52 Mantle's. Will they sell for asking?
 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-3...AAAOSwo4pYSc2m

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-3...4AAOSwImRYSc0U

This one could be a mistake listing as there is no picture?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-3...UAAOSwa~BYSc1Q

The same seller owns/has all of these.

$100 in eBay bucks right there :)

:D

uhh..NO.

JMO..

.

The 7 very possibly close. It's priced in line with relevant sales and Tony certainly has the clientele.

I am not familiar with, Tony. I assume the cards he has for sale are consigned?

I wish these were under the normal auction process rather than the BIN format as these would be fun to watch.

I don't see any problem with the asking prices. As Matt said they seem in line with previous sales. If anything a nice 7 for under 200k seems like a relative bargain.

His clientele likely will buy from him direct then.

All 3 have ended. I assume that is inconclusive if they sold or not? :confused:

Some if these, like similar cards, are just to prop up the laurels of a consignor, and the asking price of the card. Any serious buyer would go directly to the seller

Probably sold off ebay, I would guess.

Dunno if they sold but this one, http://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-3...c2m&rmvSB=true he had listed in Aug and I was informed it had "sold" in Sept or Oct only to reappear and now disappear again. No record in VCP but the sale was supposed to have taken place on ebay. If he got his price I would say he did very well.

Interesting?

Or not.
http://goodwinandco.com/1952_Topps__...-LOT34498.aspx

As linked in my prior post a very nice (if not quite centered) SGC 7 just sold in Goodwin for well less than half that. 87K.

And a SGC 6 couldn't even get a 40k opening bid. Are we seeing a price correction on the 52 Topps Mantle?

I am waiting to see the spin from the folks who think a 7 is a 200K card before commenting. :cool:

A 7 should be a $550K card. Wasn't there a PSA 4 or 5 that was listed on eBay a while back for 250K?

Plus that 7 is not in a PSA slab and not centered.;)

Anyone who bought a 52 Topps Mantle over this past summer might want to buy a second one now and dollar cost average. Better yet maybe wait until March when they can get an even better deal. Yikes. That was a pretty nice SGC 84 too.

That is what I thought. It looked like it might be a Rosen find Mantle, just oc.

Heritage has a PSA 8 coming up in February. We will see if the card is still strong at the top end.

In fairness, the 6 didn't hit reserve, but it had 4 bids, I think the website just defaults to the opening (40) when it doesn't sell.

What would that sgc 6 brought 6 months ago?

Many American dollars.

The 84 does look like a Rosen find card. As for the 8, I think it will do well. Think that part of the market is still holding, at least on that card.

Maybe on higher end examples there is a selling correction is taking place, but lower end copies seem to be selling for as much if not more than they were this past summer. A PSA 1.5 sold a few weeks ago for $14.5k via PWCC.


http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?LH_Co...le+psa&_sop=13

Lately, the SGC examples have been selling for less than their PSA counterparts.....very recently two SGC 2.5s sold for $14k and less. Perhaps the correction is only on SGC copies and not PSA copies....maybe it is time to buy SGC and send to PSA.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_udlo...le%20sgc&rt=nc

On the lower end the prices seem to have more to do with the cards presentation than the grade.

For sure, I agree....a few of the SGC cards that recently ended on ebay suffered from poor centering, however, one of the SGC 2.5s (sans a light stain) appeared sharp and the SGCs from the Goodwin auction seemed to present strongly, but all fell short of other similar graded, sharp looking PSA copies.

If a PSA 4 or 5 sold for that much, it means just one thing: the [transient] investor/buyers are still with us. The virtually endless stream of these cards at every major [and minor] auction makes it abundantly clear that the smart ones are not the buyers, but the sellers. Once the investor crowd heads for other pastures, values will drop to what true collectors will pay for what might, at best, charitably be termed a somewhat scarce card. Just my $2.50 worth. Truly amazing how this market for that card resembles tulip-mania!

Best of luck,

Larry

I'm not sure about that? The 52 Mantle is an iconic card and is coveted by many/most in the collector world.
I think there will be lulls or corrections occasionally but I don't think the card will ever fall out of favor by the collector or investor.

2 recent sales, not that they necessarily reflect anything, but these cards never fail to sell no matter how many are available.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-M...vip=true&rt=nc
http://www.ebay.com/itm/351930771313...%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

Those 2 PSA copies sold for SGC prices.....

Yeah, certainly they aren't garnering the prices like they did back in the summer, but that also can be said about most cards that were selling for huge money back then too.

Like many have noticed "I can't give cards away" currently there is a definite lull happening, imo.

But, being not near as knowledgeable as most on here, is this normal for this time of year, or does this happen occasionally where product/listings slow down?

I have noticed only 3-4 pages on E-Bay of 52 Topps cards where I normally see over double that, or at least 10 pgs of listings.

Lull before "tax refunds burning a hole in people's pockets"

'52 Mantle isn't quite Tulip Mania, imho. "Pet Rock" maybe, but no way Tulip Mania.
....Great looking examples still bring strong prices, relative to their grade. Visual appeal sells '52 Mantles in the upper ends of their brackets to the lower ends of the few brackets above them..Individual examples can be shown to sway any discussion. again, just my opinion...

The Card That Fell To Earth starring Mickey Mantle

http://www.goodwinandco.com/LotDetai...entoryid=33602

https://goldinauctions.com/Spectacul...-LOT28450.aspx


https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...ription-071515

https://goldinauctions.com/1952_Topp...-LOT27931.aspx

Kids, don't try this at home.

not a huge drop...within 20% (and maybe just 1 or 2 bidding slots.)...if i saw it go down by 50% than that would be newsworthy..the card can easily go up 20% now from the last sale, also need more than one sale for a trend.....time will tell

LOL. They are the same exact cards. 20% reduction in price over a short period of time in what most have been touting as a strong 52 Topps Mantle market, is not a good sign. Those are not reassuring numbers but if they are to you, cool!

i agree that we are talking about cards not losing value versus cards that are going up which is a different ballgame.

But again, in a short period of time, whoever was willing to pay the most back then still probably still would be paying the most now. So now its an underbidder on the last action they may of won it. I agree, you cant buy a Mantle now in mid grade and see a profit in 3 months paying the Vig.

With most cards due the buyer premium you will lose 20% if you were to sell the card immediately again. Thus, seeing a card selling for 20% or less to me in one lone re-sell of the same card in a short period of time isnt a trend. But yeah its not like we are talking about a hot card right now i agree.

Just sold my SGC 4 via Goldin. I was hoping for 1 more bid, but that's fine.

My wife is on cloud 9, it's all about perspective I guess.

Loved owning it but it's on to the next one!

Going Trout fishing :cool:

35 k drop not chump change. And that really nice sgc 4 under 30, werent people paying 40 and up for nice 4s not a few months ago?

Hopefully, you don't mean you're on to the next wife. If so, don't let her read that. :eek:

mantles
 

it is a HUGE drop
if someone really paid 169k
and then sold for 135k...thats with buyers premium
paid 169k then realized 112k
thats a 57k loss 33% approx...not 20
how about the rose rookies selling for 15-18 now selling for 4k 75% drop?
clemente 8s from 50-30
koufax 8 from 30 to last night 9K? wow

a a few months before that they were paying 25-30k.....canofcorn thought his card would sell for 30k (which was the center of the range) so the market is still there and a trend isnt just one sale, if someone with a 30k card could save some of that buyers premium in a direct deal the margin would be even less..

i dont think we can compare clemente and rose rookies with the rookie mantle.

just like one low sale cant be 100% of trend...the same can be said with one lone high sale. like you said 'if someone really paid 169k' if you show me 5 cards in a row that sold for 140-160k and the sixth one sold for 100k...thats a lot different to pointing to one sale of a card for an amount that we arent even sure if someone really paid for it\

i posted awhile ago though that mid to low grade mantles were due to fall...its a bit of a pyramid scheme when the buyers of these cards are just going to try the flip them

[QUOTE=sflayank;1625583]it is a HUGE drop
if someone really paid 169k
and then sold for 135k...thats with buyers premium
paid 169k then realized 112k
thats a 57k loss 33% approx...not 20
how about the rose rookies selling for 15-18 now selling for 4k 75% drop?
clemente 8s from 50-30
koufax 8 from 30 to last night 9K? wow[/QUOTE

https://goodwinandco.com/LotDetail.a...entoryid=33087

You mean Bill Goodwin was wrong?
"For the discerning collector or the profit-driven investor, this card should be an automatic. The Koufax rookie card’s climb has been as remarkable as Koufax pitching at Dodger Stadium on a hot summer day. We expect the day to come very soon, when Koufax rookies at PSA 8 will be selling well in excess of $200,000 and perhaps as $250,000."

koufax
 

thats pretty funny...someone actually paid 80k...because goodwin said itll be $200k-250k
insane

The word "disingenuous" comes to mind.

OK that's funny!!!

I honestly don't know how that works, that if the card didn't actually sell/change hands (it has been stated numerous times!) then how can they state it sold for $80,000:confused:

I haven't looked at prices since I sold my low grade Mantles in 2010 and 2012.
I sold them for a fraction of what they go for now. Based on the trends I'm seeing it's a stronger market now and people have the coin.

I never did upgrade and it's probably a losing proposition now.

These are just an example of low grade options but they seem to have doubled in price.

Just for reference I got just under $7k for the '52 and under $5k for the '51.

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...smukshc1a.jpeg

Have to agree on that one. That Koufax in an 8 will never, never be a 250k card. There are far too many and not enough demand.

well not talking a specifically about a card but sites do give a 'sell/sold' price right after the auction.....not everyone pays on their wins yet I never seen an auction house erase a 'sell/sold' price...Plus in theory, the card was actually sold, meaning there was a legal obligation from the buyer to pay for it, but in real life that doesnt mean much if they didnt actually pay and you arent going to collect. You can get a judgment as well against a homeless person for million dollars but again it doesnt mean anything if you cant collect but yes, you do have a million dollar judgment. Same thing as 'selling' a koufax rookie for 100k at auction, but not collecting, you can still say it 'sold for 100k' . There are probably some people that may not pay for an item but actually the type of people you can collect from as well on their legal obligation.


I'm assuming 1/100 times you may see a 'sell/sold' card that never was paid for relisted with the same auction but i dont remember REA/mile high/goodwin ever doing that the last few years.

If the card didn't exchange hands for the amount they are showing it did, then that's deceptive and an outright lie. If the card did sell, whether it be to the under bidder or to someone else, then that is the price that should be listed.

This is nothing more than the ugly side of the hobby, the ugly side that keeps people from collecting/purchasing in order to keep the hobby healthy and strong. :(

The better and higher priced the cards, the more haters, card doctors, and scammers that come out and play. You go ahead and build a better mousetrap...hidden reserves, psa, jsa...they build a better mouse ;)

It's trending around $12K right now. I think getting to $20K in the next few years would be an accomplishment.

Again, not exactly, so what if the auction house sued the person that was the high bidder and got a judgment for 100k on a mantle plus the buyers premium (20k) for a total of 120k because they proved they legitimately sold the card for 120k. That would mean in a court of law they proved a sale of 120k. The card didnt change hands yet because it was not paid for. I not saying that was the case in whatever example we were talking about, but showing there are situations that if the card didnt change hands it can still be said it 'sold' without it being an outright lie.

It not worth auction houses to sue on every case but again a legal obligation was created to pay.

People 'sell' houses all the time especially in 2008 and the buyer with no real ability to pay got a ridiculous mortgage to buy the house way above perceived market price. To the property tax appraiser and the 'market' the house sold for what the buyer was 'obligated' to pay even if later the house goes into foreclosure because that buyer never paid for the house. Even though the house was never paid (lets say 2 years were paid on a 30 year mortgage) the 'sold' price is what that buyer paid with that mortgage .

Comparing house to cards is not comparing apples to apples. It is very rare we hear of a house being sold only to find out people did not or will not pay for it.

Real estate has signatures, meeting people/agents face to face, home inspections, the list goes on and on. Cards, on the other hand, especially those being sold through auctions like E-Bay or actual A/H's, don't have that luxury. Most in the card biz know that shilling and bid retractions, to name a couple, exist all the time and if either one says they're surprised, they are also lying.

Again, listing a card as being sold for $80,000 when no money exchanged hands, and the fact they probably knew by then the bid was retracted, or whatever the case is, like I said, is outright deceptive and nothing but a lie.

Irv you have identified a glitch in the prices realized system we all depend on; I could be wrong but I doubt any major seller goes back and identifies cards that weren't paid for. Hopefully it's only a rare occurrence, although my guess is that during last year's price spike (to use a neutral term) it occurred at a higher rate than usual.

I recall reading one, Peter, where a new adjusted price was listed after the 1st one fell through. I forget the A/H, but I was glad to see they did that.

Either this card in question did sell for that amount, contrary to what a lot of people said on here, or the A/H, for whatever reason, didn't bother to adjust their sold listing.

After reading what the A/H was speculating about this card and future sales, I am pretty sure they were likely highly embarrassed and therefore, trying to save face by not correcting the actual sold price.

Actually there was a huge housing market crash for 3 or so years and tens of thousands of people bought houses that could not afford it. People with no income were getting $250,000 loans with no money down. There was also robo signatures and no real check on someone's ability to pay. Those 'sold' prices absolutely impacted the market price for legitimate buyers in the housing market.

For all we know someone could of borrowed from their credit card $50000 and bought a card then never paid the credit card. Borrowing money you cant afford and paying for an item would mean that item 'sold' but its not a true sale if the buyer couldnt afford the item. People were flipping cards and people were flipping houses as well. Credit finally ran out in the housing market and perhaps in the card market if the buyer was unable to flip an earlier card they now couldnt afford the pricey auction item they initially intended to pay.

Adding facts about 'they probably knew by then the bid was retracted' is an added premise. We have no idea of that. The example of someone bidding for the card and having a legal obligation to pay for it but not having the funds to pay for is equally as possible.

The A/H, to this day, has not corrected the original sold price.:confused:
I know very little about the big house crash in the U.S., other than to say I heard about it, but did houses not sell, money exchanged hands, and did the people/new owners not move in before it crashed?

Don't forget if they did pay for the card, but then filed bankruptcy

Well, lets remember when you a buy a house without your funds and use a mortgage you really didnt use your money, plus you never really 'owned' the house, the bank did. Banks had no reason to lend 250k to people with no income but they did anyway and the people with no income had no ability to afford the loan unless they flipped the house or they got a second and third mortgage to pay off the first mortgage which they were able to get from a rising housing market (due to other banks giving money to other new homeowner buyers with no ability to pay) Thus money did exchange hands, but not the homeowners money but a banks money which ultimately led to many banks going out of business.

Thus moving in doesnt mean anything as they didnt own the house but again the sale price was registered in the market. On ebay past sales are shown all the time even when payment is not received.

Saying an item is 'sold' doesnt mean money exchanged hands, it means a legal obligation was there to pay for it.

The single worst, and possibly most inaccurate, description of the housing crash i have ever laid eyes on

Like I mentioned, I only heard of it so I have no idea if, Jake's story is fact or fiction, but I do know, like I mentioned before, I am not sure how this whole housing collapse thing can be used as an comparison to whether a card was paid for or not? :confused:

I think I am wise just to let my questions about this $80,000 dollar Koufax die.

Part of the problem was people just selling there socials and never moving into properties. IMO It's much more than that, but that was the most blatent fraud among developers and buyers.....not to get too politcal :)

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

I not talking about the whole housing crash, i just describing one small aspect and 'part of the problem' just like you did in your post. I dont think one sale of a baseball card as well describes the entire baseball card hobby market.

Again though, you just said there was blatent fraud and the other poster talked about that there must of been many face to face transactions and money changing hands and people were moving into the properteis so the sales had to be more real. So you are supporting my argument that you can have 'sales' but that not be real in the housing market very easily. I do not think you can argue that for a period of time the housing market prices were not manipulated.

Ok let me know if its inaccurate that people were getting credit to houses they couldnt afford as at least one aspect of the housing market crash. I guess everyone could afford all those houses even though there were thousands of foreclosures within a year or 2 of time. I have been involved in many mortgage modifications and the things you learn there are amazing.

but again, my argument is that you can easily 'sell' something as an auction house and it not be an outright lie if money doesnt change hands.

Jake, there is so much wrong with your description of the housing market crash, I don't know where to start a critique, however correct your analogy might be, which is getting increasingly more difficult to decipher.

Are you saying "a bubble is a bubble and can burst when we don't know what's actually inflating it"? That I can agree with

I think its gone a bit too much off topic and as you stated you didnt want to be political (your name does start with Republican)

The point was that I dont agree its an outright lie if an auction house says they 'sold' a card on their website when looking at past listings if money didnt change hands. I used the analogy of the housing market. That is all. Thanks

Not to poke a hole in your analogy, But didn't money change hands with a housing sale, regardless of they paid their loan or not? If the sale never closed, then it would be a fraudulent report, no?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

I addressed this. It was banks money not the person's money. House is owned by the bank not the person. People could pay 250k when it wasnt their money. For some reason people like to pay more for things with other peoples money.

In fact, people owed more money than the house was 'worth'. A legal obligation was made for the buyer to pay back the bank. Even if they didn't pay back the bank, the house was considered 'sold'

There was fraud on the banks many times when they were lending 250k to people with no jobs with no ability to pay back the loan and the mortgage broker would make a huge fee to get the loan approved so there were huge incentives to get the loans approved by whatever means necessary.

Bottom line in the house market, if you look at 'past sales' The sale prices are shown without mention if they are Cash deals or for deals that are funded entirely by borrowed funds. Both are considered sales as one situation the hoouse was actually paid for by the buyers money, and the other situation there was a legal obligation to pay back a bank (with no ability to pay back in many of the foreclosure situations ) who forwarded the money. The analogy is that in the card purchase situation and in that problem mortgage situation, there was a legal obligation to pay and thus both are considered a past sale. In the baseball card market we dont know if the card was actually purchased or just sold unless the auction house tells us but in both cases the card was indeed 'sold'

Banks could get judgments against the buyers who didnt pay back the mortgage and so could the auction house against the bidder who didnt pay. In both situations the house/card was purchased because there was a legal obligation to pay.

I believe it's a common occurrence. If the AH's don't want to verify payment to VCP, maybe VCP should ask for verification? Especially when the price is more than 10% over average. If AH can't verify, VCP doesn't post.

Agreed with above post, though doubt it will happen. This would be similar to using a home appraisal, throwing out first payment defaults. VCP I believe already does eliminate the highest and lowest sales when the compute their average.


If someone doesnt pay for their house 29 years, and 11 months down the road, is THAT still a sale?

All depends but its not like a legit cash deal (assuming its arms length transaction)

If somone bought a psa 5 topps mantle for 70k due to a credit card advance that he never paid and another psa 5 topps mantle went to market i know i would of wanted to know that information. When funds are borrowed to pay for things it brings up a lot more factors to me. Someone that borrows money may need to sell the card fast and attempt to flip it to pay back the loan and take risk of a loss versus a cash investor as one example. I know when a house is foreclosed on (after a recent purchase) and sold by the bank the expected new sale price from the bank will be less than the prior sale in many occasions. If no money is ever borrowed on a home there is no risk of the foreclosure fire sale.

What ebay sales via about paypal bill me later?

I disagree. Like your housing analogy, whether it's the actual new owner or the bank, papers were signed and money from either the new owner or the bank did exchange hands somewhere.

The buyer could have easily said he would pay a million for the card. Does that mean the card sold for a million? Talk is cheap, and even a handshake means very little this day, and neither means anything unless money actually changed hands.

No it was not. Again, no signatures, face to face meetings took place, etc, etc, etc, with the card in question.

If money did not exchange hands, then there is no sale, and with no sale, they have no right to say the card sold for that amount.

Personal story. I had listed a snowmobile for sale quite a few years ago for a $1000.00 dollars. I had an out of town person call me and tell me they would take it for that amount sight unseen and would be there in 2 days to pick it up.
In the meantime, I had 2 guys come by for a look and see and they said they would take it for $800. I told them, although I didn't feel very good about it (greed got the best of me!) that I had a guy who was going to give me a $1000 for it in 2 days.

2 days came and passed, and you guessed it, the original person, who said they would buy it for a $1000.00 was nowhere to be found? I called and received no answer so I called the other 2 guys who offered me $800 but they had already purchased another sled.

Long story short, I ended up only getting $650 for it. When my friends asked what I "sold" my sled for, I told them $650 dollars,,,,,,,,,, not the $1000.00 the first guy said he would purchase it for.

I disagree. Like your housing analogy, whether it's the actual new owner or the bank, papers were signed and money from either the new owner or the bank did exchange hands somewhere.

You also agree to terms on the internet auction sites to be legally liable for your winning bids. Its an agreement you click online which is the same as a signature


The buyer could have easily said he would pay a million for the card. Does that mean the card sold for a million? Talk is cheap, and even a handshake means very little this day, and neither means anything unless money actually changed hands.

Its not about talk, theres a LEGAL OBLIGATION, why dont you win every lot at the next REA auction and not pay since talk is cheap and money wont change hands. However you wont do that because you dont want to be sued for your agreement that you had signed for online and agreed to the rules. You would owe the amounts of your winning bids.



No it was not. Again, no signatures, face to face meetings took place, etc, etc, etc, with the card in question.

If money did not exchange hands, then there is no sale, and with no sale, they have no right to say the card sold for that amount.

Thats not correct. Its sale you can get sued on by the auction house. You agreed to pay and its a sale. Otherwise, lets see you win the next 1952 Topps Mantle and not pay and see what happens.

Personal story. I had listed a snowmobile for sale quite a few years ago for a $1000.00 dollars. I had an out of town person call me and tell me they would take it for that amount sight unseen and would be there in 2 days to pick it up.
In the meantime, I had 2 guys come by for a look and see and they said they would take it for $800. I told them, although I didn't feel very good about it (greed got the best of me!) that I had a guy who was going to give me a $1000 for it in 2 days.

2 days came and passed, and you guessed it, the original person, who said they would buy it for a $1000.00 was nowhere to be found? I called and received no answer so I called the other 2 guys who offered me $800 but they had already purchased another sled.

Long story short, I ended up only getting $650 for it. When my friends asked what I "sold" my sled for, I told them $650 dollars,,,,,,,,,, not the $1000.00 the first guy said he would purchase it for.

Well if you could find the guy and could prove he agreed to pay you that money you could of sued him. However, unlike an auction house you never got a commitment in writing and probably didnt know his name and location and probably not worth your time to pursue.

Lets take in another step, people agree to pay rent (lets say $1000), then dont pay the rent at the end of the month. Money didnt change hands, but cant you tell the next prospective renter that the last renter was 'paying $1000 a month' That wouldnt be an outright lie.

Remember we are going by whether the auction house is saying an outright lie when selling a card and saying it sold for X amount but money didnt change hands. If we have to point to specific instances on each end to make an argument for our side than its not an outright lie. I didnt say its a good thing what they are doing but its not an outright lie is my argument.

How 'bout them '52 Mantle's up for auction?

Think they'll sell for a good price?

lol, +1

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and agree to disagree.