Analysis of PWCC Vintage Auction 10/13/19

[frankbmd]

Do the auction results of two bidders with snipes more than $50000 above the third bidder prove anything about the actual market value of the card? I would seriously question that conclusion.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

Do the auction results of two bidders with snipes more than $50000 above the third bidder prove anything about the actual market value of the card? I would seriously question that conclusion.

I show 6 unique bidders over $100k. And this is a pop 2 modern card in a 10, with a total pop of around 30. A modern white whale. I would argue plenty was proven about the market value of the card.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

I show 6 unique bidders over $100k. And this is a pop 2 modern card in a 10, with a total pop of around 30. A modern white whale. I would argue plenty was proven about the market value of the card.

Both of the final bids also do not come from bidders with inflated statistics with one seller or a large number of bid retractions.

With a card this limited it is natural for only a few to push it to its highest point and I would agree with Frank if this was a more available card with an outlier sale due to only several bidders but on a card with such a limited number printed it says everything about the value of the card.

PWCC had close to 9,000 listings a few days ago when I looked. The party has not ended and isn't going to end.

People wan't to buy cards and will go to the source of those cards. After all they are closer to a stock exchange than a true card dealer.

[Rhotchkiss]

I know nothing about the modern market, and very little about the market for cards after 1930+/-, but with respect to the old-vintage (the stuff we talk about on net54), I believe PWCC has not been doing well of late. In my opinion, the pre-war offerings in the past three auctions have been inferior to what PWCC has previously offered, and the prices on many (not all) cards that I follow have been lower than historic. Regarding the offerings, I do believe a number of would-be-consignors have opted to hold off and/or consign elsewhere. This conclusion is based on both conversations with people and what I see being (or not being) offered in the past few auctions. Regarding prices, I believe there are several reasons for this: the sales tax argument is interesting, but it has not affected Heritage, and it has not really altered the way I buy, so based solely on those two points, I don’t think it’s a main reason. Instead, I think there is less shilling (perhaps pwcc is policing more now that they are under investigation) and I do believe less people are bidding.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Imagine bidding 202K for a 4th year Jeter card and losing.

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

I know nothing about the modern market, and very little about the market for cards after 1930+/-, but with respect to the old-vintage (the stuff we talk about on net54), I believe PWCC has not been doing well of late. In my opinion, the pre-war offerings in the past three auctions have been inferior to what PWCC has previously offered, and the prices on many (not all) cards that I follow have been lower than historic. Regarding the offerings, I do believe a number of would-be-consignors have opted to hold off and/or consign elsewhere. This conclusion is based on both conversations with people and what I see being (or not being) offered in the past few auctions. Regarding prices, I believe there are several reasons for this: the sales tax argument is interesting, but it has not affected Heritage, and it has not really altered the way I buy, so based solely on those two points, I don’t think it’s a main reason. Instead, I think there is less shilling (perhaps pwcc is policing more now that they are under investigation) and I do believe less people are bidding.

i don't have specific numbers to back this up, but IMO the non-sports/cards outside the big four sports have been pretty weak lately, compared to previous PWCC auctions. PWCC used to always have some obscure non-sports stuff in every one of their auctions that I had never seen before. That really has not been the case at all the last several auctions.

That being said, I realize Teddy Roosevelt, Charles Lindbergh and P.T. Barnum are a tiny drop in the bucket when bidders are dropping $200,000 on a Derek Jeter card.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

Both of the final bids also do not come from bidders with inflated statistics with one seller or a large number of bid retractions.

With a card this limited it is natural for only a few to push it to its highest point and I would agree with Frank if this was a more available card with an outlier sale due to only several bidders but on a card with such a limited number printed it says everything about the value of the card.

PWCC had close to 9,000 listings a few days ago when I looked. The party has not ended and isn't going to end.

People wan't to buy cards and will go to the source of those cards. After all they are closer to a stock exchange than a true card dealer.

If you were a company going public in need of $50,000,000, would you sell

A) 10,000,000 shares of stock for $5 a share in an IPO or

B) would you short print 25 pristine stock certificates in plastic cases impregnated with Joe Orlando’s saliva and verified by Spence and sell them for $2,000,000 each?

The players (in the market and in the Vault) may be the same, but how a short-printed modern, shiny piece of in cardboard is analogous to equity in a potentially very profitable start-up or in a Fortune 500 company for that matter eludes me,

but then again I will never be vault-worthy and my lack of understanding doesn’t bother me one iota.

[ullmandds]

While I am not nearly as old as you are Frank I feel the same!!! If this sale is legitimate it is definitely a testament to the craziness of the modern card market! And apparently these companies creating these rarities...albeit artificially apparently know what they are doing and are striking a cord with some very rich folks.

While Jeter was a great ballplayer he will rank nowhere near the all-time greats just like a lot of these other insane rookie refractor cards selling for five and six figures.

Originally Posted by frankbmd

If you were a company going public in need of $50,000,000, would you sell

A) 10,000,000 shares of stock for $5 a share in an IPO or

B) would you short print 25 pristine stock certificates in plastic cases impregnated with Joe Orlando’s saliva and verified by Spence and sell them for $2,000,000 each?

The players (in the market and in the Vault) may be the same, but how a short-printed modern, shiny piece of in cardboard is analogous to equity in a potentially very profitable start-up or in a Fortune 500 company for that matter eludes me,

but then again I will never be vault-worthy and my lack of understanding doesn’t bother me one iota.

[MVSNYC]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

While I am not nearly as old as you are Frank I feel the same!!! If this sale is legitimate it is definitely a testament to the craziness of the modern card market! And apparently these companies creating these rarities...albeit artificially apparently know what they are doing and are striking a cord with some very rich folks.

While Jeter was a great ballplayer he will rank nowhere near the all-time greats just like a lot of these other insane rookie refractor cards selling for five and six figures.

Pete- I'm not trying to justify (nor do I fully understand) that $200k sale price on that (obscure) card. But, to specifically address your comment above, people often forget Jeter is #6 on the all-time hits list (ahead of Wagner, Yaz, Mays, Lajoie, Ripken, etc). That seems to be forgotten...and the 5 rings certainly add to his legend. If there's 4 or 5 heads on the Yankee's Mt. Rushmore, he's on it.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by MVSNYC

Pete- I'm not trying to justify (nor do I fully understand) that $200k sale price on that (obscure) card. But, to specifically address your comment above, people often forget Jeter is #6 on the all-time hits list (ahead of Wagner, Yaz, Mays, Lajoie, Ripken, etc). That seems to be forgotten...and the 5 rings certainly add to his legend. If there's 4 or 5 heads on the Yankee's Mt. Rushmore, he's on it.

I think that's about right...

Ahead of him would be Babe, Lou, Mickey and Joe. Not sure if Jeter would be just ahead of Yogi or behind him. Perhaps I'm drawing a blank but can't think of anyone else that would push Jeter beyond #6 on a list of all-time Yankee greats. The only pitcher that comes to mind is Whitey, but he probably goes in behind Jeter.... right?

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

If you were a company going public in need of $50,000,000, would you sell

A) 10,000,000 shares of stock for $5 a share in an IPO or

B) would you short print 25 pristine stock certificates in plastic cases impregnated with Joe Orlando’s saliva and verified by Spence and sell them for $2,000,000 each?

The players (in the market and in the Vault) may be the same, but how a short-printed modern, shiny piece of in cardboard is analogous to equity in a potentially very profitable start-up or in a Fortune 500 company for that matter eludes me,

but then again I will never be vault-worthy and my lack of understanding doesn’t bother me one iota.

The shareholder base of an IPO is not a good comparison here but I will try and answer your question. On one hand it is nice to have a smaller number of shareholders to answer to with more skin in the game. It also will impact how shares are traded in the secondary market and make it harder to gain access so in theory this will make it easier for the share price to rise with such a limited supply of shares. It also though makes you more susceptible to price decline due to the limited liquidity and will also expose you to the issue of some shareholders not being interested because they can't come up with the amount to get in or can't buy enough in the secondary market once launched. The larger offering gives more people a chance to get in but will create much greater liquidity in the secondary market and you may end up with some very significant shareholders controlling more of the voting rights than perhaps you want and making it harder to manage the business. There is no right or wrong answer here.

Short print cards are about bragging rights. That is why they were printed this way. The goal was to create artificial scarcity and the ability for only a very few to say they own one. I certainly have 200k but I am not in a position to drop 200k on a single card as it would be too risky of a move but for someone with a massive net worth this might be the equivalent to a 2k card to them. Once a card becomes a must own the price goes up and where this goes from here is anyone's guess. For the nearly ten years I have been participating in online forums there has always been a chorus of people blasting the buyers of these cards and yet they only seem to go up. 15k was too much for a Jeter 1993 SP. 25k was unthinkable. You get the point.

I don't try and put myself in someone else's shoes when it comes to what they buy because everyone's circumstances are different. Do I think putting 200k into some of the more marquee vintage cards is smarter? Perhaps but perhaps not.

At the end of the day this modern frenzy is alive and well and while the risk profile of the purchases appears quite high so have been the rewards and this is going to keep it going.

[Peter_Spaeth]

To each his own, but the fact that a company intentionally printed only 10 or 5 or 1 of a card in an attempt to CREATE a valuable -- like the golden ticket in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory -- means nothing to me.

[Dpeck100]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To each his own, but the fact that a company intentionally printed only 10 or 5 or 1 of a card in an attempt to CREATE a valuable -- like the golden ticket in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory -- means nothing to me.

The only modern cards I collect for the most part are Brock Lesnar. I just bought his "rarest" card and it is numbered to 25. I own the only PSA graded copy too. I paid $125 and $124. I am not the target audience for one of these cards either. It is fun to chase these down but under no circumstances am I paying 100 times more for this one vs. the other variations of the same card just in different colors with more made.

[frankbmd]

I'm sticking with my argument.

A shiny Jeter is not the stock exchange, it's a house of cards.

A shiny Jeter is not an asset, where's the bank to would accept it as collateral?

[samosa4u]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To each his own, but the fact that a company intentionally printed only 10 or 5 or 1 of a card in an attempt to CREATE a valuable -- like the golden ticket in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory -- means nothing to me.

Well, the Golden Ticket means everything to me! I would love to pull one out of those delicious-tasting chocolate bars and have the opportunity to meet Mr. Wonka!

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To each his own, but the fact that a company intentionally printed only 10 or 5 or 1 of a card in an attempt to CREATE a valuable -- like the golden ticket in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory -- means nothing to me.

I see your point, but in an era of over production a few issues stand out for one reason or another. Cards that were hard to track down even back then. I remember opening 93 finest packs trying to find refractors. And 96 select certified hoping for a mirror red, blue, or gold.

I didn't collect basketball back then, but those PMG cards fall into the same category. 91 topps desert shield seem to be hot as well.

I think as guys around my age who collected as kids in the 90s and remember these cards get back into the hobby demand will only increase.