Calling ticket experts! - holy grail find?

[Dave Grob]

Some thoughts on general pricing data, and these tickets in particular… and this is NOT directed at anyone in particular.

In instances when you have small populations or sample sizes, the relevance of each individual data point (ticket, jersey, card, bat) becomes less relevant/more sensitive. This is not an opinion, but a core component of statistical analysis. With small populations and sample sizes, it is also essential to know these samples in detail; specifically it is even a true sample size, or have some of these items been offered more than once within the same sample. This is key since if collectors are actually seeing the same item often offered more than once, this creates a false read on true rarity. This can lead to lower prices realized since the collector might assume, “Well, if I miss it here, I’ll just get the next one that comes along.” I alluded to this in a previous post on Brooklyn Dodger “Welcome Banners.”

As for the specific data on these proofs as previously offered by Stephen:

GAME 3
October 12 2016 - Game 3 Proof PSA - $3350.05
April 22 2015 - Game 3 Proof PSA - $2250
March 05 2015 - Game 3 Proof PSA - $5000
December 4 2014 - Mile High Game 3 Proof PSA - $1,535.76
December 31 2013 - Game 3 Proof - $5750
GAME 4
December 18 2013 - Game 4 Proof PSA - $801
August 22 2013 - Game 4 Proof PSA - $4000
GAME 5
This game does not trade often, but when it does, it commonly sells in the $150-$300 range as it is a mere novelty.

General Observations
- The highest prices paid/realized are from the oldest examples, not the most recent.

- There is a huge difference in prices between the games, with Game 3 obviously commanding the most money.

- Full sheets are not candidates for grading/encapsulation.

Why these factors may not automatically translate into a much higher price for the sheet as being offered and priced today.

1. The highest prices are oldest. This could suggest that the strongest buyers have already obtained what they were looking for and are likely not interested at all, regardless of price. Use of even the low average of $3,577 for Game 3 as a pricing metric fails to acknowledge that this figure is in fact higher than the price on the two most recent sales.

2. When collecting tickets, there appear to be fairly strong differences and preferences for stubs, full tickets and proofs. It could be that the proof is seen as the least desirable of the three. Here you have to be careful in applying an otherwise macro trend (ticket prices are going up), to a subset of the larger group that may not have same macro-level appeal.

3. The collector interested in a proof, may not be interested in one from Game 4 and or Game 5, and as such, is not willing to pay a premium for what he wants, while absorbing the acquisition of items he does not want.

All of this creates a couple of courses of action.

1. If the goal is strictly to provide the maximum return on investment, separate the tickets and have them graded/encapsulated and then sold individually. This maximizes the possibly demand for the Game 3 ticket and works to satisfy what may be the collector’s preference for graded/encapsulated product.

2. Keep the sheet as is and hold onto it until a buyer is found at a more palatable sales price.

Dave Grob