T206 Lajoie Lenox PSA 4 at Goodwin

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Yes, agreed, "overpriced" and "bargain" used simultaneously to refer to the same subject is necessarily oxymoronic and logically inconsistent. My point was simply that if $9000 for Cobb Cycle 350s is the new normal, then $24k for the Nap is, IMO, a relative steal. That said, I remember feeling about real estate in 2007, how I do about rare backs today..... I think things are "whack" but in this whack world I would rather have the Nap at $24k than the Cobb cycle at $9k (although they are both great). The Nap is a once a decade/maybe lifetime card, and assuming the buyer paid that sum to collect, price doesn't really matter on card like that (if buyer can reasonably afford to stroke the check).

Why do you presume that an outlying price in a Goldin auction of all places somehow sets the new value range of rare backed T206s?

[Rhotchkiss]

I presume nothing of the sort. Over the past few weeks I have seen red Cobbs CB (with back damage) and cycle 350s, go for crazy numbers. I got outbid on a Young bare hand OM 6, at a very very high number. About two weeks ago, as posted elsewhere, somebody over the course of 1-2 days took down every rare back CB and rarer, all commons and all listings that had been out there for many many months. Just a few examples... I am hanging my hat on the totality of fairly recent sales. The Nap, well hell, that is something special and on a card like that you gotta pay what you gotta pay to make it yours.

[calvindog]

I don't think that a couple weeks of sales which include a Goldin auction necessarily means the market has changed. That being said, red Cobbs have certainly taken off over the past few years along with many cards. As for the Lajoie, it sold as a brown Lenox and is as rare as you said -- and of a HOF player.

[PhillipAbbott79]

Originally Posted by calvindog

I don't think that a couple weeks of sales which include a Goldin auction necessarily means the market has changed. That being said, red Cobbs have certainly taken off over the past few years along with many cards. As for the Lajoie, it sold as a brown Lenox and is as rare as you said -- and of a HOF player.

A single transaction is always what defines the start of a change, no matter how small. Repeat transactions dictate how sticky the change will be.

One could easily speculate why it sold at the price it did, but that would be speculation. No offense meant, but lots of people on here postulate facts. It is sad and hilarious at the same time. Your post is just that, speculation. Trying to determine reasoning of a person based on price is, no offense meant again, moronic.

The Murphy Red Hindu 1/1 must have sold at the price it did because the two buyers that fought over it thought it was a Purple Hindu.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by PhillipAbbott79

A single transaction is always what defines the start of a change, no matter how small. Repeat transactions dictate how sticky the change will be.

One could easily speculate why it sold at the price it did, but that would be speculation. No offense meant, but lots of people on here postulate facts. It is sad and hilarious at the same time. Your post is just that, speculation. Trying to determine reasoning of a person based on price is, no offense meant again, moronic.

The Murphy Red Hindu 1/1 must have sold at the price it did because the two buyers that fought over it thought it was a Purple Hindu.

Except that I spoke to people who bid it up and they did so under the belief that it was brown. Therefore, what I wrote is not speculation. Sometimes it's better to keep your mouth shut so as not to be revealed as a moron. No offense meant.

[PhillipAbbott79]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Except that I spoke to people who bid it up and they did so under the belief that it was brown. Therefore, what I wrote is not speculation. Sometimes it's better to keep your mouth shut so as not to be revealed as a moron. No offense meant.

Lol. Yea.

Well, no one proves you wrong, ever. I will not ask you to validate it with facts like others would. I will just chalk up to a loss of moronic proportions.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by PhillipAbbott79

Lol. Yea.

Well, no one proves you wrong, ever. I will not ask you to validate it with facts like others would. I will just chalk up to a loss of moronic proportions.

Let's see: before Mastro and Allen were indicted, years before, there was enough anecdotal information in the public domain -- none of it from any of them or their co-conspirators -- which made clear that fraud was afoot in their auctions. They're all in jail now. John Rodgers? Another one where circumstantial evidence existed to make clear, at least to some here, that he was a crook. He's now headed off to prison. Brent/PWCC? Again, no insiders came out and declared that fraud was going on in his auctions and a handful of people who were neither his paid apologists or co-conspirators called it. And I think we can all agree that significant fraud has gone on in his auctions. And there are many more instances of this.

And you can ask me anything you'd like; that doesn't mean I would share my insights from being involved in more hobby related-federal criminal investigations and indictments, state fraud cases and civil fraud litigations than anyone on this board, with a proud moron like you. Sometimes it's just best to shut up and listen instead of demanding to be heard, especially when you have not a clue -- or the experience and intelligence to at least know you have not a clue.