If you could only keep ONE... - Page 2

Archive · #51 02-22-2007, 04:53 PM

Posted By: peter ullman

i concede...these times are crazy! Hal...if you only keep one card of each prominent hof'er...you've got a lot of cards to sell.

pete in mn

Archive · #52 02-22-2007, 05:17 PM

Posted By: JimB

MW,
Having bought one Cobb back and sold a different one in the past two weeks, I can tell you for certain that they go for a lot more than that. Several years ago an SGC 30 went for 59k. With the ever-rising prices of true hobby classic rarities like that, who knows what it would bring at auction today.
JimB

Archive · #53 02-22-2007, 05:21 PM

Posted By: anthony

totally unfair question...but if this is an offer to sell to me, i would rather have the ty cobb back...

(like i can afford either one)

Archive · #54 02-22-2007, 05:25 PM

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Hal, I don't think it's even a close call on this one. You have to keep the Cobb/Cobb. That's a card you may spend the rest of your life trying to find again while the Cobb Uzit can be found -- but perhaps not at that grade again.

Archive · #55 02-22-2007, 05:26 PM

Posted By: dan mckee

I would keep the Ty Cobb Back, much more rare!

Archive · #56 02-22-2007, 05:26 PM

Posted By: dan mckee

If yo own both, I would sell the Ty Cobb back to Dan Mckee for less than you paid for it.

Archive · #57 02-22-2007, 05:51 PM

Posted By: barrysloate

Both will be murder to replace...DONT SELL EITHER! That's an order, from a friend!

Archive · #58 02-22-2007, 06:57 PM

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Thanks again for your opinions!

Archive · #59 02-22-2007, 07:40 PM

Posted By: MVSNYC

MW--- c'mon now, let's not get crazy...let's break it down very simply here...

cobb/cobb 2= maybe $35K
cobb/uzit 6= maybe $35K

cobb/uzit 8= maybe $60-70K...the back multiplier, especially with a cobb, is less than a common.

Archive · #60 02-22-2007, 08:02 PM

Posted By: MW

MVSNYC,

Assuming your figures are correct for a PSA 6 Uzit Cobb, I can't think of any T206s (and not very many other vintage cards) for which a PSA 8 is only worth double the price of a PSA 6. The multiplier (from a PSA 6 to a PSA 8) is much larger than that for both commons and Hall of Famers.

Archive · #61 02-23-2007, 12:40 AM

Posted By: Dylan

First off MW I was saying IF money be damned... id still go with the Cobb back just to make a point on how much i enjoy the card, but i still dont think a psa 8 would sell for your estimation. Your talking T206 Wagner money there, and thats considerable.

Archive · #62 02-23-2007, 07:03 AM

Posted By: MVSNYC

i am not sure of the values, (no one really is, until they hit the auction block) i was taking a shot in the dark...anyone else wanna take a stab at it? maybe the UZIT 6 would be a bit less then my estimate (35K) and the UZIT 8 would be a bit more than my estimate (60-70K)?

but i certainly do not think we are talking six figures for the 8, but that's just my opinion.

Archive · #63 02-23-2007, 07:17 AM

Posted By: MVSNYC

hal- was this the cobb/uzit that BMW cards once owned?

edited to say: i did some research and answered my own question...

Archive · #64 02-23-2007, 10:11 AM

Posted By: MW

<< maybe the UZIT 6 would be a bit less then my estimate (35K) and the UZIT 8 would be a bit more than my estimate (60-70K)? >>

Based on T206 sales over the past two years, the multiplier for a two grade increase (PSA 6 to PSA 8) is generally 8 to 10 times. This is true for both "commons" and Hall of Famers. The notable exception would be low-population commons or variations which have a multiplier of 10 to 20 times.

These figures can be verified by making a cursory examination of the T206 listings on vintagecardsprices.com.

Archive · #65 02-23-2007, 10:23 AM

Posted By: MVSNYC

MW- i respectfully disagree...and i don't need to check out any websites, i have a very good "gut" feeling for prices with my experience.

your "8-10" times factor might be true for commons, but does not hold water with someone like Ty Cobb:

(excluding the green cobb) recent cobb PSA 6 sales on eBay range in the $3K-4K neighborhood...PSA 8's range from $15K-20K...(Goodwin just sold a cobb red PSA 8 for $13,400)

so more like a 4-5 times factor.

BUT, i just don't see a Cobb UZIT 8 going for six figures...people who collect rare backs, IMO, usually don't want cobb on the front...and vice versa.

Archive · #66 02-23-2007, 10:25 AM

Posted By: Richard

Ty Cobb Bat Off

PSA 6 - $4170
PSA 8 - $17985

multiplier: 4.3x

Ty Cobb Bat On

PSA 6 - $4060
PSA 8 - $23633

multiplier: 5.8x

Ty Cobb Red Port

PSA 6 - $3550
PSA 8 - $13397

multiplier: 3.8x

Ty Cobb Green Port

no psa 8 data available.

Edited to say:

Looks like a 4-5x multiplier is about right.

In addition, I would think that the multiplier with a rare back is less as the total dollar amount increases.

Archive · #67 02-23-2007, 10:36 AM

Posted By: MW

<< BUT, i just don't see a Cobb UZIT 8 going for six figures... >>

I do because I'd pay at least that amount for one. And I know other collectors/dealers who would too.

Archive · #68 02-23-2007, 10:40 AM

Posted By: MW

<< In addition, I would think that the multiplier with a rare back is less as the total dollar amount increases. >>

For high grades (PSA 8 & 9) on one-of-a-kind scarcities in the T206 series, I would argue that it's greater.

Edited to add: it looks like you did some "mixing and matching" for your price analysis where some of your PSA 6 prices came from tougher backs.

Archive · #69 02-23-2007, 10:49 AM

Posted By: Richard

"it looks like you did some "mixing and matching" for your price analysis where some of your PSA 6 prices came from tougher backs."

Actually, no. Everything is from the "common back" listings.

Archive · #70 02-23-2007, 10:53 AM

Posted By: peter ullman

i think there'd be only one way to solve this debate...they must both be sold. Sorry Hal...you can't keep either...auction them both for the sake of our curiosity.

pete in mn

Archive · #71 02-23-2007, 10:56 AM

Posted By: MW

Richard,

You are correct, they are but a "Sovereign" Ty Cobb would generally sell for more than a Piedmont or Sweet Caporal, all other factors being equal.

Archive · #72 02-23-2007, 10:57 AM

Posted By: MVSNYC

<"I do because I'd pay at least that amount for one. And I know other collectors/dealers who would too.">
well, i guess i stand corrected then...

but for my money, if i was spending 100,000+ on one card i could think of many others i would want instead (and this is coming from a hard-core T206 back collector).

Archive · #73 02-23-2007, 11:09 AM

Posted By: MW

MVSNYC,

I'd have to think long and hard about that. At a wholesale level of only $100,000, I'd be a very eager buyer on a PSA 8 Uzit Cobb. And even if I were to compare it to some of the tougher T206 variations in the set (Plank and Wagner excluded), I think I would still choose the Uzit Cobb.

I think a comparison would also depend on the relative price levels -- i.e., if I were buying the Uzit Cobb at $100,000 and paying retail for the other cards (T206 variations or other), it would be an easy decision. However, if I were paying wholesale prices for the other cards, it would be a more difficult decision.

Archive · #74 02-23-2007, 11:13 AM

Posted By: MVSNYC

MW- i hear what you are saying, for that money i would just prefer another card, but hey, to each his own...

Archive · #75 02-23-2007, 11:38 AM

Posted By: Hal Lewis

You guys be SURE to let me know if anyone wants to pay $100,000+ for a PSA 6 version of the card!!!!!

Personally, I value my PSA 6 at $50k... but I realize that I am biased.

Archive · #76 02-23-2007, 11:46 PM

Posted By: RC McKenzie

I'm not convinced that a baseball card is similar to an ounce of gold. i.e. a baseball card is not a serious commodity. I could see an ounce of gold losing 50% of its value in my lifetime. I could see baseball cards losing 99% of their value in my lifetime. Baseball cards are very risky investments. For anyone to spend 100k dollars on a baseball card they'd have to believe that the card could be worth $100 overnight.

Archive · #77 02-24-2007, 02:30 AM

Posted By: Dylan

I also agree with the sentiment that many collectors would just prefer their Uzit or Drum backs with normal players and not Cobb or the like. When were talking 100,000 dollars though i would only want to purchase a card with a proven track record at auction or something very unique, not just unique due to its high grade, something that just doesnt exist but in very low numbers PF FR or whatever, period.

Archive · #78 02-24-2007, 05:36 AM

Posted By: MVSNYC

Dylan- well said.

RC- baseball cards ARE serious commodities to those who collect cards.

Archive · #79 02-24-2007, 05:54 AM

Posted By: warshawlaw

It is if you want it to be. A commodity is only something that a sufficient # of people have decided they would like to own for it to be traded. There is no inherent value in gold, for example,and how much bacon can you really eat before it spoils? Cards have value because enough people have decided that they have value to make a market of them. And how long does the market have to run before it is "serious"? 25 years? 30 years? Because if you had purchased all your HOFer OJ's and E's and so on 35 years ago, you would be sitting on a fortune today.

Archive · #80 02-24-2007, 09:08 AM

Posted By: Ed

Here is a guy who made a ton of money off of a tobacco lawsuit as a lawyer and then has the nerve to continue to make money and decisions based on tobacco, except this time it is tobacco cards. Hal, is that your little joke on society? Must be.

Sell them both and give some of the money to the tobacco users and their families that your lawfirm jilted money out of.

Archive · #81 02-24-2007, 09:51 AM

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Funny Ed!

Our firm has never represent one single smoker. Never.

Our firm represented the STATE OF FLORIDA and our former Governor in his lawsuit against the tobacco companies to recoup the billions of tax dollars that had been spent by the State on indigent healthcare related to tobacco smoking.

Unfortunately, when a Florida resident on Medicaid needed a lung transplant and a lifetime of care for emphysema... the State had to use tax dollars to pay for that medical care. Now, those payments have been reimbursed to the State by Big Tobacco.

Every dollar that we recovered for the State of Florida (payment comes every year for eternity) goes into the State's general revenue fund and is used to benefit EVERYONE in Florida -- not just smokers.

Every citizen of Florida benefitted from our lawsuit by having their taxes remain much lower than they would have been.

Not one single smoker was awarded a single dollar from our lawsuit.

Frankly, like you, I am not in favor of the individual smoker lawsuits. I understand the logic behind showing that the companies tricked the people into getting hooked... but I think people still need to be able to just "quit" on their own.

Hope this clears things up for you.

Archive · #82 02-24-2007, 10:07 AM

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Ed:

Are you related to Rose Ann Kavetski, the legal counsel for Riddle Hospital?

If so, then I would think that she would understand completely the costs associated with treating tobacco-related illnesses.

Riddle has a great tobacco cessation program in place.

I'm sorry if she thinks that smokers deserve compensation for everything that they have suffered...

but that is a completely different ball of wax than what our firm was involved with.

Here is where our settlement money is being used:

http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070212/OPINION05/702120302/1006/OPINION

Archive · #83 02-24-2007, 10:08 AM

Posted By: Ed

In your own words "Not one single smoker was awarded a single dollar from our lawsuit", however you can sure bet that your company made a lot of money off of that lawsuit and the money that you are speaking about for the tax payers in the form of reduced taxes is something that tax payers never really see, should have been the same way that you got yours via the same reduction in taxes not in the form of massive fat paychecks for the lawyer-dogs.

So, like I said sell them both and send the money to a family that was the focus of that case!

Archive · #84 02-24-2007, 10:09 AM

Posted By: Hal Lewis

And lastly, Ed...

need I remind you that this is a public forum and that your accusations of our law firm have "jilted money from someone" is the textbook definition of LIBEL.

Archive · #85 02-24-2007, 10:10 AM

Posted By: Ed

Here it is, 1 PM on a Friday and you are here playing with your baseball cards.

Archive · #86 02-24-2007, 10:14 AM

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Ed, there WAS NO FAMILY that was the focus of our case.

Every single smoker in Florida is free to retain counsel and sue Big Tobacco if they choose to do so.

Our case was purely about statistical numbers and market-share liability, etc.

No individual smokers were involved.

Yes, the lawyers made money... but that is what happens when a defendant settles a case and agrees to this arrangement.

If the tobacco companies had a beef with it, they were welcome to take the case to trial and win it... in which case our fee would have been a whopping $0.

Apparently you have some biased against attorneys.

Archive · #87 02-24-2007, 10:16 AM

Posted By: rob

Hal,

you are being kind by responding as much as you are to this junk, you really dont need to defend yourself in my estimation, this Ed character is taking pot shots that are way inappropriate, especially on this forum. How is that for a textbook run-on sentence

Archive · #88 02-24-2007, 10:16 AM

Posted By: Jason L

I have to go pop some popcorn, I'll be right back!!!

Archive · #89 02-24-2007, 10:19 AM

Posted By: Ed

Spoken like a true lawyer. Someone speaks up about the fact that it is ironic that you collect tobacco cards as some kind of smack in the face of the fact that despite what you think that you did during that case, you have not in any possible way helped anyone who was suffering, smoking, hooked, whatever at the supposed lies of the tobacco industry. You stated yourself that not one single smoker was awarded a single dollar from our lawsuit and you did not deny that your firm was paid, so what is libel there Hal? What? Nothing. Hillarious, thanks for the laugh.

No, no bias, I love lawyers. Wait, actually married one.

Archive · #90 02-24-2007, 10:30 AM

Posted By: Hal Lewis

"...despite what you think that you did during that case, you have not in any possible way helped anyone who was suffering, smoking, hooked, whatever at the supposed lies of the tobacco industry."

Our case was the very first time in the long legal history of Big Tobacco where the damning evidence of addiction was admitted by them, and it was the very first time that the tobacco companies ever agreed to pay a single cent for tobacco-related illnesses.

If you can't see the benefit of this legal precedent, then I can't help you.

Our case completely turned the public perception of Big Tobacco on its ear.

If you can't see the benefit of this to individual smokers who are suing Big Tobacco in the future, then I can't help you.

Archive · #91 02-24-2007, 10:35 AM

Posted By: Chad

I just opened this thread and, as usual, I scanned to the bottom to see what was going on. Now I am completely confused, as usual.

Anyway, I prefer rare in general to rare of condition, so I think I'd keep the Cobb back.

--Chad

Archive · #92 02-24-2007, 10:51 AM

Posted By: barrysloate

Ed- Posting like this anonymously, entirely off subject, and rather aggressively to boot, is probably a bit askew of board rules.

Anyone care to talk about Cobbs with Uzit and Cobb backs?

Archive · #93 02-24-2007, 10:59 AM

Posted By: Jason L

now what we really care about, apparently, is whether or not you think
1) smokers should be entitled to any cash reimbursement from Big Tobaccy for demonstrating their own inability to think critically, and
2) what you think of lawyers involved in the Big Tobaccy lawsuits, and
3) if Florida is better to visit during the heat of summer or during hurricane season

Regardless, Hal still needs to decide what to do with his Cobb cards.
If it were me, I would - aw shoot, I can't even make believe it was me!
Good luck, Hal. maybe sell them both, and start hoarding a less expensive card until it becomes extremely rare (or scarce, or whichever), then sell those off...

Archive · #94 02-24-2007, 11:10 AM

Posted By: leon

If Ed didn't have his email with his full name in it, it would have been against the forum rules. As it is it's not. BTW, as much as we sometimes bad mouth lawyers the great majority are good folks. If I was smart enough (and stayed out of trouble) maybe I would have been a lawyer too....best regards

Archive · #95 02-24-2007, 11:12 AM

Posted By: barrysloate

Hey, I could have been a doctor, if they just weren't so touchy about having to go to medical school first!

Archive · #96 02-24-2007, 11:16 AM

Posted By: Chad

1) I really don't know. Cigarettes smell disgusting, though and, as a drinker, it was a happy day for me when New York City banned them from bars.
2) Lawyers don't bother me at all until they sue me or let me get put in jail. Then I get all Cape Fear on 'em.
3) I like Florida in the heat becuase it makes floating down the Ichetucknee that much more fun. I like to say hello to all the turtles! Hey turtles, I call out, hey turtles!

Seriously, tho, I'm not a Cobb fan--Mathewson is more my speed--but that Cobb with a Cobb back is a great card.

--Chad

Archive · #97 02-24-2007, 11:20 AM

Posted By: Steve M.

In Florida is a tenancy where the parties are shown on the deed as Joe and Mary, without any mention of a right of survivorship, a tenancy in common or could it be a joint tenancy irrespective of the lack of such language.

Thanks

Archive · #98 02-24-2007, 11:32 AM

Posted By: Joe D.

I might just spend the first few years of my retirement in Law School.

and Ed... I sense personal frustration in your post and feel for you - but I strongly believe your anger is misguided. Completely misguided actually.

Archive · #99 02-24-2007, 11:38 AM

Posted By: Sean

I would probably smoke the Cobb with the Uzit back and drink a Summit Pale Ale.

That's what I'm doing!

Archive · #**100** 02-24-2007, 11:43 AM

Posted By: Ed

Not at all, nor misguided. Facts are facts, I was simply stating to give a little back as well as I saw a lot of irony in the entire situation. Obviously because I am a new poster, long time watcher, it affects the way that you are seeing this.

Was my topic off topic? Yes, that was the point. Off topic just the same as which $50,000+ card should I get rid of? Who cares. You don't see Keith Olberman on here griping about what cards he should get rid of, just simply put it up for auction and keep it to yourself.

I saw this entire thing as a way to promote his own item (since one will certainly end up at auction) and this original topic is only adding to the future auction, hence maximizing profit with maximum pre-auction exposure.