Auction lot opinions, is the sum worth more than the whole

[Republicaninmass]

Hi, curious on thought regarding a signed 1952 topps set. I believe mile high has had auctions in the past where 1 lot is the whole set, and the auction also has the lots individually listed. Anyone have thoughts on this method?

Thoughts appreciated

[jcmtiger]

These type auctions have been going on for years, but, not the norm. SCD magazine had these in the 80’s & 90’s.

[Carter08]

Such a tough call as to what is better for the seller in my opinion. Could convince me either way. A third option is a hybrid. Big cards solo, and then a bunch of groups of the rest.

[Rhotchkiss]

Call Brian Drent at Mile High and see what he says

[Peter_Spaeth]

I don't really know, but my thought is that this type of auction discourages bidding on the individual lots to some extent, since people know there's a chance they won't win what they're bidding on even with the high bid and therefore allocate resources elsewhere? But if you're seriously interested in exploring it talk to Drent and see what his experience has been.

[Webster]

Anyone have any rough guess - or accurate estimate - as to how often the full set wins?

[tiger8mush]

Wasn't there a 1914 CJ set auctioned this way a few years ago, with 144 individual lots and another lot for the entire set, and the set turned out to be higher?

[Republicaninmass]

Also, I think a t206 set which the set was also higher. I'm thinking since the HOF cards make up half or more of the value, the set may encourage someone to buy the whole thing. However I dont want to alienate buyers. .


Thanks for the responses thus far

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Casey2296]

It depends on the set, I don't think Ive seen an E-card set offered as a whole, usually broken up into stars and groups of the rest. Partial T206 and Goudeys seem to attract action for setbuilders. What seems to be hot are complete sets that are on the PSA registry so a guy can spend a bunch of money for instant notoriety.

[mrreality68]

I have seen a few in the past 4 to 5 years. For the seller it is a win I believe. Since it sells for the highest amount (whether 1 lump sum or a bunch of smaller that combine to be over the 1 big bid). Since he wins either way. However, as others said this method may discourage the bidders on the individual items.

[brikks]

I have a question associated with this. Is there a good tool to monitor all the auction house listings and do analysis on sales?

[egri]

Originally Posted by brikks

I have a question associated with this. Is there a good tool to monitor all the auction house listings and do analysis on sales?

The Collectible app used to do that; not sure if it's still around.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by egri

The Collectible app used to do that; not sure if it's still around.

Bid brain! Remember bid brain??

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[egri]

I put either way, because I've seen it go both ways. I remember a while ago, a member consigned a near-complete signed 1954 Topps set, and the AH sold it as one lot. It underperformed, and the consignor was understandably not happy. For a whole set, I would recommend splitting out the HOF/key cards/high numbers and selling those individually, then selling the rest as a lot. The commons might make more listed individually, but then you have to list and photograph them all separately, then you've got a big pile of unsold commons to hold onto until you find the right buyer.

[egri]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Bid brain! Remember bid brain??

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I think I missed that boat.

[Exhibitman]

I avoid them. No point in chasing after a specific card that I may not win even if I 'win' it.

[KCRfan1]

That '52 signed Topps set of yours is cool.

Value....no idea. Just really cool.

[Casey2296]

Thinking about your set Ted, it is such an incredible collection you might want to go the route of Uncle Jimmy or David Hall and sell all of them individually over the course of 5 or 6 auctions, that way you give a chance for collectors of signed 52's a chance to recharge their bank accounts and maximize your sales prices.

[G1911]

Personally, I think this dual method is obnoxious.

In general, I would say selling cards individually is better for more common but popular sets, but as a full set can be better for more esoteric stuff where the ability to get all or most of something rare at once can make more people interested and bid that might not have the patience to spend ~30 years piecing it together card by card.

[FrankWakefield]

If a seller has decided to offer something for sale, the buyers may well buy the something.

If potential buyers are wanting something, they're out of luck unless the owner decides to become a seller.

The two way system is used in real estate multiple parcel auctions quite often. And it maximizes the total sales price for the seller.

As for someone wanting one or a few lots, I don't know that it's obnoxious, but it is frustrating. And it's tough on folks who at the time of the sale, don't have deep enough pockets to buy an entire set.

What's the auction house doing??? When they get done talking about how they're working for the seller and how they're helping the buyers, what they're actually doing is trying to maximize their cut of the money that's changing hands. I'm not faulting them, but they are trying to maximize the money that the lots collectively bring... and that's good for the seller, too. So I think these auctions are frustrating to someone wanting one or a few lots, and the solution is to bid up the parts. We'll continue to see this auction format.

[BobC]

This concept can also work counter to a consignor and AH if it is a sale of something rather unique/special, where maybe only a few people are seriously interested in the set, or certain items in it, and they know each other from years of collecting the same things. An autographed set to me could fit this description.

If the seriously interested parties get together to bid as a group, they could combine forces, and pocketbooks, and agree not to bid each other up on individual items, and work together to split the total set. Chances are, without them bidding against each other, individual items will go for less than they otherwise would, and fewer people would be willing/able to go higher for the overall set due to the dollars needed. And if there did end up being a number of other bidders running up the individual item auctions way more than expected, the group could wait till near the very end of the auction and decide to abandon going after the set after all, and each go after the individual lots they were interested in.

[oldjudge]

The process is flawed. Let’s say it is a hundred card lot of roughly equivalent value cards. Let’s further assume that the whole lot is at $10,000 and the sum of the individual lots is at $9800. Further assume that there is one card in the lot that you really want that it is currently at $100. You might be willing to pay over $200 for that card but auction software won’t let you bid because once you go to $110 you are the high bidder and you can’t top yourself. The software should be adjusted so that the aggregate lot total can bump your bid, but to my knowledge no auction software is constructed like that. I had this very situation happen to me in an auction years ago. I had to call the auction and instruct them to bid against me (I may the only person ever who asked to be shilled) so that I could get my bid to the point where the total of the single cards exceeded the aggregate and I could win the card I wanted.

[FrankWakefield]

I've seen this process more times when small farms are sold, than I have with other stuff. And having read Jay's post above, I agree with that, there's a flaw in the process, especially for computer program auctions which would include eBay. Seems to me the quickest way to deal with that, using Jay's example, would be for me to get a friend to underbid the that card he was after with a $190 bid (if that fit the increments) so that Jay's $200 bid activates.

Still, the problem remains that if 2 dozen of the cards only draw bids of $70 or so, then the higher 'set bid' would win. It would definitely be frustrating. Realistically, the frustrating part is you think you've won with your bid when you haven't. You have to win in whichever auction of the two brings the higher price.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I have a vague memory of bidding on and winning both the Mize and Rickey cards in the 1941 St. Louis team set, at very good prices, but winning neither because the set went for more. Many of the commons had pretty much zero interest as singles as I recall.

[puckpaul]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I avoid them. No point in chasing after a specific card that I may not win even if I 'win' it.

+1

I just dont bother bidding on individual lots because it seems a waste of time. I think a seller should just decide in advance and go with it.

[Leon]

I think it could make sense in certain cases but most of the times I think breaking up a set or group sells for most.
.