Do you back off when the bidding gets rough?
bosoxphan
Posts: 107 ✭✭
When the bidding for the set you collect heats up, and a bunch of new bidders enter the fray, do you pay more than you'd like to get particular cards or do you lay low for awhile? Reason I'm asking is a number of new bidders have entered the market for 1935 graded Goudeys. Couple months ago I was paying 100% of SMR but i was successful at those prices. Lately they've been going for 120 to upwards of 150% of SMR, which has also risen. Only one on Ebay now and it's 25% over SMR with 3 days left to go.
0
Comments
POTD = 09/03/2003
<< <i>It depends on the set you collect. If you collect large, modern (post-1960) sets, I think it makes sense to back off when the bidding gets out of hand. But with a relatively scarce issue like 1935 Goudey, there is a risk that over time most of the cards will "settle" with collectors, leading to higher prices on the few cards sold publicly. So, in your case, I'd say bid what your wallet will allow. >>
Good point, thank you. It was a rather unpopular set, but seems to be picking up interest lately. Ruth's last card during his actual playing days. I was wondering at first if the population of the cards would increase significantly as interest increases. That has happened a bit recently, total population increased 33%, 200 cards, over the last year, but most of those cards were lower and mid grade. Most of the increase was in grade 6 and lower, with the largest % in PSA 1-4.
SMR is a guide only. I think you will do well to bid smartly, but not be afraid to win auctions every now and again. Perhaps you will get lucky and there may be a nice ungraded set in the April Mastro auction. That would be great for you.
MS
To me, the most overlooked thing in any auction is where the #3 bidder stands in the final bidding. When the #1 and #2 bidders are miles ahead of the pack on the final bid, then this is a dangerous position to be in if you are #1 guy. If the same, duplicate item comes up again, it will theoretically sell for one bid increment over what the original #3 bidder was willing to pay and the original #2 bidder will get the same item for substantially less. (This assumes that the original #1 bidder won't come around to bump up the bidding which some I know they sometimes do just to play spoiler).
For example, I collect 1968 cards and I'm typically the #2 bidder on the 1 of 1 PSA 9 or PSA 10 items. These can go from $250-$400 on the 9's and $500- $750 on the 10's. I could drive the #1 guy to his limit on every auction, but I usually take it easy on him and nowadays let him have them for a bit less. But when a second example later shows up, I can usually get the 9 for around $100 and a 10 for $350. The 68 collectors who wait for the 4th or 5th PSA 9 example can usually get them for $40-50.
With 1/1 cards it becomes a very interesting game. Some set collectors (I think 1951 Bowman, 1963 Fleer and 1968 Topps are examples) have a money-is-no-object and will pay huge bounties for the 1/1 PSA 9s and 10s. However, when alliances come into play -- those same cards usually sell for up to half of what they would have before had the people been competiting against each other.
From the bidding alliance perspective -- usually the same people that were competing end up winning the cards anyway. So if they can hold their ego in check and split the rare cards fairly with the other alliance members -- they end up with the same cards at a fraction of the cost.
If you are a seller --- it is advantageous to sell when there is large competition and a lack of alliances. (like in the above-mentioned sets).