M101-2 Supplements in Memory Lane

[BobC]

Didn't want to post this in the Memory Lane auction thread and take away from it.

As someone in that other thread mentioned, the prices for the various M101-2 Sporting News Supplements were through the roof. What I don't understand though is why they all only got graded as PSA1. The descriptions said there were no pinholes, stains, or other visible issues (except maybe some minor spider creases on the backs that was mentioned in the Cobb/Wagner, Cobb, and Mathewson supplement descriptions)), and they all looked great in the scans. So why such low grades across the board? These are extremely fragile paper supplements so, finding them in decent shape is always tough to begin with. Anybody have any idea behind the reasoning, would love to hear it?

Also, is this something new for PSA to be grading? In the past I know Beckett at least used to grade them, but wasn't aware that SGC or PSA were.

[nolemmings]

I noticed that too Bob, although the Shoeless Joe has visible fold lines both front and back, and went for the most money. The Cobb may have a diagonal fold line also, unless that's just the holder. Fold lines are sometimes really tough to discern on these, but IMHO, even if they were treated as creases, that would not knock the grade down to 1.

There are some very small white spots on the back, often in the corners, that may be evidence of these at one time being in an album. Kind of hard to say as those instead could be some sort of pressure spots from being held in the PSA holder. Speaking of that, it will be interesting to see if these premiums slide in the holder. I own a couple of M101-2s in Beckett holders where they don't slide. Then again, the holders are way too bulky--I would have paid more for the premiums to have them raw then to now worry about trying to crack open these tombs and somehow damage the fragile contents inside.

[hcv123]

is it possible people bought the cards and NOT the holders!? PSA rendered their opinion - apparently, the buyers disagreed?

[Bliggity]

I've been putting together the M101-2 set over the past couple of years. The ones in Memory Lane certainly had great eye appeal, but I believe this is just a function of people paying crazy money for PSA plastic. A couple years ago, there were a bunch of M101-2s that sold at auction (I think PWCC, but can't remember). It was the first round of PSA-graded M101-2s that I'd seen. They were all graded PSA A. It was clear that whoever had them graded just opted for authentication and not a grade. They still sold for 3x the price of a comparable raw copy. It made no sense to me. I imagine some of it must have been driven by registry lemmings given that M101-2s in PSA holders were very scarce. But there were also some non-registry purchasers who I thought at the time just flatly overpaid for no apparent reason. Since then, PSA A and PSA 1 copies have continued to rise, and based on the Memory Lane results are now more like 5-8x the price of a nice raw copy. Meanwhile, other nice M101-2s that are raw or in BGS holders are selling for maybe 1-2x their pre-pandemic prices.

I will admit that there's not much data here, so it's hard to know exactly what's up, but it just seems to me that it's another example of people paying up for plastic. I'll pass and wait for raw copies...I hope! I have no idea why someone would want a M101-2 graded in the first place.

I also acknowledge my bias as a M101-2 set builder who would like to continue to have access to reasonably-priced examples

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Bliggity

I've been putting together the M101-2 set over the past couple of years. The ones in Memory Lane certainly had great eye appeal, but I believe this is just a function of people paying crazy money for PSA plastic. A couple years ago, there were a bunch of M101-2s that sold at auction (I think PWCC, but can't remember). It was the first round of PSA-graded M101-2s that I'd seen. They were all graded PSA A. It was clear that whoever had them graded just opted for authentication and not a grade. They still sold for 3x the price of a comparable raw copy. It made no sense to me. I imagine some of it must have been driven by registry lemmings given that M101-2s in PSA holders were very scarce. But there were also some non-registry purchasers who I thought at the time just flatly overpaid for no apparent reason. Since then, PSA A and PSA 1 copies have continued to rise, and based on the Memory Lane results are now more like 5-8x the price of a nice raw copy. Meanwhile, other nice M101-2s that are raw or in BGS holders are selling for maybe 1-2x their pre-pandemic prices.

I will admit that there's not much data here, so it's hard to know exactly what's up, but it just seems to me that it's another example of people paying up for plastic. I'll pass and wait for raw copies...I hope! I have no idea why someone would want a M101-2 graded in the first place.

I also acknowledge my bias as a M101-2 set builder who would like to continue to have access to reasonably-priced examples

Hi Dan,

I've been a coilector of the M101-2 set myself, just not paid attention much in recent year once I got 99 of the 100 supplements. And like you, I would much prefer to collect them raw, see no real need for getting them graded. i actually have two of them graded by Beckett, had in the earlier post said only one as I forgot about my 4.5 supplement of Harry Lord to go with my 1.0 supplement of Wajo/Street. A set collector is not going to worry about grading, especially when it comes to some of the double page team supplements. Don't believe any TPG has a holder for those anyway so not sure if they'd even try to grade them.

Anyway, I haven't been paying much attention to their prices for several years till I saw these ones from the ML auction this past week. Those are some insane prices, or so I thought, especially for PSA1s. I didn't even realize PSA had started grading these, any idea how long it has been? I knew Becket had been grading them all along, but never SGC for some odd reason. Still can't believe a PSA graded one would be worth that kind of a premium over a raw or Beckett graded version. It is obviously not normal set collectors, like you and I, pushing these prices, especially for just PSA1s. Unless it is a set collector(s) who want to put a PSA registry set together and figure to work on a set that no one else really has even started on yet. I guess that way they would be assured to have a top rated registry set just by having a PSA graded one when no one else has.

Just took a quick look at PSA's pop report for M101-2 supplements, and I was stunned again. They show only 102 graded supplements, in total, with none being graded higher than a 3!!!! And of the 102 graded in total, only 3 - 3s, and 4 - 2s (and of those 2s, one has a qualifier). There are 100 different supplements in the M101-2 set, and to date PSA has only graded 46 out of the 100 different supplements.

I was going to say that if it were the investors looking to buy into these M101-2s and pushing these prices so hard now, they would normally only go for the higher-end graded supplements. So why would they be spending so much on these PSA1s then? Well, based on the PSA pop report, I guess there really aren't any graded much higher. The Cobb/Wagner is one of the three highest graded, the Cobb is the second highest graded, the Jackson is one of the three highest graded, the Mathewson is one of the two highest graded, as is the Wagner also one of the two highest graded. So if some not-so-well informed investors are paying those kind of prices for M101-2s they think are literally the highest grades out there, based on PSAs current pop reports, they may be in for a surprise as I have to believe there a lot more, higher condition M101-2 supplements out there in the hands of collectors that couldn't care less about having them graded. Of course, with recent auction results like this for the M101-2 supplements, I guess that could start changing quickly.

[Bliggity]

Originally Posted by BobC

Unless it is a set collector(s) who want to put a PSA registry set together and figure to work on a set that no one else really has even started on yet. I guess that way they would be assured to have a top rated registry set just by having a PSA graded one when no one else has.

Just took a quick look at PSA's pop report for M101-2 supplements, and I was stunned again. They show only 102 graded supplements, in total, with none being graded higher than a 3!!!!

So if some not-so-well informed investors are paying those kind of prices for M101-2s they think are literally the highest grades out there, based on PSAs current pop reports, they may be in for a surprise as I have to believe there a lot more, higher condition M101-2 supplements out there in the hands of collectors that couldn't care less about having them graded. Of course, with recent auction results like this for the M101-2 supplements, I guess that could start changing quickly.

Bingo. And I found the info I had been looking for before.

In June 2020, Lelands auctioned a near-complete set of 96/100. All of the main stars were included and were graded PSA A; the rest of the set was raw. This was the first time I'd seen any in PSA holders, so PSA must have just started grading them not too long before that. The set sold for $12,998.40. The buyer immediately split the set and put each of the supplements for sale individually on eBay, with BIN prices on the graded ones about 3x or more of comparable raw versions (and the raw ones were also priced about 2.5x other raw comps). I thought they would sit forever in the eBay museum, but one collector immediately bought the Jackson and Cobb/Wagner and posted them here and on other sites. He noted with pride that the Cobb/Wagner was a "POP 1" and was the first and only copy that PSA had graded. I was floored.

Since then, PSA A and 1 copies have continued to do unreasonably well. Meanwhile, around the same time I bought an absolutely beautiful Eddie Collins in BVG 4.5 for $160. BVG cards in grades 2-3ish continued to stay around $125-250 for mid-tier HOFers, while PSA 1s were sometimes pulling $300 when there were better raw or BVG copies available. And now we have a PSA 1 Jackson alone going for $12,700, which was basically the price of the entire 96/100 set that sold 13 months ago.

Unlike most other prewar cards where the highest-quality examples are already in TPG holders, 99% of the highest-quality examples of M101-2s are in raw collections, along with tons of examples that would probably grade in the 2-4 range. Whoever is buying these either has no knowledge or understanding of the series, or is a registry addict, or both. As BobC mentioned, if the people holding the 99% of the nice raw M101-2s start grading them, the people who are paying $12K for a PSA 1 Jackson and $10K for a PSA 1 Wagner are going to be hurting.

But who knows, we'll probably look at this thread in 3 years and think they got the deal of the century.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by hcv123

is it possible people bought the cards and NOT the holders!? PSA rendered their opinion - apparently, the buyers disagreed?

Hi Howard,

I agree to "buy the card and not the holder", but look at what I just said/asked in my last post. If you are buying something online and can only view the scans, the way the item is described is going to have to also play a part in the decision of a potential buyer then. The descriptions by the AH repeatedly state that aside from the "minor spider crease" on the back of some of these supplements, there are no stains, pinholes, or "other visible issues" with any of them. As nolemmings posted and pointed out though, there clearly are other issues that if you can look closely enough at the scans, are visible. And the AH went even further to state that each of these M101-2 supplements looked to be at least EX condition, or better. Yet all five supplements only got PSA1 grades, so obviously there is something seriously not right with them.

My original post was because based on the scans and descriptions, there was no way I could see these all getting only PSA1 grades, yet they did. Now that the back issues were pointed out, it seems the AH descriptions don't make sense. And it isn't like this was something done on a single auction description, this was done over five separate auction lots, so whoever wrote the descriptions up, did so intentionally.

Usually the "buy the card not the holder" saying refers to instances where the card appears to be graded higher than it may seem to the person looking to buy it, and therefore the advice has been to not overspend just to get a TPG holder with a specific grade. These supplements would appear to be the rarer, opposite occasion, where the card looks much better than the technical grade then. So did the descriptions and scans unjustly play any part in making these M101-2 supplements seem that much better than the technical grades, and as a result bring in what seems like exceptional prices?

As I said, these appear to be exceptional prices for M101-2 Sporting News Supplements, especially given the technical grades. And don't get me wrong, I'm ecstatic to see such prices for these as that hopefully means my collection of them is worth that much more. However, something about these auction amounts just doesn't make sense then, given the PSA1 grades. These M101-2 supplements aren't traditional cards and are more of a niche collectible, or so I thought. I always equated them as more on a par with say the S74 silks. Nice and collectible by some, but nowhere near the demand or prices usually for major stars (like Cobb) in the more mainstream, contemporary issues.

I know you don't see M101-2s for sale everyday, but have always been able to find them out there, so to my thinking they aren't super rare, and certainly never at prices like this before. So are these recent M101-2 prices from this auction due to this crazy pandemic surge we've seen over this past year. Or is this a result of the non-collectors/investors looking and paying handsomely now for Cobbs, Wagners, Mathewsons, and Jacksons in a more obscure set like the M101-2s, because they can't afford the prices anymore for these same superstars in the regular card sets? And even if either of these reasons were totally (or even partially) true, that still doesn't explain such prices for PSA1s of these supplements, regardless of how nice they may look. The technical grade is still always going to be factored into the price being paid, or so I thought. Now if these M101-2s were graded 7s, 8s, 9s, or even 10's, then I could understand some of the prices that just got paid for them. But for PSA1a??? If one of those same M101-2 supplements come up for sale/auction in the next several months at an actual 7, 8, 9, or 10 grade then (with maybe the exception of the Mathewson), are we potentially talking a six figure price for it? If so, that is insane!!!!!

[BobC]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I noticed that too Bob, although the Shoeless Joe has visible fold lines both front and back, and went for the most money. The Cobb may have a diagonal fold line also, unless that's just the holder. Fold lines are sometimes really tough to discern on these, but IMHO, even if they were treated as creases, that would not knock the grade down to 1.

There are some very small white spots on the back, often in the corners, that may be evidence of these at one time being in an album. Kind of hard to say as those instead could be some sort of pressure spots from being held in the PSA holder. Speaking of that, it will be interesting to see if these premiums slide in the holder. I own a couple of M101-2s in Beckett holders where they don't slide. Then again, the holders are way too bulky--I would have paid more for the premiums to have them raw then to now worry about trying to crack open these tombs and somehow damage the fragile contents inside.

That is kind of what I was thinking as well, even if some spider creases (as the AH termed them) existed, I couldn't see the grades all being lowered to PSA1's. I did not really notice the white spots on the backs till you mentioned them. The original back scans looked fairly clean, and coupled with the AH's comments of no visible issues on any of them, I didn't use the magnification to really examine them. After doing so I can see what you're referring to on the pieces. Seems the visible white spots (maybe some kind of glue or adhesive residue) you described are most prominent in the upper corners of the supplements, and then down the right and left hand sides, seemingly more pronounced towards the bottoms. There also seems to be some stain, discolorization, or something on the lower, right side edge of the back of the Wagner supplement as well. And there is most definitely what looks like some tape residue in the upper and lower left hand corners on the back of the Jackson supplement. Can't easily detect the spider creasing they described from the scans, so glad they did mention that in their descriptions.

So if there is some tape, glue, or paper residue on the backs, along with some creasing, I can maybe understand now the PSA1 grades. Looks like these may have been in some scrapbook or attached to something then, as you said. Being paper, I don't think anyone would ever try to soak a supplement to get rid of any such residue as it would probably ruin the supplement. So if these back issues are what really lowered the condition of these M101-2s, I would have loved to have seen these in person to be able to see just how bad these really are to only get PSA1 grades. The scans of these definitely make them look way better than the grades then.

As for the white spots possibly being pressure points from the PSA holders, can't really tell from the scans, but doubt it. Those white marks look more like random residue. The plastic surfaces of the holders should be smooth so the pressure points, if any, would more likely be larger, more pronounced, and consistent for all the supplements, which they are not. As for an M101-2 supplement possibly moving around in a PSA holder and damaging it, can't really say till I've had a chance to see and check one out in person. It is highly possible though that if there is any movement that a supplement could be damaged, they are fragile paper and over 100 years old. I've got one M101-2 supplement in a Beckett holder also. And you're right, the supplements aren't moving around in those, and they are also way too bulky to or store or keep easily. Like you, I would rather a supplement not be encased in such a bulky, Beckett holder, but would never try to crack a supplement out of one either for fear of damaging it.

Which now leads to another question. Why would the AH go to the trouble of mentioning the virtually unnoticeable creasing, but then state there are no other visible issues on any of the supplements, when there clearly are? The AH even went so far as to state that all of the supplements looked to be in EX or better ccondition, despite the PSA1 grades. Yes, I know they said "to the naked eye", but to then also say there are no other visible issues aside from the spider creases doesn't seem right. I have seen the hyperbole of AH write-ups before, but this seems to go beyond that. If they were only referring to fronts of the supplements as looking EX or better, and stated there were only talking about the fronts, then that would be a different story.