T5 Jackson - $47,853 vs. $182,425

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

Two T5 Jacksons are auctioned within a few months of each other -- one has a reported price realized of $47,853 (Mastro Auctions), the other $182,425 (Mile High Auctions), almost four times more. Yes, I recognize the one in the Mastro Auctions had some issues with the photo, but the photo quality was outstanding and the mount had no meaningful flaws. Anybody else scratching his/her head on this one?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Talk about timing...Wow, that's quite a difference. Thin market on some items. Maybe the top 2 people really wanted one last time and drove it that high. This one comes up on it's heels with the person willing to pay the most for one out of the game. The 3rd person only wanted to go to around 40k....so the last auctions runner up should have got this one for where the current market is. Timing......and congrats to whomever won both of them....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

Not quite as dramatic, but did anyone else notice that a PSA7 McPhee (the highest graded by two notches, I believe) sold in Mastro's auction for $8166? Previously, a 4 sold for $13K plus juice and I think a very nice 2 with some writing on back sold for over $10K. One thing is clear to me. The direct, immediate, and certain cause of this precipitous drop in price is the fact that I finally own a McPhee.

[Archive]

Posted By: Greg Ecklund

This post would fit in well with the "Cards as Investments" thread. Definitely an example of how volatile things can get at the high end and for me an example of why it should always be a hobby first.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

Timing, timing, timing...

I'd be willing to bet that the consignor for this T5 is singing the blues but that's just the way it works out sometimes. One thing for certain is that the consignor did choose a good auction house and probably figured on a similar result.

[Archive]

Posted By: Harry Wallace (HW)

I am 99% sure who won the card in Mastro's auction and he was not even the underbidder in the Mile High auction.

Maybe the fact that Mile Hile called it the only know example had something to do with it. If the person paid $180,000 partially based on the assumption that it was a one of a kind Jackson card, he is surely disappointed. Does anyone know who won the card?

REA sold the exact same card that was in the Mile High auction a while back for $5,000 or so. That has got to be a record for greatest return on a single baseball card in a relatively short period of time. How would you like to be the person that originally sold the card and only got $5,000 or so for it?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay

Two points/questions:

1-Has anyone ever heard who won the Jackson in the MHCC auction?

2-The McPhee in Mastro may have had a higher numerical grade but it is inferior to the one in REA by alot. Forget the number, look at the card. The Mastro example had a faded photo and the REA one had a sharp photo.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

The REA and Indy Find McPhee cards have much nicer images than the SGC84 McPhee in this last Mastro.

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

While we're on the "who bought it" topic, anybody know who landed the 1914 Boston Garter Jackson from that same Mile High auction? That one touched down at $102,974.

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Masson

"a mysterious, wealthy newcomer to the hobby"
If true, he obviously inherited it.

They eat folks like that for lunch in coins, stamps and horses,
but they usually show up with a splash, not anonymously.

If the cards didn't really trade, why bother running them up to absurd levels?

The whole episode is bizarre.

[Archive]

Posted By: WP

Does the auction house have motivation to do so?

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

To respond, for the dishonest-inclined, there is signficant motivation for both the consignor and auction house to run levels up to absurb levels. The consignor would benefit by establishing a much higher market value for his/her card. So the consignor would then take it back, hold it for a period of time, then reconsign it (hoping to piggyback on the "new" market value). For the auction house, in addition to any "fee" the consignor might pay it to participate in such a scheme, it would be salivating as it imagines its next ad trumping how it generates higher prices than its competition.

[Archive]

Posted By: Harry Wallace (HW)

Corey - I do not know who won the Boston Garter, but I am pretty sure that they both came from the same consignor.

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

Harry, that's my understanding as well.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I've been in the hobby long enough to know that when something does not look right often it isn't right. At the very least, it shows how two determined bidders can skew the price of an item. However, if the bider who paid $180K thought it was unique, he must be pretty upset right now. Unique is a dangerous term in the hobby, because a second one or more is always potentially around the corner.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

The cards in Mile High did come from the same consignor, and he is an honest long-time collector.

Thus, I do NOT think he was pulling the old "bid on your own item and run up the price" trick.

I think someone with more money than sense thought they were buying a "one-of-a-kind" item and got burned when another one surfaced.

How many more may still surface??

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay

Hal--How do you know this?

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

All I know is the consignor.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Something similar happened with the T206 Doyle NY Nat'l. About 6 or 7 years ago a PSA 2 sold in a Ron Oser auction (before he joined Mastro) for 170k. Then about 4 years ago a PSA 3 sold for something like 58k in a Mastro auction. These sales were a bit more spread out timewise. I don't think there was anything fishy. I just think it is sometimes a matter of timing. Also, in a thin market when one agressive bidder is eliminated, it can make all the difference.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: Wesley

After the Mile High auction, a forum member posted that he was underbidder on the T5 Jackson in that auction. Hopefully he won the one in Mastro at the discounted price.

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

The exact same T5 Jackson in the Mile High Auction sold in July 2000 for $6,412. The auction house was REA, at that time a division of Mastro Auctions. The $182,425 reported price realized by Mile High means that in six years the card increased in value by 2,745%. Since that time, the highest other price appreciations in the vintage card market to my knowledge have been the T210 Jackson and the Baltimore News Ruth, each appreciating perhaps 900%, and even that might be stretching it. So what this means is that for the T5 Jackson to have been legitimately sold by Mile High at that price, TWO disinterested bidders with no connection to the consignor or the auction house had to have been ready, willing and able to buy at a price reflecting a price appreciation about three times greater than any other vintage card has known to have appreciated in the same time period. Is this possible? Yes, but to call it extraordinary could only be described as an understatement. For me I would be a lot more comfortable with the whole thing if I knew who the buyer and underbidder were. I also would be a lot more comfortable if it were confirmed that the underbidder was the winning bidder of the T5 Jackson that Mastro Auctions just sold.

[Archive]

Posted By: Wesley

Here is the thread about the T5 Jackson when it was auctioned by Mile High.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/thread/1150391723/last-1150509696/T5+Pinkerton+Joe+Jackson


The last time a T5 Jackson was for sale, people were talking about how the card was obviously going to break six figures or more.

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

Wesley,

That thread examines the card's value from the perspective of foresight, no doubt influenced in part by the card's astronomic rise as the auction was nearing its close. I'm now looking at the situation from the perspective of hindsight, seeing how a comparable T5 Jackson sold two months later for a fraction of the price. It is that subsequent sale which to me raises questions about the first one. Had the second T5 Jackson broken the 6-figure barrier, I don't think we'd be having this discussion.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Corey,
You wrote:

"Wesley,

That thread examines the card's value from the perspective of foresight, no doubt influenced in part by the card's astronomic rise as the auction was nearing its close. I'm now looking at the situation from the perspective of hindsight, seeing how a comparable T5 Jackson sold two months later for a fraction of the price. It is that subsequent sale which to me raises questions about the first one. Had the second T5 Jackson broken the 6-figure barrier, I don't think we'd be having this discussion."

To further the debate let me say a few things. First of all the underbidder, in the Mile High Auction, has been on our board saying he was the underbidder. That underbid price, with juice, would have been $165,800.00 (or there abouts). Let's take out the top bidder who did win it and is happy with it, I believe. So we have someone willing to pay $165,800 for THAT particular card. You said comparable but I would argue we don't know that the underbidder in Mile High thought the Mastro one was comparable. The mount was a different color and not like any I have seen, the image was not as good, and the border didn't look right being that it's larger and white......Maybe those things led to less bidders on the Mastro one and especially the underbidder(s). I would be a little careful about crying foul without all of the facts....For the record I don't think there was any funny business going on I just think the bidders on the Mile High card didn't all bid on the Mastro one. I am also NOT saying that the Mastro one isn't legit but it is obviously different....
You can look at the two pictures and tell that...easily....best regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

Leon,

To use your terminology, I'm not "crying foul without all the facts". The main reason I put up this thread was to get facts. Also, in one of my posts I distinctly leave open the possibility that everything about the Mile High sale was legit. Yes, as you and other have noted, there are sensible reasons why the two cards could trade at such different prices. However, I believe the facts surrounding it (including the simulataneous sale of a restored 1914 Boston Garter Jackson from what I have been told is the same consignor for $103K) raise a legitimate basis for discussion. I've been around long enough to know that just because an auction house announces a card/item sells for a certain amount, that doesn't mean eventhing by definition is kosher about what went on. Indeed some months ago when the T210 Jackson from the Halper sale was put on eBay, the thread this Board had about that auction had no shortage of posts speculating as to what shenanigans might be happening. Also, while not singling out any particular auction house, I think it would be very naive to believe that shill bidding does not take place in this hobby, or that all reported sales actually took place. I think questioning things and not assuming that all is sanguine is healthy.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Clarke

I would like to know the history with the Milehigh card. If memory serves my correct, TIK had one for sale at around 15K not too long ago? Not sure if the same one. I do not think most people would think that the Jackson Cabinet was a one-of-a-kind item. I would bet there are 10-15 of them in collections or attics. I think the Milehigh Cabinet was a GREAT item and the price might be a steal 10 years from now. When did the Wagner T206 card break 6 figures? I bet people had the same debate...

JC

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

Different T5's, I think the mount for the Mastronet T5 was fine. I won a lot of about 12 or so T5's from a Mastronet auction--mostly minor league Toledo cabinets in about 2000 or 2001 and about 1/2 of them were on this cream color type mount. For comparison purposes.......The gray mounts were much more prevalent I think........have seen other mounts but like Leon, I was suspect on those including a brown mount on a horizontal T5. It had MUCH larger margins that any of those pictured below.....

Jacksons that sold in Mile High and Mastronet...




Eddie Plank on a similar cream mount.....



A Blair New York Player cabinet from the lot I'd won....

[Archive]

Posted By: scott brockelman

The Mastro item appears to be correct in respect to the other one. I have a few T-5's, some with different color mounts and cream is common, However none that I have nor the ones posted above, have been cropped to the photo image. All have a small white border. Also as i recall someone in the other thread mentioned the MHC had the entire photo glued down, when issued only a very small strip at the top actually was glued to the mount(someone has told me that they have seen ones with a strip at top and bottom, but I have not).


Other than that, the prices realized could certainly be 100% legit, BUT, if the 1sat buyer renegged in Mile High, why wasn't the underbidder offered the item, this is standard protocol for most auction houses, I mean you have a ready and willing buyer. I know that if I was after it and got 2nd and then offered a chance to buy it after the winner fell through I would certainly have jumped on it, UNLESS the Mastro T5 was already on the block. I am unsure of the exact timing.

Random thoughts and facts.

Scott

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I feel the need to state that I DO think the Mastro T5 is a good card and is a great looking Jackson. Many T5's have borders, their pics can have different clarity, and the mounts can be different colors. That being said these 2 being talked about do look different when you look at them. I would love to own either one.....best regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

It's been brought out that the underbidder on the Mile High T5 Jackson admitted such on this Board. That's all well and good. However, that same underbidder hours before the close of the auction posts on that same thread that he expects the card to go for around $150K. The thread started when the bidding was at $89K. Three hours later the underbidder made that prediction. About seven hours after that the bidding was at $131K. While I don't know exactly where the bidding was when that prediction was made, it was obviously betwen $89K and $131K, probably closer to the $89K based on the usual custom of the bidding to sharply accelerate as the auction nears its end. Now why would a person who intends to bid aggressively on an item with hopes of buying it possibly want to make a public pronouncement telling everybody how undervalued the item is?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Good question. Also, after examining many more T5's in the last few hours most do have the white border. I guess the mounts I remember were all darker but the ones I have seen today, here and elsewhere, are all over the board in color. Suffice it to say I probably spoke a little bit out of turn on the physical characteristics and was only going from memory. I have learned more though, which is good.....And Corey's question(s) still remain.....

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

I have e-mailed the Mile High consignor and will let you know if he chooses to speak on this topic.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

The consignor tells me that he received full payment from Mile High and is very happy with results and his timing!

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

(hope it wasn't asked already) Did the high bidder of the MHC Jackson know of any other Jackson's or did he/she rely heavily on all that 'due diligence' that MHC did that identified theirs as the only one?

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

As was mentioned by a couple of members, I was the under bidder on the MHCC T5. Prior to their securing the item, when asked, I told them I could see the card selling for 150K or more based on what I had seen in recent auction results for cards of similar scarcity and importance. Being an avid Jackson collector and never having seen another example I made a bid hoping to own the item. I suppose it was a blessing to me to have only come in second when the following day I learned that Mastro had secured one. And raising the question as to how many more are out there.

I hope I am not stepping on toes when I tell you that the T5 was offered to me by Matro prior to their placing it in the auction. My offer for Mastro's example was too far off from their asking. My offer was based solely on the fact that the photo had the horizontal flaws and more importantly the item was certainly not unique and I had questions about how many more are out there. Making the value I placed on the item significantly less.

I did not win the one in Mastro due to other issues, the foremost being bad timing and not being able to liquidate investments to pay for the item. I had already committed all available cash on hand to two large card deals and was between a rock and a hard place and was not about to start putting myself in a bind for hobby purposes.

While this may not be anyone's business and many of you probably do not care but due to a couple of people who have posted even after knowing this entire story but decided to post their suspicions and fuel the fire and more importantly, Corey's recent post in which he has all but called me a shill for MHCC, I felt people should have some more facts before they go off with their various conspiracy theories as is so popular here.

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: David Vargha

But Greg, the conspiracy theory was far more interesting than the one you just told us.

DavidVargha@hotmail.com

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

Greg,

It's precisely facts that I focus on and that continue to puzzle me about what you've said. The first is that an experienced dealer, which is how you've been described, would believe the card is unique and base such a significant amount of its value on that attribute. None of the T5/Jackson collectors I've spoken with thought another one would not turn up, especially with the publicity generated by a high realized price. In fact, some of these same collectors said they already knew the card was not unique before the Mastro one was announced. All that uniqueness stuff MHCC was trumping about the card is something perhaps a novice would fall for, not an experienced dealer. I've come to learn that most anything is liable to pop up, and I've never regarded that knowledge as divine revelation.

Second, and this is what troubles me the most, why would you announce to this Board hours before the close of the auction that in your view the card still had a ways to go before the bidding stopped? Your post instead addresses what you privately told MHCC. It has to be the most peculiar bidding strategy to publically annnounce hours before the close of an auction that an item you wish to purchase still has a significant ways to go before it reaches its market level.


Edited twice for spelling/grammer

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Masson

If the underbidder was real, which we knew, and the consignor got paid the full amount, a new fact, then someone bought the cards.

The only mystery is who.

Maybe Jay won the lottery.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Not this Jay. I'd be corning the Thorpe market if I won the lottery.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Corey,

I am not sure how to answer your questions, clear up your confusion or address your insinuations. I appreciate those who describe me as an experienced dealer, that is a vast improvement to what is usually said about me, but years in the business does not equate to knowledge of the business. Maybe it is news to you but I have virtually no contact with any of the advanced collectors.

I did not feel the post I made at 1PM PST on the day of the auction was in anyway going to influence the bidding or create a situation that would end up in my being beat. That was what I felt the item was worth, what it would bring and what I was willing to pay for it at the time under the circumstances. Since you feel that was, in all probability, a stupid thing to post after having more information from me, then I guess I will not be able to convince you that I am not so stupid as to post what I did at 1PM PST if I was intending to be a shill.

I do not recall off hand how many bids I made on the MHCC T5 but I can assure you there were several different people who had bid in excess of what Mastro's ended up. Maybe Brian Drent will come on here and post more detailed information as to this auction since his credibility is also being called into question.

Not sure this clears up anything for you. You seem to be convinced that there is foul play and I just do not agree. If people want to add stupid and shill to the list of adjectives for me there is not a whole lot I can do about it.

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Since Greg (the underbidder on Mile High) did NOT win the Mastro T5...

then who did??

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Or for that matter...

who won Mile High?

We still don't know either winner.

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

Greg,

Thanks for the response. I've never said there had to be foul play. I'm just saying the circumstances surrounding the sale of the T5 Jackson look pretty strange and legitimately raise questions. I hear what you've said and let's just say at this point I don't know what to believe. I will add, though, having reread the thread put up the day the MHCC auction closed and on which you posted, one of the posters hours before the auction closed emphatically stated that the card was not unique. I guess you either missed that or questioned the accuracy of what the poster said.

Putting the situation in the light most favorable to MHCC, let me add the following. A siginficant amount of the value of the card was based on the underbidder's belief the card was unique. Another one now having publically turned up, if the one MHCC sold was to be reauctioned, it would almost certainly sell for considerably less. So by MHCC trumping an attribute (uniqueness) of an item that hours after the auction's close was confirmed to be bogus, a good faith winning bidder was forced to pay considerably more than he/said would otherwise have had to.

[Archive]

Posted By: WP

Corey,
Would the winner be able to take action against MHCC for misrepresentation?

[Archive]

Posted By: Millerhouse

In Scott Brockleman's post, he recollected from the earlier string regarding the Mile High T5 of Jackson that it had been stated that the photo had been fully glued down to the mount. He is, in fact, recalling my post on the card in which I questioned, based upon the appearance of the card from the photo supplied by Mile High, whether the photo was fully glued down. I don't know, one way or the other, and no one responded to my post to verify or deny this.

However, I continue to suspect that this is the case, and the posts in this string focusing upon the border of the card make it appear even more suspicious to me.

I invite any long-time T5 collectors, if there are any others out there, to respond. My experience with these has long demonstrated that the photos, as issued, were only glued down to the mounts with a small strip of glue at the top border. Thus, whenever I have seen one fully glued down, my alteration radar has gone off immediately. (It suggests to me that someone who does not know any better had remounted a Pinkerton photo onto a mount from a lesser valued player or a mount with a seriously damaged photo.)

To me, it seems far more horrifying that someone may have paid a fortune for a significantly altered card than the possibility that the bidding itself may have been skewed. Can anyone verify whether the photo was fully glued down?

Dan

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

At the National, Terry Knouse mentioned to me that he previously owned the T5 Jackson that Mile High auctioned. (He regretted selling it just a little too early). If someone calls his attention to this thread, perhaps he can shed some light on whether the picture was fully glued down.

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

WP asks if the winner would be able to take action against MHCC for misrepresentation.

Here is what MHCC said about the uniqueness of the card: "It is not often within the organized hobby of Sports Collectibles that one can be nearly assured that an item is one of a kind or unique, but after performing our due diligence in regards to research, we are confident that this is the one and only example of a 1911 T5 Pinkerton cabinet of Joe Jackson extant.....As previously mentioned, we thoroughly researched the item, as well we discussed the item with many collectors and long time hobbyists and have come to the conclusion that this is the only example known of this extremely rare card."

My answer to WP is I don't know, though I imagine it will become an issue exactly how MHCC performed its due diligence as well as whether the winnning bidder and underbidders relied on MHCC's representations of uniqueness in deciding how high to bid. Perhaps some of the attorneys on this Board might have further insights. I will add, though, that if I were the winning bidder I would be VERY unhappy in light of the underbidder publically stating that the only reason he valued the card as high as he did was because of his belief the card was unique. I would be going to MHCC asking that they refund the portion of the winning price in excess of the amount one bid higher than what the highest underbidder who bid in nonreliance of MHCC's representations of uniqueness was willing to pay.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Corey,

This will be my last post on this thread.

You are correct you never said there was foul play but you have inferred it countless times in your obsession on this matter. I saw the post by Zach and one person posting on a message board claiming he knows MHCC is not the only example is not going to do it for me especially in light of the discussions I had with Brian Drent. I was wrong and Zach was right. I do not know Zach at all and have never even said a single word to him. Was not going to base something he posted determine whether or not I bid. Was there a part of my last post in which I wrote that I did not really have hobby connections that you did not understand? If you want to call me sometime I would be more than happy to bore you with those details.

A significant amount of my decision to bid as high as I did was based on not having ever having had the opportunity to add this item to my collection and having an abundance of unspoken for available funds in which to do it. Your following statement is inaccurate, "only reason he valued the card as high as he did was because of his belief the card was unique." The reason I did not chase the one in Mastro with the same intensity and desire was due to financial constraints, the condition of the photo and it was now the second of how many more. You have all of these hobby connections, it seems. Can you tell us who else had bid on the MHCC example or at least why they did not make an effort to go for the Mastro copy? I placed very few bids on the MHCC example so this was not about two people wanting that item. There were many bids after the 50K level.

Corey, I understand your confusion. Well I don't really but I understand that you are confused or skeptical or suspicious or all three. I think your time would really be better served if you were trying to find who really killed JFK.

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: Harry Wallace (HW)

While T5's generally have a single line of glue at the top of the photo, it is easy to see why many would be fully glued down today.

I think that many of the original owners did not like the fact that the photo was not adhered well to the mount and took it upon themselves to fully glue it down. Most all of the other cabinets cards up to that time has their photos entirely glued donwn. I do not seen any advantage to not doing it at the time.

I am sure that many of the photos started to curl over time and could only be displayed properly if they were totally glued down.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay

Reading this thread makes me feel like a blind man walking past the Fulton Street fish market late on a hot sunny day.