Restored Honus Wagner at SCP Auctions

[chriskim]

Originally Posted by robertsmithnocure

That T206 Wagner looks to have a bit more than a surface crease (singular) in the “before” picture.

What happened to this PSA 7 1933 Goudey Ruth that is also in the SCP Auction. I am not sure how they can rate this as a “9/10 in the eye appeal department.”

https://catalog.scpauctions.com/1933...-LOT48853.aspx

I think they meant the back is 9/10 in the eye appeal.... which I agree.

How come this Ruth can zoom in much closer than the Wagner? Are they trying to hide the true current condition of the Wagner?

[GasHouseGang]

That card looks weird. Like they drew him with too much makeup. The other Wagner is the the one at the Baseball HOF.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

That card looks weird. Like they drew him with too much makeup. The other Wagner is the the one at the Baseball HOF.

The makeup made his nose look bigger. I would take the makeup back to the store and ask for a refund.

Brian

[chriskim]

You can blow up a Jordan Photograph 20x but this Wagner can only blow up 1.25x ... why??

https://catalog.scpauctions.com/STUN...-LOT50039.aspx

[SteveS]

This one doesn't even have a crease. First $3 million takes it.

[JK]

Originally Posted by SteveS

This one doesn't even have a crease. First $3 million takes it.

Make this an NFT and you might get your asking price!

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

The makeup made his nose look bigger. I would take the makeup back to the store and ask for a refund.

Brian

We have the McNall-Gretzky Wagner and the Jumbo Wagner. Will this one be known as the Jimmy Durante Wagner?

[Tao_Moko]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

That card looks weird. Like they drew him with too much makeup. The other Wagner is the the one at the Baseball HOF.

If restoration can preserve and is disclosed then I can accept to some degree. My issue is the artist did a very poor job. The nose, cleft, left eye and right cheek entirely change the appearance. It's very poorly done. Do we know who the artist/restorer was?

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Tao_Moko

If restoration can preserve and is disclosed then I can accept to some degree. My issue is the artist did a very poor job. The nose, cleft, left eye and right cheek entirely change the appearance. It's very poorly done. Do we know who the artist/restorer was?

why didn't they just rebuild the borders too while they were at it?

[Tao_Moko]

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

why didn't they just rebuild the borders too while they were at it?

Not saying I like it at all. The Wagner is hardly a "card" any longer and has transcended the hobby for decades. I don't really care that it is restored just wish they at least hired an artist worth a sh*t. It now looks like a Simpsons character.

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by Tao_Moko

Not saying I like it at all. The Wagner is hardly a "card" any longer and has transcended the hobby for decades. I don't really care that it is restored just wish they at least hired an artist worth a sh*t. It now looks like a Simpsons character.

I agree the restorer did a poor job.
That Card will continue to Be the Holy Grail of Cards to many collectors for decades to come.
Of Course we do not know the reserve but I hope it does sell and changes hands to someone hopefully is a collector vs an investor.

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by chriskim

I think they meant the back is 9/10 in the eye appeal.... which I agree.

How come this Ruth can zoom in much closer than the Wagner? Are they trying to hide the true current condition of the Wagner?

WTF - that card looks like it had a few too many days out in the sun - how is that a 7!?

[ullmandds]

ugliest wagner i've ever seen. if that's a 2 million card I'll eat a t206!

[ejharrington]

The card looks 1000 times better now than before. If I had the money I'd go for it.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Hey, I had to draw that guy from memory!

[mrreality68]

Perhaps others are reading our forum (or not)

But after the first day the bidding is only at $389k.

I thought it would have been a bit higher after one day with more bidders getting in their bids early.

[luciobar1980]

I personally wouldn't want any part of that card, even if I did have the money.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

ugliest wagner i've ever seen. if that's a 2 million card I'll eat a t206!

Get ready. Today's buyers aren't all Net54 members.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Leon]

Originally Posted by todeen

Get ready. Today's buyers aren't all Net54 members.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

No they aren't. And it seems a lot of them don't know what the F they are doing! (according to the bids I see) They should become a member and get enlightened.

.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Leon

No they aren't. And it seems a lot of them don't know what the F they are doing! (according to the bids I see) They should become a member and get enlightened.

.

The buyer of Heritage's Joe Jackson autographed photo did pretty well with his investment despite the fact that almost everyone thinks the autograph is a forgery. The hobby has trended towards what the flip says is more important that what is inside. Buyers who are investors not collectors are only looking at the financials. They don't care about Net54 or what the hobby thinks of their purchases.

[ValKehl]

+1 to what Corey said so very well.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by rats60

The buyer of Heritage's Joe Jackson autographed photo did pretty well with his investment despite the fact that almost everyone thinks the autograph is a forgery. The hobby has trended towards what the flip says is more important that what is inside. Buyers who are investors not collectors are only looking at the financials. They don't care about Net54 or what the hobby thinks of their purchases.

Maybe PWCC "conservation " is taking a foothold

[2dueces]

I like the restored version.

[glynparson]

Originally Posted by Leon

No they aren't. And it seems a lot of them don't know what the F they are doing! (according to the bids I see) They should become a member and get enlightened.

.

Maybe if they read the archived threads or have a time machine. Because currently it only seems to be a bunch of whiners complaining about graded cards or other things they act like experts on but now less than some of these “novices”

[Schlesinj]

I am assuming the buyers are looking at this as a piece of art then a baseball card collector. A display piece and they would rather look pretty.

[rats60]

You guys need to consider all sides, not just the buyer looking to get steals. If you owned a card that just sold for 2.5 million dollars, you wouldn't sell yours for 1 million. You would want a reserve to protect your investment.

From the AH side, they aren't going to want a bunch of cards with high reserves that don't sell. They make their money on BP. They need cards to sell. They are only going to accept reserves for high profile cards and they are going to want most to be reasonable. A Wagner is going to get eyes on their other cards, so why wouldn't they do what it takes to get a copy of the Hobby's best card in their auction?

[brob28]

Originally Posted by hcv123

WTF - that card looks like it had a few too many days out in the sun - how is that a 7!?

Agreed, no way that is a 7 in my mind.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by brob28

Agreed, no way that is a 7 in my mind.

That is one of the worst looking Goudey Ruth 144s I have seen. And after juice it's already over 30k? Maybe it's a registry thing because I wouldn't pay 5k for it unless it was to flip. I couldn't own it and look at it everyday. My last one wasn't quite up to snuff so I upgraded and it looked tons better than this 7, it was a 4. That is one ugly card to me. From their write up-

" GEM MINT reverse and pin point sharp corners give this example a 9/10 in the eye appeal department in our view."

Whomever "our" is certainly isn't a collector. Because of the sharp corners and great looking back I would give it a 2, at best.


As for the Wagner. Ugh..... what the heck? I agree they should return the make up they put on him. I honestly think I liked it better unrestored. It looks fake now.,
.

[SteveS]

I am convinced that other than true, diehard collectors, people are buying the holder and not the card. I absolutely believe that if PSA were ever to do an April Fool's joke and issue an empty holder with a flip that says, "T206 Honus Wagner Invisible Gem-Mt 10," there would be a bidding frenzy on it.

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by SteveS

I am convinced that other than true, diehard collectors, people are buying the holder and not the card. I absolutely believe that if PSA were ever to do an April Fool's joke and issue an empty holder with a flip that says, "T206 Honus Wagner Invisible Gem-Mt 10," there would be a bidding frenzy on it.

Congratulations! You have just described an NFT.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

Congratulations! You have just described an NFT.

[chadeast]

Originally Posted by Leon

That is one of the worst looking Goudey Ruth 144s I have seen. And after juice it's already over 30k? Maybe it's a registry thing because I wouldn't pay 5k for it unless it was to flip. I couldn't own it and look at it everyday. My last one wasn't quite up to snuff so I upgraded and it looked tons better than this 7, it was a 4. That is one ugly card to me. From their write up-

" GEM MINT reverse and pin point sharp corners give this example a 9/10 in the eye appeal department in our view."

Whomever "our" is certainly isn't a collector. Because of the sharp corners and great looking back I would give it a 2, at best.


As for the Wagner. Ugh..... what the heck? I agree they should return the make up they put on him. I honestly think I liked it better unrestored. It looks fake now.,
.

Totally agree Leon. Fading is just not a priority for the TPG's in my experience. Having recently put together my '33 Goudey set, and having vivid colors near or at the top of my personal list of what's important to me on that set, I found that grades were mostly independent of fading/color saturation/whatever you care to call it. It bothers me much more than rounded corners, and presented a significant challenge to me as I built my set.

Good excuse for me to show off my #144 SGC 2 once again. I challenge the 7, stamp and all!

[brob28]

Originally Posted by chadeast

Totally agree Leon. Fading is just not a priority for the TPG's in my experience. Having recently put together my '33 Goudey set, and having vivid colors near or at the top of my personal list of what's important to me on that set, I found that grades were mostly independent of fading/color saturation/whatever you care to call it. It bothers me much more than rounded corners, and presented a significant challenge to me as I built my set.

Good excuse for me to show off my #144 SGC 2 once again. I challenge the 7, stamp and all!

I can't agree more Chad, I'd take your 2 over that "7" anyday, BTW, nice card!

[JustinD]

As long as it's clearly labeled as restored, I don't have a problem in the world with it. However, I admit I collect "Authentic" cards with no qualms.

Actually interested in the final hammer on this as it will be telling on the overall temperature of collectors on the owners choice to have it worked on.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by hcv123

WTF - that card looks like it had a few too many days out in the sun - how is that a 7!?

because it's been soaked in bleach, peroxide and trimmed. Color looks like s***. A nice Authentic (Restored), IMHO