[Rob D.]

Today I received the catalog for Legendary's current auction, and it reinforced a thought I've had for some time regarding auction catalogs. I know that Huggins & Scott recently has made a push for bidders to not receive their catalogs and instead do everything online (offering a $50 credit for those who opt to go paperless). Many of the smaller auctions don't even offer hard-copy catalogs as an option.

Each time I receive a catalog, it arrives after I've already searched and browsed the auction online. And each time I find a good number of items within the pages that I end up bidding on that I would not have if the auction were Internet only. I'll usually do a number of searches (Lajoie, Butter Cream, R306, Indians, Cleveland, Boudreau, Colavito, Cobb, Ruth, Goudey, T206, etc.), so it's not like my scope is limited. But in this catalog alone I discovered an uncut sheet of Fro-Joys with mailing envelope and Ruth premium; a few Kalamazoo Bats; a complete set of graded Dan-Dees; and a great selection of 1951 Topps Major League All-Stars. All of these are things I wouldn't necessarily search for but likely will end up bidding on.

It's not like I'm uncomfortable using a computer or the Internet: I do it for a living and spend about 8-10 hours online each day (I do not live in my parents' basement). I simply think that there are many positives to having a catalog you can hold in your hands -- no matter the size of the auction. I wonder not only whether other bidders feel the same way, but has the thought crossed the minds of collectors who consign high-dollar items? Do you feel at a disadvantage placing your items in an auction that's online only? It certainly would give me pause.