What would a 1914 Baltimore Ruth sell for today?

[Golfcollector]

what happens if two different bidders both put in a "Top All Bidders" requirement on an item....

Do the two of them Rochambeau for it???

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Golfcollector

what happens if two different bidders both put in a "Top All Bidders" requirement on an item....

Do the two of them Rochambeau for it???

Pretty sure the price goes to infinity, and (more importantly) the juice is also infinity.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

As an auctioneer I think "top all bids" is an horrific idea. For the reasons you mentioned, but also for the simple fact that an auction is supposed to be about determining the market through open competition. It's the same reason I'm not a fan of reserves, or even worse of auctions retaining the right to put "bad faith" bids in to lift items to just below a reserve and a number of other practices that seek to remove all risk from the auction process. If you want to remove the risk of an auction and have only the reward, you don't really want to run an auction.

I hear you, and couldn't agree more. Still very surprised if Nic is correct and some AH actually still does that today.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

As an auctioneer I think "top all bids" is an horrific idea. For the reasons you mentioned, but also for the simple fact that an auction is supposed to be about determining the market through open competition. It's the same reason I'm not a fan of reserves, or even worse of auctions retaining the right to put "bad faith" bids in to lift items to just below a reserve and a number of other practices that seek to remove all risk from the auction process. If you want to remove the risk of an auction and have only the reward, you don't really want to run an auction.

Hell, Scott, no one who owns a card wants to run it in an auction; we'd all prefer a sure thing. Auctions just happen to generate sales more readily than parking the items in an eBay 'museum', but make no mistake: when I consign, I don't give a rat's ass about the 'market'. I ain't selling to determine a market, I am selling to make money, as much as I can. If my choice is between a 'market' price or getting paid stupid money by some idiot who has to have the item no matter what, I am all for the latter option.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Hell, Scott, no one who owns a card wants to run it in an auction; we'd all prefer a sure thing. Auctions just happen to generate sales more readily than parking the items in an eBay 'museum', but make no mistake: when I consign, I don't give a rat's ass about the 'market'. I ain't selling to determine a market, I am selling to make money, as much as I can. If my choice is between a 'market' price or getting paid stupid money by some idiot who has to have the item no matter what, I am all for the latter option.

I'm all for the idiot, preferably two for each item, but let that idiot win it the old fashioned way, that's establishing the market the way an auction should. I'm definitely a snob about the auction process, and I know that makes me a weirdo, even among people I genuinely like and respect.

[oldjudge]

Do auctions really establish a "market"? Take an example--on a scarce card buyer A is willing to pay up to $10,000 for it. The next best buyer, buyer B, is only willing to pay $6,000 for it. If it goes to auction it will sell for one increment over $6000, say $6250. If sold privately it will sell for $10,000. Now, what's the "market" for the card? I think this illustrates the problem with auctioning off scarce items--the fact that the price is set by the second most aggressive bidder, not the most aggressive bidder.

[Schwertfeger1007]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Do auctions really establish a "market"? Take an example--on a scarce card buyer A is willing to pay up to $10,000 for it. The next best buyer, buyer B, is only willing to pay $6,000 for it. If it goes to auction it will sell for one increment over $6000, say $6250. If sold privately it will sell for $10,000. Now, what's the "market" for the card? I think this illustrates the problem with auctioning off scarce items--the fact that the price is set by the second most aggressive bidder, not the most aggressive bidder.

The counter argument here is that someone might not be willing to pay an aggressively high price for something they want if there are no public sales in that range for fears of overshooting by potentially thousands. In an auction, (theoretically and shilling aside) you can be confident that no matter what you spend, someone else is willing to buy it at one bid less.

[oldjudge]

Agree with what you're saying but that addresses confidence in bidding, not defining a market value.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Do auctions really establish a "market"? Take an example--on a scarce card buyer A is willing to pay up to $10,000 for it. The next best buyer, buyer B, is only willing to pay $6,000 for it. If it goes to auction it will sell for one increment over $6000, say $6250. If sold privately it will sell for $10,000. Now, what's the "market" for the card? I think this illustrates the problem with auctioning off scarce items--the fact that the price is set by the second most aggressive bidder, not the most aggressive bidder.

To my way of thinking the market is actually one bid higher than the 2nd place bidder is willing to bid. Look at it this way. In your scenario why is the market $10,000? The guy who bought it for that can't sell it for that because the next guy in the market is only willing to go $6,000. A competitive situation sets the market much more accurately than a one on one sale. Again, all just my opinion, and pretty self-serving at that, but it is a decent argument I think.

[edhans]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Do auctions really establish a "market"? Take an example--on a scarce card buyer A is willing to pay up to $10,000 for it. The next best buyer, buyer B, is only willing to pay $6,000 for it. If it goes to auction it will sell for one increment over $6000, say $6250. If sold privately it will sell for $10,000. Now, what's the "market" for the card? I think this illustrates the problem with auctioning off scarce items--the fact that the price is set by the second most aggressive bidder, not the most aggressive bidder.

+1, Jay. Been beating that drum for a while now.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Do auctions really establish a "market"? Take an example--on a scarce card buyer A is willing to pay up to $10,000 for it. The next best buyer, buyer B, is only willing to pay $6,000 for it. If it goes to auction it will sell for one increment over $6000, say $6250. If sold privately it will sell for $10,000. Now, what's the "market" for the card? I think this illustrates the problem with auctioning off scarce items--the fact that the price is set by the second most aggressive bidder, not the most aggressive bidder.

Great point Jay, and also, maybe not everyone that would be interested in that same card knew that it was even being auctioned, or that at that particular time they had enough cash to buy it. There could have been another card in the same auction they wanted more and spent the money they had on it instead. Doesn't mean they wouldn't have paid more for the card they passed on. Also, what about some people that would actually go into debt, use a credit card, etc., to buy a particular card. If the AH didn't offer such an option, then you possibly aren't getting all the actual interested customers in on the bidding, and thus it isn't the "true" market value at all that ends up winning.

To really be able to say you're getting a "true" market value for a card being sold at auction, I'd think you need to know that every single person on Earth that might want that particular card, knew about the auction in advance, had easy access to it, and even if they didn't have the actual cash, had access to credit cards, a line of credit, or other debt options to be able to effectively bid what they feel the card is worth. Then, and only then, may you have realized a "true" market value for a card sold through and auction.

Otherwise, think about how market values of things like houses would be if you could only buy them via bidding in an auction, with ready cash.

[oldjudge]

Scott—in most situations the market is set by the best bid and the best offer. Look at stock and commodity markets. You can also look at other forms of auctions, like Dutch Auctions. There the starting price is begun high and is continuously lowered till the item is sold. Such an auction price is set by the best bidder, not the second best bidder. I would not be surprised if some day a Dutch Auction is offered as an alternative for selling collectibles.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Scott—in most situations the market is set by the best bid and the best offer. Look at stock and commodity markets. You can also look at other forms of auctions, like Dutch Auctions. There the starting price is begun high and is continuously lowered till the item is sold. Such an auction price is set by the best bidder, not the second best bidder. I would not be surprised if some day a Dutch Auction is offered as an alternative for selling collectibles.

I think there’s already one out there, although I haven’t ever looked very closely. My sense is that they don’t have all that much in the way of quality vintage pieces.

https://dutchauctionshop.com/