1977 Topps Andre Dawson SGC 96...WOW!

downgoesfrazier

PSA MINT 9's Don't sell for even half of this!

I realize Dawson's card has a very low SGC population and this copy is very well centered. I was shocked to see that my 250.00 snipe was "bid too low". I figured Vayank finally paid up for an important card, but to find so many bidders above me was shocking. The SGC 96 on star cards does awfully well at auction.
dgf

aconte

DGF,

What a crappy scan! How can you tell how good the card really is? The world is littered with cert buyers.
I should add the card could be really nice but the scan does not answer any questions.

I've seen a couple cards go pretty high in the last month for 70's cards in Sgc holders. I swore a 76 or 77
Topps common in Sgc grade was recently sold in the $170 range. Don't break my stones but I think that
is a lot of money for a 70's common in any holder. But I do appreciate the 70's set builder....tough goal
to complete a big set in high grade...very tough!

aconte

jrdolan

I would think a lot of "modern" cards are very low population in SGC holders, since their core base is in the pre-war stuff. I hope auctions like this don't result in people cracking open their PSA's from the 1960s and '70s and sending them to SGC so they can claim "1 of only 6!" or whatever.

The thing I don't like when people crack their PSA's and send to SGC or BGS (or GAI like WVShoebox and others) is that it artificially inflates card populations. PSA's pops do not diminish, since they're already counted, but the others increase. Of course the same thing applies when those slabs are cracked and the cards become PSA. It appears there are more cards around than there really are. I doubt that's healthy for the hobby in the long run.

jackstraw

i will not speak for psa but sgc returns the flips to psa if its done under a crossover. i will also add that he has a bruce sutter sgc 96 up for auction now. tony i would think if a 70's common sold for that price something would have been on their message board?

aconte

Straw,

It did. I just don't remember when.

I wouldn't count on their message boards for the latest news.

aconte

downgoesfrazier

I guess it's Dmitri buying the card as the PSA 10 copy he bought for 2K last year was a glorified 8 in a 10 holder. He must want the highest graded copy from each company. Still, there were others who bid awfully strong to arrive at that price.
Tony,
That is a TON of money for a common from any topps issue (with exception to topps high-numbers) in any holder. I admit I have paid $100 for a key common for my set that I've been unable to locate. My reasoning was that if I couldn't find the freakin' thing with all the cards I've been through, that is ONE BAAAAD HOMBRE! Many people bid crazy numbers without investigating the reasons behind the low population. They purchase most of their set on line already holdered and haven't yet discovered for theselves how elusive a card can be.
One thing, if I have twelve copies that are close to mint (well centered, reasonably clean, etc.) yet the population is still 1 or 2, I don't consider the card difficult and I won't pay up. I feel I'll eventually find one without the corner touch or 4% better centering, etc. It's the cards that have populations of 0 or 1 or 2 that I have 60-70 copies of from 15 different sources over a 5 year period that my nicest example is EX/MT--those are the card I pay huge for.


dgf

downgoesfrazier

John,
There were a handful of SGC minor stars that went nuts a couple months back. I don't remember the numbers, but I do remember going "What the !$#!@ is goin' on there?!?!"


dgf

ctsoxfan

Wow - guess I got a great deal on my PSA 9 a month ago. It's a blazer, and I paid less than $120. I am shocked by the SGC 96 premium.

Fabfrank

That Dawson card is sweet. Aconte's right though. The scan should have been better and if it was that card might have gotten a better price. The way it looks now I bet that card would garner a 10.

koby

Wow is right!

That must be one of the nicest SGC cards