Goldin Auction - Honus Wagner “Rookie Card”

[bcbgcbrcb]

I just watched a YouTube video this afternoon which made reference to the recently completed Goldin Auction with a large number of high-end, pre-war baseball cards. One of the biggest cards was a PSA encapsulated 1897-99 Henry Reccius Cigars Honus Wagner “Rookie Card”. If I remember correctly, the card did not meet reserve and went unsold despite a high bid of $875K. This immediately brought back memories of this card being discussed on Net54 more than a decade ago and how the dating by PSA was incorrect and the actual issue date had to be during the early 1900’s at best and possibly as late as 1918 or so. Low and behold, I found the Net54 thread, here is the link:

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=196820

It’s insane to me that bidders ran this card up to that level, I wonder how many did not realize the discrepancy in the date of issue. More towards the end of the description, Goldin does allude to the fact that some believe that the issue date of this card could be late 1900’s but then reverts back to most likely being a 1897-00 issue. Am I missing something, has there been more recent information that dates the card to the late 1890’s or is that date still believed to be misinformation?

[Peter_Spaeth]

We have been discussing this very question on another thread. Lots of cause for skepticism it seems. I looked for but could not find the original Hal Lewis thread about the card.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...hlight=reccius

[tjisonline]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

It’s insane to me that bidders ran this card up to that level, I wonder how many did not realize the discrepancy in the date of issue. More towards the end of the description, Goldin does allude to the fact that some believe that the issue date of this card could be late 1900’s but then reverts back to most likely being a 1897-00 issue. Am I missing something, has there been more recent information that dates the card to the late 1890’s or is that date still believed to be misinformation?

Bidders might have not . "Goldin may place bids below the reserve on behalf of the Seller, either consecutively or in response to other bids."
source = https://goldin.co/useragreement

[oldjudge]

Ideally, the dating questions should have been clearly pointed out in the lot description. I have heard nothing that would make me believe that the card was absolutely issued pre-1900; perhaps if such information exists the consignor(who it appears thought the card was worth over $1 million) or the high bidder (who thought it was worth almost a million) or Goldin (who accepted the reserve) could provide it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Ideally, the dating questions should have been clearly pointed out in the lot description. I have heard nothing that would make me believe that the card was absolutely issued pre-1900; perhaps if such information exists the consignor(who it appears thought the card was worth over $1 million) or the high bidder (who thought it was worth almost a million) or Goldin (who accepted the reserve) could provide it.

This has been researched exhaustively as detailed in Rob L's thread and in a prior thread by Hal Lewis. I very much doubt there is any additional relevant information out there. There is clearly no definitive evidence supporting 1897-99 as the issue date, although I suppose it remains possible if not likely.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by tjisonline

Bidders might have not . "Goldin may place bids below the reserve on behalf of the Seller, either consecutively or in response to other bids."
source = https://goldin.co/useragreement

So they can run you up to the reserve. I am surprised there has not been more angst about this. Back in the day there might have been.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So they can run you up to the reserve. I am surprised there has not been more angst about this. Back in the day there might have been.

Peter,

That is a recognized practice among most major auction houses, disclosure of which is buried in the fine print of the auction rules. I characterize it as legalized fraud, as its purpose is to induce bids on the mistaken belief there is genuine interest at that bidding level.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Peter,

That is a recognized practice among most major auction houses, disclosure of which is buried in the fine print of the auction rules. I characterize it as legalized fraud, as its purpose is to induce bids on the mistaken belief there is genuine interest at that bidding level.

Uh, yeah!

Why is this type of auction/sale allowed. It's basically trying to induce people with a lot of money that don't know any better to purchase something very hyped.

Why is this legal? Is this a practice/tactic auction houses like Lloyd or Christies employ?

[Yoda]

I believe Aaron Seefeldt owned this card at one time. I am sure he could add something here.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by Fred

Uh, yeah!

Why is this type of auction/sale allowed. It's basically trying to induce people with a lot of money that don't know any better to purchase something very hyped.

Why is this legal? Is this a practice/tactic auction houses like Lloyd or Christies employ?

It is employed by Christies and Sotheby's.

[robertsmithnocure]

Originally Posted by Fred

Is this a practice/tactic auction houses like Lloyd or Christies employ?

I think that this practice is common with many of the major art auction houses.

Other niche auction houses, like some in our hobby, use a similar practice too.

This is from Mile High Card Company's Auction Rules on their website:

2d) ...A reserve price is the confidential minimum price that a consignor will accept before they will sell the material, this means that a bid of equal or greater than the confidential reserve must be placed for a successful bid to be accepted on that lot. MHCC may implement this reserve by bidding on behalf of the consignor and may place a bid up to the amount of the reserve, by placing successive bids if necessary. In the limited instances where MHCC has a financial interest in a lot beyond our commission, we may place a bid to protect our financial interest...

And from SCP Auctions' Terms and conditions:

Reserve bid prices are not publicly available and will not be published. SCP may implement this reserve by executing bids on behalf of the consigner and may place a bid up to the amount one increment below the reserve, by placing successive bids if necessary.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Peter,

That is a recognized practice among most major auction houses, disclosure of which is buried in the fine print of the auction rules. I characterize it as legalized fraud, as its purpose is to induce bids on the mistaken belief there is genuine interest at that bidding level.

I get it, I was just expressing surprise it hasn't evoked more angst, as people used to bitch a ton about hidden reserves and such.

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Peter,

That is a recognized practice among most major auction houses, disclosure of which is buried in the fine print of the auction rules. I characterize it as legalized fraud, as its purpose is to induce bids on the mistaken belief there is genuine interest at that bidding level.

+1. It’s dog shit and, while legal, ethical fraud. I don’t like a hidden reserve, but I get it and think it’s fair enough. But an AH should not be able to effectively shill up the price, making it seem that real bids are being placed, in an effort to get someone to place a real bid at the hidden reserve amount. I despise this practice. Now, just because an AH can do this does not necessarily mean they do it, although I expect they do/would if an item is below the hidden reserve- why not use the tool if you can.

[tjisonline]

I get why they do it but like many here, do not agree with the practice. It’s dogshit as you stated.

If a consigner (or AH) has a minimum price set, that’s perfectly fine. Just open the auction lot at that price instead of faking additional interest (bids).

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

+1. It’s dog shit and, while legal, ethical fraud. I don’t like a hidden reserve, but I get it and think it’s fair enough. But an AH should not be able to effectively shill up the price, making it seem that real bids are being placed, in an effort to get someone to place a real bid at the hidden reserve amount. I despise this practice. Now, just because an AH can do this does not necessarily mean they do it, although I expect they do/would if an item is below the hidden reserve- why not use the tool if you can.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by tjisonline

Bidders might have not . "Goldin may place bids below the reserve on behalf of the Seller, either consecutively or in response to other bids."
source = https://goldin.co/useragreement

Why bother with a reserve if the AH is going to bid it right up to the reserve amount? Is there something I'm not understanding here? Why not just start the bidding at the reserve price? Is it because they're afraid nobody will bid on it? To me, all the bidding before the reserve is met would just be suspect and the AH trying to hype the card. This is the part of the hobby that just isn't.