Have 1967 Topps gone "cold"

acowa · November 28, 2003 8:07AM

This card is usually $100+ every time.

Hamilton PSA 8

qualitycards · November 28, 2003 8:12AM

It went for $89, thats not too off the mark...jay

ejguru · November 28, 2003 8:57AM

Hey--I was expecting it to go a bit higher too--. Just thought 2 other bidders could go after this after one. Timing of the auction may have allowed bidders to miss it or not solidify snipes. In any case, I am just flat out refusing to go triple digits after a common 8, regardless of population. I'd rather open a Series I cello and pull him and Duke Sims out together

toppsgun · November 28, 2003 10:53AM

Had it on my watch list to see what it would do. I thought $89 was too high for what I was willing to pay. The high bidder covered himself with a couple of bumps just to make sure. If another bidder was out there, that either scared him off or else Acowa is right and the market has softened.

Afternoon ending time shouldn't matter to the snipers.

Guru, that would be fun to pull both from a pack. Hope you do it someday.

Stonegate · November 28, 2003 11:48AM

Probably had more to do with the rough cut on the left border, tilt in the centering, and prints spots in the METS "E" and "T" and a bit in the black pinstripe border. Viewed 140+ times, I'm guessing that the set collectors wanted to wait to pay triple digits for an 8 that was a little more problem-free.

Kevin

norty · November 28, 2003 12:39PM

Stonegate:

Are you looking for a 9 in 8 clothing? Please note when you view that scan, it is enlarged considerably. To the naked eye, the print issues are unnoticeable. Some people (myself included) prefer rough cuts. If people passed for that reason, they lost out on a great card for no good reason.

Acowa:

While some auctions were a little soft, I was not displeased with the results of the Hamilton or many other of the auctions that ended today. (I mean Hamilton did go for nearly 6X SMR). Rojas and Boswell went for close to 1 1/2 times SMR, and Agee went for 2X SMR. Briles also went for nearly 2X SMR. I think 67's are still moving well.

tripoli · November 28, 2003 2:18PM

Acowa, what kind of scanner are you using? That's a beautiful picture.

acowa · November 28, 2003 7:41PM

That's Joe T's scanner so I will defer to him. I just linked the picture.

With respect to the price...this card is considered one of the tougher commons in the set. I have sold several of the tougher ones for well over double what this one closed at. I would've, should've, could've bid more on this one...but I didn't feel it would be "neighborly" to run up the GURU.

To Toppsguns point, it take's two idiots to run up the price of a piece of encapsulated cardboard. I am just sorry I wasn't one of those idiots on this one.

Regards,

Alan

Basilone · November 28, 2003 11:10PM

How bout somebody provide a POP analysis for the past year....that may answer your question.

qualitycards · November 29, 2003 12:22AM

I just viewed the pop report and there is 16 PSA-8's and 9 PSA-7's of Jack Hamilton. So $89 seems pretty good to me, regardless what it used to fetch. I also checked out other low pops and saw Sims, Bristol, M. Alou & Sparma all w/ the same & less pop in PSA-8's then Hamilton and that took me to just card #21. ...jay

Basilone · November 29, 2003 1:53AM

I would not consider 16 PSA 8s to be a hard to find card. A sleight premium over SMR yes...but not 6X SMR.

John

toppsgun · November 30, 2003 5:10AM

Vindication.

Davalillo · November 30, 2003 7:08AM

Late 60s cards have only begun to be submitted to psa--seems this and other 10-15 pop cards in 8 have no place to go but down but I may be wrong as it is a popular set.

Also do not believe there are any psa 8s in set with pop of less than 10.

Other than 1968 appears to be easiest larger pre-1970 major set to put together in 8.

acowa · November 30, 2003 7:36AM

Maybe I have a bias because this was the last card I needed to complete my 1967 set. I don't fully trust the pop reports because high end cards are routinely broken out and resubmitted hoping for higher grades. Even if the pop reports were dead on... a card with a pop of 10 isn't a slam dunk to find. Ask Dan about his buddy Al Worthington.

My point (assuming that I ever had one) was that many of the top sets are in fact missing this card...and it couldn't garner $100 puzzled me a bit. Other sets are just a bit more competitive I guess. All in all, if Joe's happy then I am happy.

Regards,

Alan

acowa · December 3, 2003 9:58PM

For everyone that thought this would be the last Hamilton ever. (like myself) ... SUPRISE

Link to new auction

Regards,

Alan

Hubcap · December 3, 2003 10:23PM

I don't think the pop report has any validity any longer. Too many high grade 8s have been resubmitted numerous times and still come back an 8. Why are they resubmitted? Frankly, to catch a more lenient grader who might let it slide. Does that happen? Absolutely. But more times than not, it comes back an 8. Do I have in hand proof? This Saturday at Ft Washington, I am buying a 1961 Mantle PSA 8 #300 that has been reviewed and resubmitted ad nauseum for a PSA 9. The owner is finally giving up and selling it to me for my 1961 set. The previous Mantle he had that I wanted to buy was a stunning 8 and he had it reviewed and it got a 9.

I also think the day of the week, time of the day, holidays, weather, etc. all play a factor into prices. Remember, not all bidders use snipe programs. I don't. I love to see the action during the last minute. Heck, how many times have I fell asleep and missed a midnight auction? *laugh*

See you at Ft Washington !!! Bring your money and snow shovels! *wink* I will be wearing a Brooklyn Dodgers cap. Look forward to seeing other Set Registry members.

AL Z.

qualitycards · December 4, 2003 2:03AM

<< <i>Too many high grade 8s have been resubmitted numerous times and still come back an 8 >>

HUBCAP - With cards like the '61 Mantle you mentioned ad other big $ cards, re-submitting can be very profitable if the bump occurs.
But how many of us take a 1960's common and re-submit it several times? The grading/shipping fees will kill a chunk of the increase,
if it even increases in grade at all....jay

acowa · December 4, 2003 3:39AM

Here's the kind of love that 1967's deserve:

1967 Jim Lonborg PSA 8 Diamond cut

aconte · December 4, 2003 4:07AM

Acowa,

Is that a bad 8? It looks ok to me. I thought I was bad!

aconte

acowa · December 4, 2003 4:24AM

Tony,

I don't think it's a "bad 8"...it looks like it meets the standards. I wouldn't call it high end. It's up to almost $170...that's all.

Regards,

Alan

Ullr · December 4, 2003 8:46AM

$300 Photo Finish
1967 red Sox cards are never cold
Third place bidder felt it was worth $96
Pop report 16 8's
2 9's

Basilone · December 4, 2003 10:40AM

This auction tells us that there currently are TWO people on this earth...who would pay that much for the card.

toppsgun · December 4, 2003 11:36AM

The two high bidders got into a bit of a tiff. Next time, everything else being equal, this card goes for $97 or less.

Either way, I'm glad I got my Lonborg in the Fall '02 Superior auction (skylane's lot of 225 different 8's) for just slightly under SMR.

dude · December 5, 2003 12:02AM

Just skimming through the Pop Report, it appears that John Romano #196 and Andy Etchebarren #457 are the two toughest cards in the set now. (This is excluding the rare variation cards.) Both have the same Population at 8 or higher: ten 8's and one 9. Al Worthington #399 and Sal Bando #33 get honorable mention at ten 8's and two 9's.

As for the Lonborg, I'd be patient. The population is 16 in PSA 8, and more will surely come.

acowa · December 5, 2003 1:04AM

Dan,

What's strange is that my Etchebarren PSA 8 NO QUALIFIER CARD(on EBAY currently hint hint shameless plug) hasn't had a sniff at $150. The Red Sox and Tigers always command a premium...but this much premium is scary.

Regards,

Alan

toppsgun · December 5, 2003 1:11AM

Here's another usual tough card that went for a reasonably low price:

1967 Hoerner PSA 8

Nice pickup for ejguru. Didn't he bust a 9 out of a pack last summer, or was that someone else??????????

toppsgun · December 5, 2003 1:14AM

Alan, that's a slider 8 if I ever saw one.

Can't blame you for fishin' though.

acowa · December 5, 2003 1:28AM

Especially since the pond where I fish had a free fishing day!

Regards,

Alan

ejguru · December 6, 2003 10:42AM

MLB--Good memory--I do have the Hoerner 9 straight from cello last year. I am still resubmitting a few from those packs to be bumped to their deserved grade of 9. Actually, some of those that were given 8's are just as nice as the Oliva 10.

E

ejguru · December 6, 2003 10:46AM

BTW 1967 regsitrants--

There are some high, high grade sets being formed. 2004 may see increased competition for mints.

sjjs28 · December 6, 2003 11:56AM

Yeah "t-gun"
The guru promised me the "9" hoerner ......
Still working the logistics - but I have my hopes that the deal will happen in the not to distant future....

ejguru · December 6, 2003 1:01PM

Sjjs--"Do I know you?"

--kiddng.

Yeah, I think I'm still in need of a Brooksie in 8 and a couple of Red Sox in 9. That Lonborg in 9 would've been a nice starter to open up trade discussions Steve. I thought you knew I needed it.

jwmerrill · December 6, 2003 9:33PM

Increased competition for mints in 04... hmmmm.................

acowa · December 11, 2003 6:07AM

Way to step up MLB!

1967 Topps PSA 8 Hamilton

This card went for 20% more than the previous card auctioned by Joe T. with a scan that was 100% worse. EBAY is a strange market.

Regards,

Alan

norty · December 11, 2003 6:48AM

Was it my breath?

qualitycards · December 11, 2003 7:06AM

I don't understand it either. That seller took forever to ship cards to me, but Joe ships within 24 hours and charges a buck for shipping...jay

toppsgun · December 11, 2003 7:33AM

This one is dead centered. (I don't recall Joe's being centered that well.) Hopefully the corners are nice, but the scan did leave a lot to be desired.

I'm down to two cards to finish in all 8 or better. I'm at 100% on the Registry since I have those last two in 7, but hopefully I find them in 8's before I lose interest.

Basilone · December 11, 2003 7:57AM

Hope the guy takes refunds....

qualitycards · December 11, 2003 8:06AM

<< <i>Hope the guy takes refunds.... >>

BASILONE - It took me almost a month to get my Santo off of him.
I can't imagine how long the process would be for refunds...jay

Basilone · December 11, 2003 8:09AM

I lived in the same freaking town as him and it took him 2+ weeks.

John

toppsgun · December 11, 2003 8:28AM

"Hope the guy takes refunds.... "

I just hope it's a real 8 when it arrives, not a 7 in 8's clothing.

It's bad enough to write checks to someone in Ohio with Buckeye cheers in their auction location line.

GO WOLVERINES. BEAT TROJANS AND CLAIM #1 also.

1967topps · February 5, 2004 10:20AM

So...what do you figure? Everyone who wants one has one?

1967topps · February 5, 2004 10:27AM

>>Briles also went for nearly 2X SMR
The $32 I got it for in November was a relative bargain. I'd bought another one in
July from sjjs and that one went $72.
(I then kept my choice and tried listing the other one at $49.99 and got no takers,
eventually relisting at $29 and selling for $38. Until July I hadn't ever seen an ungraded one
that looked like more than a 6 so was willing to pay for the 8 whatever it took.

1967topps · February 5, 2004 10:36AM

(I just discovered this forum, thanks to the link in acowa's article - great reading)

>>There are some high, high grade sets being formed. 2004 may see increased competition for mints.

For a while I was seeing rweigel winning all the 9's for multiple hundreds of dollars each
(like Abernathy). I like a few 9's to balance out my 7's until I get all 8's but hard to compete against
his seeming budget.

Have 1967 Topps gone &quot;cold&quot;

Comments

Have 1967 Topps gone "cold"