Greg Morris raw cards - trust or no?

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

I bet the people that consigned those cards wish they'd directly consigned to Greg Morris, rather than an auction house.

I think that the opposite may be true. The $44,400 1965 PSA complete set from REA broke last evening via GM at approximately $39,500 ...the original REA consignor is likely glad to have gone through REA vs GM on this one. If GM purchased this set, they are in the red by almost $10k after ebay fees.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

I think that the opposite may be true. The $44,400 1965 PSA complete set from REA broke last evening via GM at approximately $39,500 ...the original REA consignor is likely glad to have gone through REA vs GM on this one. If GM purchased this set, they are in the red by almost $10k after ebay fees.

Wow, I didn't realize someone had done the math to see if the GM had made money. Yikes if they were $10K in the red....

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Wow, I didn't realize someone had done the math to see if the GM had made money. Yikes if they were $10K in the red....

I was actually following the set, not the seller. I came into the auction last evening needing 10 cards to finish my set, down to 4 after. Prices were really all over the place in this break and I was curious as to how it would break after it sold for more than I expected it would as a complete set via REA.

[BioCRN]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

I think that the opposite may be true. The $44,400 1965 PSA complete set from REA broke last evening via GM at approximately $39,500 ...the original REA consignor is likely glad to have gone through REA vs GM on this one. If GM purchased this set, they are in the red by almost $10k after ebay fees.

Anecdotal (and not limited to any particular seller), but as a buyer, I've benefited greatly on many auctions that flood an auction ending in a single pay-due period with same-year/type cards.

I've seen this somewhat recently on a heavy N172 auction as well as 60s/70s Topps set breaks. It may attract the right people to the auction, but I wonder how much $$ the buyer pool feels comfortable spending all at once. It seems prioritization shoves some stuff into the background that would ordinarily be bid up.

I wonder if things would have been different if they took that 1965 set and broke it up over a few weeks/months of separate pay-due auction periods rather than putting the set up all at once.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by BioCRN

Anecdotal (and not limited to any particular seller), but as a buyer, I've benefited greatly on many auctions that flood an auction ending in a single pay-due period with same-year/type cards.

I don't understand this way of selling. It makes no sense. List a handful from several sets instead. A slow break of a complete set gives people more time to (re)generate funds. Not all customers have the freedom to bid on a huge pile at once.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by BioCRN

Anecdotal (and not limited to any particular seller), but as a buyer, I've benefited greatly on many auctions that flood an auction ending in a single pay-due period with same-year/type cards.

I've seen this somewhat recently on a heavy N172 auction as well as 60s/70s Topps set breaks. It may attract the right people to the auction, but I wonder how much $$ the buyer pool feels comfortable spending all at once. It seems prioritization shoves some stuff into the background that would ordinarily be bid up.

I wonder if things would have been different if they took that 1965 set and broke it up over a few weeks/months of separate pay-due auction periods rather than putting the set up all at once.

In the past, the trend has obviously been that PSA sets are selling for more broken up than sold whole. Recently several complete 60s PSA sets have sold for more whole than in parts. This 1965 set https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...?itemid=140373 and a 1968 set recently with MHCC http://milehighcardco.com/1968_Topps...-LOT93678.aspx have now both sold for more whole than broken.

Could be a new trend, not a good trend for GM whose speciality is breaking sets.

To tie this back to the OPs original topic, I BID on a fair amount of GM items, rarely do I actually win what I bid (at market prices) on. I have trusted their grading and have felt that overall it's accurate. After this 65 set break, I trust their auction integrity even more than I did before.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

In the past, the trend has obviously been that PSA sets are selling for more broken up than sold whole. Recently several complete 60s PSA sets have sold for more whole than in parts. This 1965 set https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...?itemid=140373 and a 1968 set recently with MHCC http://milehighcardco.com/1968_Topps...-LOT93678.aspx have now both sold for more whole than broken.

Could be a new trend, not a good trend for GM whose speciality is breaking sets.

To tie this back to the OPs original topic, I BID on a fair amount of GM items, rarely do I actually win what I bid (at market prices) on. I have trusted their grading and have felt that overall it's accurate. After this 65 set break, I trust their auction integrity even more than I did before.

I can't access that REA link, can anyone else?

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

I can't access that REA link, can anyone else?

Try the link I had in post #31

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

Try the link I had in post #31

Thanks, that worked.

Whoever bought that set and consigned it to GM (either GM or another collector) made a foolish mistake.

[scottglevy]

Quality company. Quality product. It’s a bit of a gamble to buy something that’s described as NMMT and actually expect a slabbed “8”. But the cards should be roughly in line with the described grades - which is more than I can say for most raw card sellers.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

Thanks, that worked.

Whoever bought that set and consigned it to GM (either GM or another collector) made a foolish mistake.

Was mentioned in post #32 of this thread that perhaps GM is buying sets from auction houses, such as the '65 set from REA, directly. But I suppose it is more likely that someone consigned the set.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

I think that the opposite may be true. The $44,400 1965 PSA complete set from REA broke last evening via GM at approximately $39,500 ...the original REA consignor is likely glad to have gone through REA vs GM on this one. If GM purchased this set, they are in the red by almost $10k after ebay fees.

What is the link for that REA auction?

[Flintboy]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

I think that the opposite may be true. The $44,400 1965 PSA complete set from REA broke last evening via GM at approximately $39,500 ...the original REA consignor is likely glad to have gone through REA vs GM on this one. If GM purchased this set, they are in the red by almost $10k after ebay fees.

Wow, is that factoring in the buyer’s premium?

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by Flintboy

Wow, is that factoring in the buyer’s premium?

Yes, that $44,400 is with the BP.

If the REA winner immediately consigned this 1965 set to GM to break, based on GM's advertised consignment rate of 25% of the final price, that consigner would have realized about a $15,000 loss on this set.