It's all about the registry

[Leon]

Originally Posted by jayshum

https://www.cllct.com/sports-collect...-at-heritage-1

Wow. And a Jose Cruz card sold for 33k too. I wonder if the values go down if another 10 gets graded?
.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Leon

Wow. And a Jose Cruz card sold for 33k too. I wonder if the values go down if another 10 gets graded?

.

Yes, I think the value is down already now that those two bidders have sobered up.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[Exhibitman]

Mine goes to 11.

[Snapolit1]

Sheer craziness.

[Peter_Spaeth]

See you and raise you one.
https://milehighcardco.com/1961_Topp...LOT106366.aspx

126K for a 61 Topps Brown.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

See you and raise you one.

https://milehighcardco.com/1961_Topp...LOT106366.aspx



126K for a 61 Topps Brown.

Wow, that is a nice one! I would rather have one Brown than 4 Robertses.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

Yes, I think the value is down already now that those two bidders have sobered up.

The numbers are actually chilling for the high bidder who "won" the lot. And no, I'm not talking about the buyer's premium that he now must pay or any selling fees he'd incur were he attempt to liquidate his "investment" now. It's the brutal underlying mathematics of being the high bidder in an auction.

Consider. It's actually the second highest bidder who's the key in setting the hammer price. And if the lot were to go up for auction again, it would be the third highest bidder of the auction just concluded who'd be the second highest bidder of the new auction. But if two bidders went head-to-head on the concluded auction leaving the third highest bidder in their dust, the third highest bidder's maximum bid of say only 50% of the hammer price in the previous auction would be the bar that would need to be beaten by a tick in the next auction. So the hammer price of the next auction might well turn out to be only half of what the "winning" bidder in the just concluded auction paid!

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

The numbers are actually chilling for the high bidder who "won" the lot. And no, I'm not talking about the buyer's premium that he now must pay or any selling fees he'd incur were he attempt to liquidate his "investment" now. It's the brutal underlying mathematics of being the high bidder in an auction.

Consider. It's actually the second highest bidder who's the key in setting the hammer price. And if the lot were to go up for auction again, it would be the third highest bidder of the auction just concluded who'd be the second highest bidder of the new auction. But if two bidders went head-to-head on the concluded auction leaving the third highest bidder in their dust, the third highest bidder's maximum bid of say only 50% of the hammer price in the previous auction would be the bar that would need to be beaten by a tick in the next auction. So the hammer price of the next auction might well turn out to be only half of what the "winning" bidder in the just concluded auction paid!

Yup, that's how it works.

A few years ago on Ebay, I won a card for $31.33 that I thought I bid $3 for. I had typed in $33 by mistake. Somebody else bid $30.33, probably fat-fingering their $3.03 bid.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[Exhibitman]

I'm fine with mine:

[G1911]

My raw VG-EX was like $40. And the tougher white blob variant. I have a hard time seeing how sharper corners, lighter coloring and better centering would bring me $126,000 more joy. I guess I could show the label to my friends and explain to them that the "10" means I am better than everyone else for owning it in this companies registry competition. That might account for the joy gap.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by G1911

My raw VG-EX was like $40. And the tougher white blob variant. I have a hard time seeing how sharper corners, lighter coloring and better centering would bring me $126,000 more joy. I guess I could show the label to my friends and explain to them that the "10" means I am better than everyone else for owning it in this companies registry competition. That might account for the joy gap.

Man, that's a STUNNER Greg! Congrats

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by G1911

I have a hard time seeing how sharper corners, lighter coloring and better centering would bring me $126,000 more joy. I guess I could show the label to my friends and explain to them that the "10" means I am better than everyone else for owning it in this companies registry competition. That might account for the joy gap.

You'd need to have the right psychology to derive joy from bragging though.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by G1911

My raw VG-EX was like $40. And the tougher white blob variant. I have a hard time seeing how sharper corners, lighter coloring and better centering would bring me $126,000 more joy. I guess I could show the label to my friends and explain to them that the "10" means I am better than everyone else for owning it in this companies registry competition. That might account for the joy gap.

That's a cool card, Greg.

[Kutcher55]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I'm fine with mine:

Beautiful example.

[Exhibitman]

Thanks, Jason. It's one of my favorites. Vintage Topps dark color background cards are so nice when they aren't covered in print boogers. You just have to be patient to find them.







Could not give less of a $hit about the number on the slab. A sub-8 on cards with this sort of clarity and print quality is a feature, not a bug.

[Stampsfan]

Originally Posted by Balticfox

The numbers are actually chilling for the high bidder who "won" the lot. And no, I'm not talking about the buyer's premium that he now must pay or any selling fees he'd incur were he attempt to liquidate his "investment" now. It's the brutal underlying mathematics of being the high bidder in an auction.

Consider. It's actually the second highest bidder who's the key in setting the hammer price. And if the lot were to go up for auction again, it would be the third highest bidder of the auction just concluded who'd be the second highest bidder of the new auction. But if two bidders went head-to-head on the concluded auction leaving the third highest bidder in their dust, the third highest bidder's maximum bid of say only 50% of the hammer price in the previous auction would be the bar that would need to be beaten by a tick in the next auction. So the hammer price of the next auction might well turn out to be only half of what the "winning" bidder in the just concluded auction paid!

That can be exactly how it can play out. Early last year I was the underbidder on a PSA 6 C55 Vezina that, with BP, ended up going for about $60K CAD. At the next large card show, it was the talk about how it set a new bar. I've not bid on one since, but the last 6 (in fairness, newer grade and OC and a slight diamond cut) went for just over half of that. None have come close since.

I never told anyone I was the underbidder, but the buyer knew me and also knew I cost him almost $15K (his last bid, then mine, then his winning bid).

[Balticfox]

Originally Posted by Stampsfan

Early last year I was the underbidder on a PSA 6 C55 Vezina that, with BP, ended up going for about $60K CAD.nd cut) went for just over half of that. None have come close since.

I never told anyone I was the underbidder, but the buyer knew me and also knew I cost him almost $15K (his last bid, then mine, then his winning bid).

$60,000! I would have been out of the bidding perhaps a tad sooner.

[darwinbulldog]

I'm not sure boosting one's ranking on a PSA set registry is quite the aphrodisiac these guys act like it is.