Set Registry - Pricing

dalew

For the purposes of determining the value of your cards in the Set Registry, when you have a qualifer, do you substract two cards (i.e., a 8 (OC) would be valued at a 6?). Secondly, why are 10's not listed, and what value do you place below a 6?

Thanks,

Dale

mikeschmidt

10's before 1978 are generally so infrequently found that sometimes the rules just don't apply to them. SMR says generally that their pricing is a multiple of 2 to 5 times a regular PSA 9 version of the card.

With tough sets -- through the multiplier away. Commons can trade 10 to 20 to higher times multiples of the SMR. HOF'ers generally trade closer to three times SMR. Though HOF rookies generally trade at huge multiples.

There is simply not enough of them on the open market to establish a true and efficient pricing paradigm, generally.

Vargha

Is there a place where you determine the value of your cards on the Registry? Or are you simply trying to ascertain the value of your cards . . . if the latter, eBay and auctions like Mastro, Superior, Andy Madec, Mile High, etc. are much better indicators than guides like SMR. Marc is right about PSA 10's -- it depends a lot on who the madmen are bidding up the prices. The 1951 Bowman PSA 10's (there are 7 total ever graded) will close at over 20x SMR for PSA 9 on the commons currently up for sale at the Superior auction. The 1955 Bowman PSA 10's will go for a much lower multiplier -- go figure.

NickM

The 10 to 9 price ratio difference between '55 and '51 does make sense though. The '55s are much tougher to find in 9s and that's reflected in the price of 9s.

Nick

mikeschmidt

NickM-

You're not making any sense! The 1955 Bowmans are much harder to find in PSA 9 -- but they have an SMR of about $120 -- and have sold recently on Ebay for about $175 - $300, for population one PSA 9 cards. In 1951 Bowman, a PSA 9 with a Population of 1 would go for $750 or so on Ebay, I would tend to think...

Vargha

Marc has it correct on the pricing, although eBay tends to fetch less for the 1951 PSA 9's then the big auction houses do.

NickM

You're right. I wasn't making any sense. What I was trying to say was that SMR is more in line with actual sales prices for '55 Bowmans than for '51s. Instead, I got several different concepts tangled up together.
Looking at the Superior auction did point out to me one more major reason that the 10 to 9 ratio is lower for the '55s - almost all of the 55s up in that auction came out of the David Hall collection, and many of them look obviously deficient as 10s (not quite as bad as his '55 Bowman Mantle, but close).

Nick

Vargha

Most of the 10's in all of the sets were Hall's, I believe. There is a deficiently centered 10 in the 1951's that was at $1,900 (including buyer's fees) going into the last day. There is too much money chasing the 1951 cards.


(Typo . . . )

Vargha

Here's the one I'm talking about:

1951 Bowman Joe Haynes #240 GEM MT 10

mikeschmidt

Every Bowman PSA 10 that is currently in the Superior Sports Auction came from David Hall's set(s)


Every one.

NickM

I didn't realize the Ford was from Hall's collection, because it has a far different number than the rest of the cards up.
What are the odds the PSA 10 Memo Luna ('54 Bowman) is also from his collection?

Nick

mikeschmidt

They are both from his collection. Just check the Set Registry. Honestly, they are all from his collection.

NickM

I had already checked the registry on Memo Luna (Spanish for Can't Play). I was trying to be funny.
I wonder how long it will take PSA to erase the taint of the questionable Hall vintage 10s.
We should actually thank Superior for putting them up for auction with nice large scans, because they can then be saved for the world to see what a questionable 10 looks like.

Nick