Superior Auction
The53Kid
Posts: 189
And the final bell rings after 5 1/2 hours of live bidding on EBAY. Granted I could only survive the first 3 hours, but I just checked back and caught the final lots. At the end the lots were buzzing by in 10 seconds....680+ lots in 330 minutes.
The beginning of the auction was the most entertaining. The first group of lots with the vintage basketball had bids flying all over the place, everything was on fire! Then the BIG dollar cards, Mantle and Mays 9's seemed to draw good.
As a general observation I did seem to notice that 8's in general draw a more consistent bid amount than 9's. By this I mean the bids for 8's seem to match closely with the SMR. However 9's were all over the place. Especially with the late 60's and 70's. I saw quite a few 70's 9's go for 60-70% of book. For example, a 1972 Rose 9 books for $1000 and ended at around $600 or under. Don't know how that jives with current prices.
What did others observe?
P.S. I was 2 for 2 on the cards I wanted!
The beginning of the auction was the most entertaining. The first group of lots with the vintage basketball had bids flying all over the place, everything was on fire! Then the BIG dollar cards, Mantle and Mays 9's seemed to draw good.
As a general observation I did seem to notice that 8's in general draw a more consistent bid amount than 9's. By this I mean the bids for 8's seem to match closely with the SMR. However 9's were all over the place. Especially with the late 60's and 70's. I saw quite a few 70's 9's go for 60-70% of book. For example, a 1972 Rose 9 books for $1000 and ended at around $600 or under. Don't know how that jives with current prices.
What did others observe?
P.S. I was 2 for 2 on the cards I wanted!
Looking for:
1953 Topps in PSA 8
1941 Playball in PSA 8.
1952-1955 Red Man cards in 7 and 8
1950 Bowman in PSA 8
1953 Topps in PSA 8
1941 Playball in PSA 8.
1952-1955 Red Man cards in 7 and 8
1950 Bowman in PSA 8
0
Comments
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
Maris Proof...................or Poof ?
...................'62 Topps FB been berry berry good to me ; my max bids much higher, so maybe the consignor(s) or (sss) had computer problems
so much confusion, so many ways to not win
Did you get that 1966 PSA 10 you were gunning for?
Mike
Also...I was quite surprised that the 1965 Topps Baseball sold as low as they did. (IMO).
Nice pickup on the Hunter!
Pricing is such a subjective and sometimes mysterious science. You paid $1,100+ for your Hunter PSA 9, and I "only" paid $776 for a 1955 Bowman Al Dark PSA 9 card. The funny thing being -- the Al Dark card is 1/1 in PSA 9, and has only a POP of 4 in PSA 8. I only know of one advanced collector who actually owns a PSA 8. This was one of the few cards that I needed from my set to upgrade from PSA 7 -- and I believe I was able to do it at a relative bargain.
Contrasting that to the Jim Konstanty #231 that sold for $582 in PSA 8 NM/MT grade, to Marshall, and that is a Pop 6, with one higher.
It is interesting (for me) to study the histories of population of these cards, too. For example, in the last 2.5 years, the Konstanty has had 15 examples graded, with two of them being PSA 8. The Dark has had 25 examples graded in the last 2.5 years, with one grading PSA 8 and one grading PSA 9. Both of those were graded within the last six months.
I wonder if there are still a quantity of these sets sitting around in collector's collections from the Paris, TN find? I honestly don't know. I know one collectors has a few such sets -- but do not know if some of them have made their way to GAI. From collecting this set for nearly 5 years -- I can tell you that the raw cards in high grade don't exist. Perhaps there may be some shored up in long-term collections -- but they're simply not around. The dark wood borders, and propensity for chipping makes this set very easy in PSA 7, but exceptionally tough in PSA 8. It is one fo the few sets from the 1950s that has yet to be completed in PSA 8 NM/MT condition -- though there are two collectors that are very close.
If your really into a set you know the ones you need to spend the money on when the surface. I 've paid $2200 for a Yaz in 9 (POP2) and $1200 for the F.Robby in 9 (POP1), and $700 for a Gibson in 9(POP4). Of course you would like to spend less, but thats just not going to happen anymore. As for finds, how many more are out there? Top grade sets , my guess is not to many more either. Plus even if there were, why would the tough ones grade high? History shows those cards are tough in high grade. No certainty there 8's or 9's.
<< <i>I bought LOT #595. My website bid was not topped during the live session.
Also...I was quite surprised that the 1965 Topps Baseball sold as low as they did. (IMO). >>
if you are interested in selling that 1961 Plante 8, please keep me in mind
I lost the 2 lots of 64 stand ups, trying to get a head start on the set. I put bids of smr through the superior site but both went higher on the ebay bids.
overall, happy with the 2 orr cards and many more auctions to spend my $$ on in the next few weeks
Doug
Anyone actually sit in the auction room and see the action live? It's pretty wild to see this thing run live, with the bids coming from the internet, phones, and the auction floor.
1953 Topps in PSA 8
1941 Playball in PSA 8.
1952-1955 Red Man cards in 7 and 8
1950 Bowman in PSA 8
1951 Bowman Overmire(toughest card in set) went for $3,680--Both David Vargha and I have sold one for $4,500-$5,000 in the past year and I think one has gone for over $5,000. I still think it makes sense not to chase the low pops as I believe the evidence will ultimately prove that they will come in as 1)more examples are graded and 2)there are a limited number of collectors who will pay well into thousands for commons.
Another bbargain of the night--how about the 1941 Play Ball psa 8 DiMaggio only going for $6,000. The high end vintage superstars is where the most weakness in the market has occurred and where I think the best buys are currently.
Jim
It appeared that there were many good prices for the 1952 Topps High numbers. Book is $700, and I seem to remember seeing most of them finish in the $500 range.
I do agree that the best deals currently are on the stars. It's not uncommon to see the 50's commons go for 4x SMR only to see Mathews, Reese or Paige go for 20% under. Granted, I am a set builder, but I still have a tough time paying $600 for a 53 Topps (insert low pop common here) in PSA 7 versus $600 for a 53 Reese in PSA 8.
And I have seen certain low pops start their decent in 53 Topps. One in particular, used to go for $2000, then down to $1200, now the last example went for $660. But what I have noticed is that the amount of cards in a given set considered "low pop" has increased. Thus for 53's, sellers attach the low pop tag to anything under a pop of 20. Which is a 1/3 of the set!! Overkill, to drive the higher price, and it's working.
1953 Topps in PSA 8
1941 Playball in PSA 8.
1952-1955 Red Man cards in 7 and 8
1950 Bowman in PSA 8
The Seaver went super high, but I think a Met collector took it. It did look dead on centered though which is not easy found.
Interesting. 51 Bowman and 52 Topps low pops are coming down--now 53 Topps which I have been very inactive on because of the high numbers. I think this will spread to other sets such as 1955 and 1957 where the low pops are at very high prices and other sets as well.
<< <i>Another bbargain of the night--how about the 1941 Play Ball psa 8 DiMaggio only going for $6,000. The high end vintage superstars is where the most weakness in the market has occurred and where I think the best buys are currently.
Jim >>
Dav:
I'd like to hear your thoughts on this above point. It does seem like a pretty broad softening of high end vintage superstars -- basically anything 8 and above. Why do you think this is happening? Do you think that there are less collectors in the market? Do you think that there is less confidence in PSA product? Do you think that certain key collectors have left the market?
I would be interested to hear what you thought. It certainly appears to me that certain key players are no longer aggressively buying key PSA-graded cards. In fact, I think one or two are selling/consigning them away (e.g. Tom...). There certainly was an escalation in prices over the past few years -- but it seems that some of the prices are selling lower than the pre-escalation. Perhaps there has even been a market shift from the "key card collectors" to the "set collectors", and more of a focus is being placed on the commons, with less being placed on the superstar cards. Would be interested to hear what others thought on this.
Would also like to hear your thoughts on the 1957 Topps set, Jim. My thoughts on that set is that the run-up over the last 18 months has been primarily related to Branca. Now that he is complete with few upgrades left -- there may be many more reasonable opportunities going forward. Any predictions from anyone as to what set John will steward next...?
MS
2)A big piece of it is Fogel, Merkel, Branca and Louchios have already bought their cards and are out of the market.
3)Another big piece is how many collectors spend $10,000 or more on any card? They are expensive.
4)Tom and others are selling or are inactive.
5)I honestly do not know if high-end collectors have lost confidence in the product. I have thoughts but I have learned that this is not the forum to address such issues.
6)I am buying these high-end cards selectively and carefully at today's prices.
No doubt Branca can drive appreciation of a set but I think there are quite a few buyers in this set. I tried to buy a psa 8 common in tough series and it went for $920.
The real appreciation in cards is tied to putting complete sets together--not for individual players based on their baseball credentials.
It's kind of funny but the 1965 Charlie Smith card recently sold for almost as much as the Mantle card did on Saturday night - both in psa 8. Who could have predicted that 5 years ago???
Wayne