'd also be happy to scan the appropriate pages from Springer's Cinderella Stamps guide if they would like verification of tax stamp date.

When I describe something as "circa 1910s" 1918 certainly fits into that time frame. Any where between 1910 - 1919 is acceptable.

[canjond]

Originally Posted by thekingofclout

When I describe something as "circa 1910s" 1918 certainly fits into that time frame. Any where between 1910 - 1919 is acceptable.

Maybe - but that, combined with a description that states "we can only assume that a trading card is safely entombed inside as well, though whether it pictures a bird, fish, flag or baseball player is anyone’s guess" certainly seems misleading to me.

I guess everyone may be entitled to his or her own opinion, but the way I read it, there is a high likelihood of SOME card being inside, when actually, that probability is pretty low.

[tcdyess]

Wow, as a Yankee fan I have only gone through 25 pages and have more in my watch list than any other auction. Some beautiful cards and photos...

[thekingofclout]

Originally Posted by canjond

Maybe - but that, combined with a description that states "we can only assume that a trading card is safely entombed inside as well, though whether it pictures a bird, fish, flag or baseball player is anyone’s guess" certainly seems misleading to me.

I guess everyone may be entitled to his or her own opinion, but the way I read it, there is a high likelihood of SOME card being inside, when actually, that probability is pretty low.

My statement was not "my opinion" Jon. It's the industry standard and has been for decades. Circa 1900s = 1900-1909. circa 1950s = 1950-1959. etc.

Also, I was not addressing their description, as that is a whole different issue. Their dating of the pack is correct and should not be bundled with the description in order to claim they are misleading.

BTW... I want to make it clear that I know absolutely nothing about cigarette packs from that or any era. I simply took your original post at face value and commented accordingly.

[canjond]

Fair enough (although I did state at earliest it could be is 1918 - I'm still leaning closer to early-1920s).

[Kenny Cole]

Describing a pack as "circa"1910 is fine if you don't have information which would narrow it down to a more concrete date. I'm not a dealer, so I can't really comment on what the "industry standard" is, but I would sure hope that is isn't so lax that it allows dealers to say something so broad that their
"circa" statement basically wires around what they know, or should know, is the truth. If that's the "industry standard," then buyers are probably getting screwed on a routine basis

I don't know bupkus about packs, but, at least according to Jon, information narrowing down when the subject pack was issued was available, on the pack itself. That seems rather important to me. I don't know Jon personally, but I tend to trust his opinion since he's made a study of taxstamps on packs, and has been posting helpful information (which doesn't make him money, at least not directly), for quite some time. Then you add the fact that Legendry, IMO, tries to make it appear as if the pack was issued in the early teens by stating that it should have some sort of card in it. I have a problem with that too. If Sweet Caporal was still inserting cards into is packs during the 1918-1920's time frame, I might back off some although I would still think the description was misleading. I don't think that's the case however.

IMO, the description is either based upon a really sloppy investigation into the lot they're selling (which I doubt), or a knowing effort to mislead. Either way it is problematic IMO

[dallen]

Well you narrowed down the reason for the inaccurate write up as "intent to deceive or sloppy investiation". I can tell you that there was no intent to decieve. Although the pack looks similar to the 1910 to 1918 era packs it clearly has a later tax stamp which was missed by our cataloguer. It will be corrected before bidding goes live. Hope you all enjoy the auction!

Doug Allen
President
Legendary Auctions

[canjond]

Thanks Doug - and the offer stands. I'd be happy to scan the pages from Springers guide if you would like them for verification purposes.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

http://www.legendaryauctions.com/Lot...PSA-DNA-MINT-9

WOW!!! I can't imagine what this is going to go for! I want that, but can't get it lol

[ullmandds]

without the coupon on that Dimaggio rookie...I don't think it'll go for "that" much?!

[Jaybird]

NM

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

without the coupon on that Dimaggio rookie...I don't think it'll go for "that" much?!

still a signed rookie non-the less...

[sycks22]

Excited to see what the Ty Cobb back will go for? It's always fun to see those in an auction.

[glenv]

Great stuff. However, a "Buchner Gold Coin" Advertising Poster was in the HOFs "Baseball in America" exhibit for a number of years. Unless the HOF is selling theirs, it is Almost Certainly NOT Unique!

coop_post.jpg

[4815162342]

Was it actually owned by the HOF or did someone loan it to them?

[bcbgcbrcb]

Is it just me or does the Zeenut DiMaggio look like possibly a reprint card? It looks exceptionally clean for a Zeenut card. Also, wouldn't you think that PSA would at least identify the card being that it is a major HOF Pre-Rookie worth thousands of dollars by itself in that condition if it's an original?

[benchod]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Is it just me or does the Zeenut DiMaggio look like possibly a reprint card? It looks exceptionally clean for a Zeenut card. Also, wouldn't you think that PSA would at least identify the card being that it is a major HOF Pre-Rookie worth thousands of dollars by itself in that condition if it's an original?

I think that Zeenut DiMaggio is originally from Halper's collection

[Cat]

I bought a graded signed DiMaggio Zeenut without coupon and then sold it to a board member (at least he used to be a board member) through EBay. Neither when buying or selling do I think it went for much of a premium, if any.

[drc]

I've never heard of that circa 1910 = 1910-19 standard before, and don't consider 1918 as circa 1910. Circa means plus or minus a few years of the date. 1918 is circa 1920.

However, there can be a little looseness to the +/- number (2 years? 3? 5?) as in practice the dater and buyer don't know the year the item was made. If they knew, there would be no need for the circa.

[oldjudge]

Circa 1910 means that the exact date is unknown but that the best guess is 1910. The probability of it being X years later than 1910 is the same as the probability of it being X years earlier than 1910. As Doug acknowledged, the text was incorrect and it was/will be corrected. The person who said that it pertains to the period from 1910-19 is just plain wrong. Also, there is no dealer convention in the English language, possibly only one in the "self-serving bad English" language.

[sayhey24]

Here's an attempt to straighten out this argument about "circa" -- both sides are right because you are talking about two different things.
Early on in the thread the quote is "circa 1910s" -- notice the "s" on the end. Yes, circa 1910s would refer to anything from that decade, just like circa 1960s would pertain to something from 1960 or 1968.

In the last couple of posts, somehow the "s" was dropped and it was changed to circa 1910. Yes, that would pertain to something within a couple of years plus or minus of 1910.

Greg

[drc]

I received my Legendary catalogs and the lot title does indeed says circa 1910s and not circa 1910.

My points about circa 1910 were not relevant to the auction title. As already noted, c. 1910 and c. 1910s are two different things.

I had the correct answer, but to the wrong question

[Runscott]

There was a minute there when I was actually high bidder on a Cobb with Ty Cobb back

...minute's over.

[sycks22]

Originally Posted by Runscott

There was a minute there when I was actually high bidder on a Cobb with Ty Cobb back

...minute's over.

I felt good being the opening bidder, but like you said it lasted 18 seconds.

[thekingofclout]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Circa 1910 means that the exact date is unknown but that the best guess is 1910. The probability of it being X years later than 1910 is the same as the probability of it being X years earlier than 1910.

The person who said that it pertains to the period from 1910-19 is just plain wrong.

Originally Posted by sayhey24

Here's an attempt to straighten out this argument about "circa" -- both sides are right because you are talking about two different things.
Early on in the thread the quote is "circa 1910s" -- notice the "s" on the end. Yes, circa 1910s would refer to anything from that decade, just like circa 1960s would pertain to something from 1960 or 1968.

In the last couple of posts, somehow the "s" was dropped and it was changed to circa 1910. Yes, that would pertain to something within a couple of years plus or minus of 1910.

Greg

Thanks for making this clear for everyone, Greg. As always, my very best regards, Jimmy

[e107collector]

Awesome auction!

I was planning on bidding up to around $10-$12k on the Babe Ruth rookie. By the time I went to enter my inital bid, it's already at $18k.

I can't believe how much demand there is for this card, even in a lower grade.

Oh well, there are some other great cards I have my eye on.

Tony

[Rob D.]

Good luck to everyone who'll be bidding tonight and tomorrow night. (And please don't bid on the lots I'm chasing. )

[glchen]

Besides the usual answer of 2-3 people w/ too much money and trying to buy the same card, any reason why the Famous and Barr Ruth Rookie is going for so much? It's currently at 37.5K before BP. M101-5/4 Ruth's have been going up and this one has decent eye appeal for a 10/1 Poor, but no way it deserves this kind of premium. Is the Famous and Barr back that much in demand?

[bcbgcbrcb]

Gary:

I think it's more the fact that all of the Ruth rookies are going crazy these days. BTW check the current Goodwin auction, the Ruth postcard that you got from me (not the exact one but a second example) is well over $12K with another week of bidding still to go.........

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

Good luck to everyone who'll be bidding tonight and tomorrow night. (And please don't bid on the lots I'm chasing. )

Okay Rob, I'll bow out on the Cobb/Cobb back, AND the Ruth rookie.

Good luck!

[atx840]

Noooo I missed the time to get in, one more hour behind in Hawaii the I thought.

[calvindog]

[Leon]

Originally Posted by calvindog

not me ....j/k

[calvindog]

LOL. Insane, right?

[ullmandds]

wow...that's lunacy!

[Leon]

Originally Posted by calvindog

LOL. Insane, right?

With what I am holding in my proverbial hand, I am just glad it's still crazy.

[seablaster]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

wow...that's lunacy!

What he said.

In that condition, I was thinking 4-5K range. Wow.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Leon

With what I am holding in my proverbial hand, I am just glad it's still crazy.

Agreed. Thank God for the Greater Fool Theory.

[Runscott]

That might have been the insane bid of the night.

Great fun...looking forward to more of the same tomorrow night.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Gary:

I think it's more the fact that all of the Ruth rookies are going crazy these days. BTW check the current Goodwin auction, the Ruth postcard that you got from me (not the exact one but a second example) is well over $12K with another week of bidding still to go.........

Hi Phil,

Yep, I saw that. While I'm definitely happy that I picked that card up before the prices ran up on these cards, I still think that the ~$44K on that Ruth rookie in Poor condition is irrational exuberance. You could have picked up a PSA 4 for $25K on ebay ~6 months ago, and the winner of the card was asking ~$36K for flip on ebay. Definitely money only whales have.

[Bicem]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

wow...that's lunacy!

The guy could have bought a PSA 10 Ozzie Smith rookie for that kind of money!

[calvindog]

PS if anyone wants to make me an offer on my Rose Cobb above in this thread the offers should be in the 45-50K range. Cough.