imo
 

It's real..... and it's spectacular.

I dont see a problem with discussing a high profile card's legitimacy. Its not much different than people here talking about the "sheet cut" 2.8 mil Wagner....is it?

The top left part of the frame not only is not square, it appears to be missing altogether? Are there other examples of this type of printing error on other T206s? It probably is related to the bleeding, and probably is just one of those things...

Methinks someone has some spaining to do. :confused:

paper loss
 

In speaking with another hobby veteran about that upper left corner he believes it's just a little paper loss. I probably concur on that one point. regards

People that own a Cobb/Cobb card are going to say that the price was fair and the card was legit -- because it affects them financially. People that depend on Goodwin's auctions for financial reasons are gong to say the same thing -- because it affects them financially. Follow the dollars and you'll find out motivations of posters.

As for the auction, I'm not saying that it wasn't legit. I'm also not saying that if it wasn't legit that Goodwin was at fault. I just would say that the price was a joke because a) it has no gloss (which to me is a problem, not a positive); the bleeding issue is weird; c) the left corner issue is weird; d) the registration of the card is weird. I'm no expert on Cobb/Cobb but these issues are troubling and I've never seen issues b) and c) on any Cobb/Cobb before. These are red flags to me and surely should not cause the price of the card to triple in value. The card very well may be real but, again, the red flags are troubling and do not serve to enhance the card's value. I've bid on Cobb cards up to 100K; I can tell you that I wouldn't have bid 30K for this card. Just my opinion.

I agree with everything that Jeff just said...except I've never bid 100K on a cobb/cobb card:)!

Hi Leon,
I have already had my day in the sun regarding my SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper Red Cobb and I don't mean to hijack this thread or be busting your eggs too hard. However you seem to have no trouble jumping on board and voicing your skepticism of this Cobb/Cobb card (one I am assuming you have not seen in person but maybe you have) but were unable to commit an opinion to a card which was in your possession which also possessed an anomaly which I provided numerous close up pictures. Could that have anything to do with the Cobb/Cobb not having been auctioned by you or that it is PSA graded versus being SGC graded?

With respect to Goodwin's example I do see the differences which Kevin pointed out and wonder if those can be attributed to the non glossy version as the image quality or registration of the two cards is quite different. Anyone here have pictures of the other non glossy Cobb/Cobb?

Greg

Greg...c'mon now....
 

Greg- we are giving you the BP back on the Cobb you bought. If you want me to say the card you bought is no good I am not willing to do that as I am not positive. I also said I am not positive on this card. I raised questions just like several others. If you go back to the other thread I think I admitted the Cobby you bought looked funny too but I wasn't convinced the same way you are. I trust SGC far more than PSA. That is my choice. I am sure they have both made mistakes before, just as I am sure you and I have too. BTW, you actually DID mean to hijack this thread but it's ok as you came back to on topic. Anytime someone says "excuse me I don't mean to interrupt", they are lieing...... regards

Hey Leon,

So now I am a liar or is it simply that you now know all my intentions? No I really did not want to hijack the thread but found it odd that you would so freely render an opinion on a PSA graded card which you have not seen and one you were not the seller of. I could have brought my thread back up to the top and copy and pasted your statement but thought it would be out of context. I can't control where I call shenanigans nor can I control the fact that my comment related to a certain issue I had.

Feel free to edit these posts and put them on my T206 Cobb thread and we can duke it out there. I certainly don't mind my thread being pulled back up from page 5.

And again for the record and to continue to hijack this thread, I told you privately in emails and PMs as well as on the thread that I appreciated your gesture and it was entirely unnecessary as you are not the one who issued the grade on the T206 Cobb I won from you.

Thank you,

Greg

well...
 

I figured you would take my comment the wrong way and you didn't disappoint me. All I meant about the hijacking is that yes, you really did mean to bring up the old subject that didn't pertain to this thread. I was just commenting about anyone, not you, that says they don't meant to interrupt....because if they didn't, then they wouldn't. What I won't do is debate you, on the previous Cobb, every time I make a comment about a card I have an opinion on. I just won't answer anymore. You can think what you want to. If you want to pull the old thread up that is your call. I am completely done talking about that Cobb. I did all I could do....and yes, you said it wasn't necessary to give back the BP (in a credit) but Scott and I feel it's the right thing to do. I wasn't calling YOU a liar I was just trying at a little humor... which didn't work. regards

Maybe my eyes are not so good but that does not look like paper loss to me?

In my opinion, and i am by no means an expert, the top left of the PSA card would be enough to make me not want to purchase it. It looks odd. I am more protective of what i spend my money on. I would have an issue spending $1000 on an odd looking card let alone 150k. Thats just me.

But i am a little confused.... Guys want a Cobb with no gloss?? I thought gloss usually meant is was printed more recently and that original T206's had no gloss. So is this card different? or am i back half asswards?

Exactly!

The large scan just raises more question in my mind; such as why do the corners (other than the paper loss) on the front and back seem whiter than the card and why all the stray fibers? Could be my eyes but when the super-large scan is enlarged even more it becomes evident...IMO.

Guess these are questions I would ask or at least throw out before I spent over $100K (or less) on a card. Perhaps the buyer did just that, I don't know. Like Leon said, second or even third opinions. I think for $100K I would fly down with someone to look at it....but that's just me.

Yes, the card may very well be real and I know very little about the Cobb/Cobb but there appears to be red flags when compared to others. At least enough to be discussed....again, just my opinion.

I agree, it doesn't look like paper loss on the hi-res scan. The other thing i notice is all 4 corners are evenly rounded... not alot of cards have uniform perfect rounding on all corners.

just my two centavos worth

Those are questions most people that frequent this forum would ask. However just because you have $100k to spend on a card doesn't make you a knowledgeable collector.

I'm sure there are at least a couple of people in this hobby with the ability to spend $100k on a card and not really know a lot about the card other than what they're being told.

And as I've said before, once they own it getting a second opinion has no upside.

Edited to add: I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the Cobb/Cobb in question, but one would think a more solid example would bring the price realized. IMO

I've been making a side-by-side comparison of the Goodwin Cobb with the REA Cobb, and have made an interesting observation. Take a look at the following scans, giving particular attention to the placement of the comma after "Cobb" in the caption, in relation to the seam in Cobb's jersey. Notice how in the Goodwin Cobb, the seam lines up directly above the comma. In the REA Cobb however, the seam is halfway between the "b" and the "D", and not directly over the comma. Also, in the Goodwin Cobb, the "D" is directly under the buttons.....in the REA example, it is not. It additionally appears that the caption on the Goodwin Cobb has narrower font than on the REA Cobb.

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8...ackGoodwin.jpghttp://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8...obbbackREA.jpg

I don't know what this means, but it is interesting.

Steve

The comma definitely is in different positions on each card. The SGC Cobb looks exactly as you would expect it to look; the PSA one does have a bit of a different feel to it. The "D" on one is very gray, and black on the other.

These are of course just observations, I also don't know what to make of the discrepancies.

The REA Cobby is looking right at me...the Goodwin Cobb is looking up and to the left.

Those are 2 very distinct faces....anyone else see that?

That isn't unusual though. Due to the printing process, many T206s have registration issues with the eyes. On different examples of the same card, the eyes can be looking straight ahead, up, down, left or right. It's just the way they were printed.

Steve

Ok, thanks. I just learned 2 new things. First, about the eyes, and second that the term "registration" doesnt just refer to the thin black line between the white border and the background.

Hey guys, I have at least two T206's that have the background color spilling over the framed border of the card.
So, that upper left printing flaw is not unusual.

Also, if you compare many Red Cobb's, you will find an occasional one with the coma lining up with his uniform's
seam line.

Since I had a real close-up look at this card back in the March Philly Show, the thing that strikes me is the darker
Red background color, as compared to all other Red Cobb cards.


TED Z

It seems odd, to me anyhow, and I don't know what to make of it, that one card has so many apparent anomalies. Perhaps none of them in isolation is significant, or perhaps even none in combination, but when they coincide on such a valuable card, it seems fair at least to be having the discussion.

with so few known to survive...you'd think not too many were made in the first place. Would there be such printing/gloss variations with so few made...I mean the two background reds appear very different? I don't know?

Maybe the red ink is the same, but the gloss alters the appearance?

Also, isn't the point of buying this card to get the unique back of the card? Why spend 150K on the card when the back looks like crap compared to other examples of the card which could have been had for 1/3 the price? Again, makes no sense at all.

Jeff you will have to ask that question to the winner and underbidder(s).

Since we started this thread, (not necessarily because of it) the REA Cobb has picked up a couple more bids. It's up to $60k versus $45k a few days ago. I think it will close in the same area as the Goodwin Cobb.

$135,000 with the juice? I'll take the over.

Rucker T206 Fact. 42
 

I was thinking same thing.......are they that rare?..........may have to get my Rucker Fact.42 slabbed and sell it.........:D

i think you probably missed the boat on the rucker escapade!!! must have been 2 crazy back completionist collectors going at it!!!

Rucker
 

Yep................:(

I'll take the under. REA's crease is heavy.

http://sports.ha.com/common/view_ite...&src=pr#PHOTO#

Here's another that the price makes no sense at least to me..4.5k for this card.. what am I missing? Factory 42 OP's are not that tough...

The SGC 80 bare hand in the same auction was almost 1.5k cheaper...:confused:

Not everybody really knows what they are doing.;)

Every damn card I bid on, and we are not talking anything exotic, seems to go for a world record price or at least one that makes no sense to me.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that any of the insane prices received in Goodwin auctions will revert to lower prices in REA. You know, like the D304 Cobb:

http://bid.robertedwardauctions.com/...x?itemid=13101

Under/over of 275K (what it sold for in Goodwin)

Jeff I get outbid no matter whose auction it is, can't win a thing.

Start consigning. Then you'll see lower prices for sure.

T206 Cobb/Cobb
 

<< One aspect of the Goodwin Cobb that seems to have been missed here is the fact that this one appears to be only the third example to not have a glossy surface (out of ~15 total examples known of the Cobb/Cobb back. >>

Steve D.,

Absolutely correct. Most of these examples are found with the glossy surface. The ones that lack that, some argue, were pulled pre-final production and are called "proofs."

Maybe he should start consigning AND start bidding on his own items. With Peter's luck that would drive the price up and he would win.

But who would let me bid on my own cards? :D:D

Jeff would, if he had an auction house.

Hey, I'm just a good guy, not a great guy.

And yet, some would disagree.

But a "great" lawyer. Or so I've read. Somewhere.

Well, it's true, sometimes I talk about some of the bad things in the hobby and that just sucks because this hobby is great and it's all about the relationships and the great friends we make. Gosh. Darn.

Probably on his website.

You forgot "golly."

Yes, true. Golly!

Interesting that the REA Cobb is still so far below the Goodwin...and all the Planks seem to be way below where they should be...

wouldn't the t214 victory cobb currently up for grabs in the rea auction be tougher than the cobb/cobb? not as iconic...but tougher?

Pete, there's a ton of rarer Cobb cards than the Cobb/Cobb.

Here's one:

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/2909245525/" title="1921 Herpolsheimer's E121 by calvindog65, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3155/2909245525_ae7548bf60_o.jpg" width="900" height="764" alt="1921 Herpolsheimer's E121" /></a>

Much like the Masters not really starting until the back nine on Sunday, REA doesn't really begin until 1 a.m. Sunday.

T214 Victory Cobb - 2 known
T206 Cobb Back - 15 known

Does anyone know what happened to the Goodwin Cobb/Cobb back?

I was just looking at their auction results, and the final bid is listed as $0.00. It looks like they cancelled the bids on it.


Steve

Very interesting!


OK. Who wants to make up the first story?

Maybe the buyer just doesn't want the data to be in VCP....

Too late for that. VCP has been reporting it for close to a week.

Besides, that decision isn't up to the buyer. Auction houses that have a business agreement with VCP would probably have a contractual obligation to report ALL sales, not just the selected few.

Perhaps the winning bidder, seeing the REA one going for much less decided not to pay Bill and instead go after the REA one.

Perhaps. But wouldn't Bill then try to sell it to an underbidder and sue the renegger for the difference?

I have never heard of Bill suing a renegger.

If he did sell to an underbidder, I don't think that sale would be entered as the auction results. I think the auction would show a no-sale and that would be a different transaction.

hmm
 

don't you have a prom queen about to come home?

LOL! Just walked in the door. Earlier than I expected, too!

that's great
 

now you can roll up your sleeves and do some serious bidding!

Well, that's how I would run "my" auction house!

It will be interesting to see what Bobby does with VCP. I suppose he will have to take down that bid also.

Maybe the Cobb/Cobb is being broken down by Gloss or No Gloss, as they are pretty distinct differences....whatever it is, I'm hoping there is a reasonable explanation. I don't feel like anything nefarious is going on...and I'm not sure we are even owed an explanation. Maybe its as simple as the buyer or seller wanted the price taken down....just like on our own B/S/T!

I like the one in the SGC holder (REA),over that one in the PSA FR 1.5 holder....

Perhaps the buyer became concerned about authenticity and Bill agreed to cancel the transaction.

just my opinion
 

Just my opinion, and I have voiced it repeatedly privately, I always get that sinking feeling when looking at the Cobb/Cobb in the last Goodwin auction. I know it's probably just me but I never liked the "look". But what do I know?

Yeah funny I have that feeling too when I look at a certain Red Cobb. :eek:

That said I would like to know what happened with that Cobb/Cobb.

Maybe it will end up on ebay tomorrow with a BIN price of 10% less than what it went for in Goodwin?

I agree. As I may have said before, just too many things coinciding on one major card -- the color, the registration, the perfectly even corner wear, the lettering, the weird upper left print problem. Then again, who knows.

Whatever the problem was, the price is now back up. (In fact, that item is listed twice.)

clarification too
 

Let me add a bit to my personal assessment. I have not seen the Goodwin auctioned Cobb/Cobb in person. Ted Z has, and some others have, as well as PSA. I am sure the card is probably fine. I was just giving my semi-experienced (not near as much as some others on the board) opinion on the card. Bill Goodwin knows cards too so he must think it's good also. I certainly defer to their opinions more than mine on the authenticity and grade of this Cobb/Cobb. I am sure the buyer is happy. regards

I looked at it at the chicago show and it looked good to me. There are too many conspiracy theories recently. Please! If you have no clue, than don't make up sh*t. Dan

Yes, why would anyone question any high-dollar cards in today's hobby?

rob - I agree that we should question questionable cards, but it seems like every high priced card is a problem lately. AND... not everyone that has commented knows what they are talking about. So, one more time, if you (understood you, not u personally) don't know what you are talking about stop making sh*t up.

I think most of the guys on here that have discussed the Cobb /Cobb back card know what they are talking about. Even a novice can look at at that card compared to other Cobb red portraits and see there are slight differences in the background coloration and overall registration and printing. I think it's totally valid to bring these points up whether the card is a high dollar example or not. You will never stop collectors or non-collectors from claiming something is wrong with certain graded cards. The controversy or part of it , lies in the fact that if one of these high dollar cards is discovered to be altered or not real the company that graded it could be out of business really fast. Collectors who have invested thousands on graded cards will undoubtedly be pissed off at such a revelation also. I've had discussions about it since the early 90's with other collectors, so it's nothing new. I have no problem with the price that the Goodwin card sold for, afterall it's only worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it in the end.