Are you happy Carlos?
Wayne8348
Posts: 769 ✭
Carlos,
There is no doubt in my mind you are at your computer right now. What do you think? Are you happy with the results?
Wayne
There is no doubt in my mind you are at your computer right now. What do you think? Are you happy with the results?
Wayne
1955 Bowman Football
0
Comments
Carlos
Would they update the web site to reflex the phone bids?
Carlos
Wayne
In case anyone needs the phone number it's #888-337-4492
Is the $2,400 what you expected on your set?
Carlos
It's funny. The set realized exactly the same amount as my '70 Kellogg's set that was in the last Superior Auction.
Oh well, was hoping to win that Goudey set and others...c'est la vive.
145............... $3,300.00.... $3,795.00
147............... $7,000.00.... $8,050.00
148............... $6,800.00.... $7,820.00
149............... $445.00....... $511.75
150............... $1,250.00.... $1,437.50
151............... $1,500.00.... $1,725.00
152............... $2,800.00.... $3,220.00
TOTAL........... $23,095.00... $26,559.25
The real question for those of us who have watched the past few Superior and Mastro auctions is the future value of graded sets (which has been discussed thoroughly and intelligently on this board). It seems that the smaller sets (1964 Giants, 1970 Kelloggs) have a strong following because they are easy and relatively inexpensive to complete and flip; but as for the full-sized sets, perhaps the Set Registry is promoting Icarus-like behavior: (1) ambitiously decide to collect set; (2) buy and register (repeat); (3) complete set (or decide that set is too expensive or difficult); (4) sell set for loss to dealer who breaks set up, starting the cycle again.
I know that I personally have bitten off more than I can chew: 1970 baseball, 1972 football, 1978 football. Completing these sets will require 1500 graded cards; even at $10/each, that's $15K. I'm into collecting cards for the long haul, so recent auction results have only slightly dampened my enthusiasm. How about everyone else? Has the economy / state of the hobby changed your collecting habits?
<< <i>the Set Registry is promoting Icarus-like behavior: (1) ambitiously decide to collect set; (2) buy and register (repeat); (3) complete set (or decide that set is too expensive or difficult); (4) sell set for loss to dealer who breaks set up, starting the cycle again >>
It looks like the results for many issues are not that spectacular (just consider the grading fees alone). Who knows what the future may hold but it looks like the market for completely graded (large) set is not a strong as first thought. Hopefully this trend will change in the future.
John
$10/ card seems low to me too. Flipping on this set just may not be very attractive on 50% of the commons. It seems that the set registry special has flushed out an abundance of high pop 8's in this set and they routinely seem to go for $10 or less now.
For the 72' set builder this is great. It helps him get well on the way with the minimum investment. For a dealer looking to buy this lot perhaps the reward is not great enough at this price level for what work they would have to put into it.
Dealer comments?
Regardless Carlos; this was an awesome effort to complete and I highly respect your accomplishment.
I am even chipping away at my starter 72' set myself :-)
RayB69Topps
On the other hand, Superior is a terrific place to auction truly vintage stuff--just look how well those Wilson Franks cards did!
______________________________________
The best presents in life are the ones you give yourself!
I do believe though that in time when a new bull market in vintage cards appear and as the demand for complete graded sets grows, the larger graded sets will have their day in the sun too.
These results tell me the buying collectors puts very little extra value on the work that goes into these graded sets. Its like the thinking is this "I can buy any good raw set and have it graded out at any time" At a $5-6 registry special grading alone would be $4000-5000. Had there been no grading specials and we are talking $10 per card for grading alone and i bet these sets would of sold for much more
Just my comments and just curious to see if everyone feels im accurate with the second paragraph
Don
Going off the subject slightly, I noticed this:
1965 Topps John Roseboro PSA 9 (pop 2)
In my analysis I used the following assumptions:
Graded Stars and Superstars Listed in online SMR (was almost $1000)
All non superstar high numbers were $16/card (roughly $1600)
All non stars were $7.00/card (roughly $4550)
All non superstar cards below PSA 8 were $125 for the entire lot of 50
I think there were 25 PSA 9's that I added a $30/card premium to (roughly $750)
That came to $8025.
Regards,
Alan
The market deteriorated for the 72 set each passing week after Carlos consigned with Superior. Commons used to go for $13 apiece 6 months ago on eBay all day long. Currently they're selling in the $8 - $9 range if they're selling.... No way would I consider posting comons starting at $1 apiece like I used to.
I think too that the PSA 7's hurt the price as well. The dealers would only go so high in order to ensure the breakup value would be sufficient. But, most collectors who would be willing to pay 5-figures are probably only willing to do so, if they figure that they won't have to continue to search and upgrade the hardest cards in the set. Carlos has many of the hard to find cards in PSA 8 but I think the perception hurt the end price.
Sets - 1970, 1971 and 1972
Always looking for 1972 O-PEE-CHEE Baseball in PSA 9 or 10!
lynnfrank@earthlink.net
outerbankyank on eBay!
Graded Stars and Superstars Listed in online SMR (was almost $1000)"
I did number crunching on this actual set using Carlos' set registry and their grades and came up with $12,161 total SMR . Here is how I came up with numbers:
<p>
65 cards listed in SMR (stars and superstars) in PSA 8 total: $3,122
603 commons (#1-656) X $11 each in PSA 8 total: $6,633
119 high # commons (#657-787) X $16 each in PSA 8 total: $1,904
Net deductions for non-PSA 8 cards and net additions for PSA 9 total: net +$502.
Total: $12,161 SMR
<p>
Regardless of whatever SMR lists for 1972 low # commons, I agree with acowa on $7 average based on ebay completed auctions past month. Thanks to set registry specials in past year, majority of cards in this set have relatively high populations in PSA 8, i.e. 20 to 30 each. $8,000+ bid on this set in Superior Auction is in my estimation a fair price for a dealer to break it into smaller lots and flip them on ebay in current market. Not many of collectors or dealers including myself have this kind of money on hand thus eliminating 90 percent of collectors from bidding on this set in first place.
<p>
I still have printouts on entire PSA population reports from August 21, 2001 which may be useful. Based on those printouts and current population reports there were 6,183 in PSA 8, 999 in PSA 9 and 23 in PSA 10, total of 12,798 in all grades in 1972 Topps set as compared to 15,967 in PSA 8, 3,405 in PSA 9, 79 in PSA 10 and 30,161 in all grades currently.
<p>I admire set builders and I have sold many PSA cards to set registry collectors on ebay. Please don't let high populations on certain sets spoil your fun collecting them!
Did I do better than Carlos? I think it was about even, when it's all said and done. He had the seller's fees subtracted and I didn't. So I cleared a bit more cash. . .but I can assure you, breaking up a set this size and attempting to mazimize the return is darned tough. Based on the work I did for the sale of my 72s (web listing, eBay, various mailings and followups, etc) I would say what he paid in the seller's fee was fair.
Do I regret doing the work to get the little bit extra in my pocket? Not at all. But I also think the "convenience fee" Carlos paid was very fair in light of the work it would take to get the equivalent dollar value.
That said - I agree with FB. I wasn't particularly happy with what my set ended up at. The timing was terrible! I happened to sell at a time when the market for PSA8 commons had pretty much bottomed out.
Mike
The low pop 65 psa 9's have just been out of control. There are a couple of 65 collectors who will pay a VERY fair price to get them and another Dodger collector who bids very high on the psa 9 dodger players. This has led to some amazing sale prices.
Everyone,
Great points being made here. I don't think we can look at the results Carlos got and say that selling off a whole set at once is a bad thing to do financially. I think his final sales price for the 72 and 74 sets are more a result of the drop in the psa 8 card prices. I would bet that if the sets had been for sale 8 months ago they would have realized more money. I did something very similiar to what Alan did for the 1974 set and gave very little value for the psa 8 cards. The psa 8 market is drying up right now until more collectors start collecting graded sets. Many of us have been collecting graded sets for a year or so and have many of the higher pop commons. I believe the rush is over for 8's until more collectors enter the market. We'll see what happens. I wish they would have brought more but I believe it's just indicative of the softness in the market.
Wayne
Thanks to everyone who bidded on my auctions...And if you can help me with my Football set...LMK
aponte@adelphia.net
Carlos
I think the fact that someone would pay close to $8k for a 1974 Topps set is a great indicator of the strength of the graded vintage card market and, particularly, the set registry.
I cut and pasted the online SMR into an excel spreadsheet and came up with $1052. This $1052 figure is not adjusted for some of the stars being 7's and not 8's. Rerun your #'s. We also have a $4 per common difference which is huge. There has to be some room for a dealer to have a margin on the set.
The 1972's are soft right now, however, if you look at the 1971's...we had ourselves a little bidding war last night.
Regards,
Alan
<< <i>the market has proven time and time again that complete sets will not sell at or above the sum of the individual card prices. >>
That's not true. Net of fees, my 1970 Kellogg's PSA 9 set and 1964 Topps Giants PSA 8 set both sold for modest premiums to their break up values on the Superior Auctions. I acknowledge that it could have easily worked against me too.
I've seen other sets as well with similar results. For example, a 1963 Fleer all PSA 8 set (except for two cards including the tough checklist) also sold for a modest premium to its break up value about a year ago.
There's not enough evidence to conclude anything definite, but there is sufficient evidence to at least suggest that smaller graded sets might have a better bang for your buck at auction then their larger brethren. The cost is one of a number of factors. There's simply more people willing to shell out $3,000-5,000 then $10,000-20,000.
I used pricing information from September SMR as I still have not received October SMR in mail. I went to online SMR and find that there are 63 star cards from 1972 Topps set. I have counted and rechecked several times. Exact total is $3,119. You probably put in prices from PSA 7 column instead of PSA 8 in your case. $1,000 for 63 star cards in PSA 8 would be terrific bargain at slightly less than $16 each! Also, September SMR lists 1972 low # commons at $11 each in PSA 8 and high # commons at $16 each whereas online SMR list doesn't show pricing for low # commons.
That's really strange. I cut and pasted the numbers out of the SMR online into a spreadsheet. Since it was only 60 numbers, I cut and pasted each amount individually in the next column. The totals are different. Maybe it has something to do with the formatting...I was using the correct column and had gone in and erased the + signs. Anyways, I came up with the $3,162 when I did it. I didn't take $$$ away for some of the supers being 7's.
So, assuming the set will be broken up, I guess the dealer has a 20% margin to work with...
Regards,
Alan
Always looking for 1957 Topps BB in PSA 9!
Carlos
<< <i>There's not enough evidence to conclude anything definite, but there is sufficient evidence to at least suggest that smaller graded sets might have a better bang for your buck at auction then their larger brethren. The cost is one of a number of factors. There's simply more people willing to shell out $3,000-5,000 then $10,000-20,000. >>
Great point GemMint....I think you will see a increase in popularity of smaller sets in the next year.
John
54 Red Hearts
and now 64 Stand ups
CU turns its lonely eyes to you
What's the you say, Mrs Robinson
Vargha bucks have left and gone away?
hey hey hey
hey hey hey
Anybody see anything interesting with the formula above? I wonder how much of the "softness" that people see in the market for these newer cards can be attributed to something as simple as the grading fee. Some months ago, it would have read - 787 cards graded at $8 each comes out to $6296. Wasn't the cost even some time ago for most people $10 a card? Now it's $6, and even sometimes $5 a card. When the cards were $10 to grade, the easiest cards sold for a few dollars more than the grading fee. Now that grading is $6 a card, they sell at basically the same level - a few dollars more than grading. I'll throw out a wild guess that greater than 50% of the Carlos collection contained cards that cost $8 or more for grading. I think his greatest challenge in selling the set was having to sell it in the new $5 and $6 grading fee mentality environment. The cost of grading is very important when you are grading commons of no significant value. When the market for these cards is $10 and less, percentage wise, the holder cost contains at least 50% to 70% of the value. For older cards in the $50 type of range the cost factor of the holder is minimal. I think the new lower fees have a lot to do with the "minimum values" people place on cards based on their grading fee.
On a serious note, the real issue is that there apear to be 3-5 serious players on most sets. After they get theirs...the bottom drops out of the prices. With 1972's, the top players already have theirs.
Regards,
Alan
I think that you bring up a strong point....there are only a few players trying to do sets in PSA 8-9 condition. They may not be looking to buy a whole set of 8's because they already have 60% or 70% of those cards in the same condition. What do they do with all of the extras? Most people would't want to take the time to list them all on eBay or atleast I know I wouldn't want to do it. Plus once they already have 8's the prices drop and more will be graded. Patience is the name of the game.
Also, based upon the completion percentage on all 51 registered sets, there are a total of 7,200 cards listed. They aren't all 8's or better of course, but assuming they are, that's 7,200 of the 19,451 total cards that have been graded 8, 9, and 10. Again, where are these cards?
john
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
John
Whats up with the current project link in your sig line? It shows the checklist for 1965 topps, but no cards. But the set has stats? 10.7 completion percent? Have you ditched 65s for the Red Heart set?
Brian
CU turns its lonely eyes to you
What's the you say, Mrs Robinson
Vargha bucks have left and gone away?
hey hey hey
hey hey hey
I was curious on the two bidding $46 on the 72 Reds Team card. It is definitely two Reds Team collectors - fightin it out in my neighborhood! I've got a quarter that says the next one goes goes for under $25.
Sets - 1970, 1971 and 1972
Always looking for 1972 O-PEE-CHEE Baseball in PSA 9 or 10!
lynnfrank@earthlink.net
outerbankyank on eBay!
Waitil,
I have picked up several of these cards at the minimum cost of grading:
Example 1
Example 2
Example 3
These cards all have SMR of $12 (over double what I paid). In these examples, I think it's evident that nobody "needed" these cards...and the cost of grading had very little, if anything, to do with the auctions outcome. The only influence that the cost of grading had is what the seller started the auction at. If the seller had $10 in the grading, I bet he would have started the auction at $9.99.
There are quite a few auctions for 1972's in the range of $6-$9 that are ending with no bids...which brings me to my point. There are about 3-5 players for each set (give or take a few). After the big fish are full, it becomes hard for the fisherman to survive. When it becomes hard for the fisherman to survive, it makes it difficult for the guy who's selling him the bait, tackle, and other supplies. If the big fish are full, does it matter to the fisherman that his supplies cost have been reduced from $10 to $6...given the fact that the big fish are full already? You either need more big fish or less fishing supplies.
Regards,
Alan
<< <i>Right now there are 21 - 1972 sets listed on the registry with greater than 5% completion. Only 7 sets are above 50% completion, 3 sets are between 25% and 50%, and 11 sets are under 25%. In addition to the 21 "serious" sets are 30 "odds and ends" type of sets below 5% completion. If all 21 sets were completed in PSA 8 or better, it would consume 16,527 of the 19,451 cards currently graded 8, 9, and 10. Where are all these other cards? There is obviously more people collecting this set than are listed on the registry. The top 3-5 guys are certainly responsible for some of those huge $ figures we've been teased with in the past, but there does still exist a big demand for cards beyond those few guys. But it's more of a demand for cards at their pace and terms and not demand to pay record prices. The top 5 guys when complete will account for 3935(3776 currently) of the available cards.
Also, based upon the completion percentage on all 51 registered sets, there are a total of 7,200 cards listed. They aren't all 8's or better of course, but assuming they are, that's 7,200 of the 19,451 total cards that have been graded 8, 9, and 10. Again, where are these cards? >>
I can give the background on my 1972 set as an example of one of the under 25% completed sets. The set is complete and mostly NM-MT or better. I started out a few years back by grading out the SMR listed cards. I then graded out the commons in which I had one or more high grade duplicates and also graded a few of the sharpest looking commons and a few of the low population commons like the Schaal IA. All the while, I was monitoring eBay auctions to pick up PSA 8's to replace <NM-MT raw cards in my set. I haven't been adding to this set for the past several months because I'm focusing on completing my 1969 set in PSA 8+. At some point, I'll return to grading out that set. I may wait and see if a $5 grading special ever appears for vintage commons. I'm building so many different sets that I can only focus on one or two at a time. I'll probably work on my 1968 or 1971 sets after the '69 set is completed.
I think there are more people in my situation. At least some of those sets on the '72 registry are complete but only partially graded. The sets that have all the star cards registered are most likely to be the sets that are complete. Some people prefer to only grade out the money cards while leaving the commons in raw form.