Well it looks like the set topped out at $2,400 plus the buyer's fee for a total price of $2,760. I think that's a pretty respectable final figure! Kellogg's cards have gone from total obscurity to a very solid auction result in a relatively short period of time.
Thank you very much to everyone here who bid!
The high bidder won a tremendous set, and I'm very confident that he will enjoy it thoroughly. Congratulations to the high bidder!
I think that the sale price was pretty fair, averaging out to about $40 a card. Frankly, I thought that it would/should have gone for a bit more in light of the scarcity of some of the cards in the set. I am probably biased in this regard as I am a collector of this set and realize just how tough some of the cards in this set truly are.
Regardless, a bold move putting the set on the auction block. It is always a tricky thing to be the first to offer such an item, but it certainly reinforces the fact that the 1970 Kelloggs set is finally getting the recognition and credibility it so richly deserves.
Despite the "Nabobs of Negativism" that proclaimed that the only bidders for this set would come off this board, it seems as though the majority of bids (including the winner) came from outside our fraternity.
Congratulations gemmint. I am nearing completion of this set in straight 9 and it's no easy task. There are a few really tough cards to get in 9. While I don't plan on selling my set when it's finished, it's nice to know that it's worth something.
When does the all PSA-10 set go up for auction
Robert
Looking for: Any high grade OPC Jim Palmer High grade Redskins (pre 1980)
Thanks everyone . I honestly don't know who the high bidder was, but unless someone comes forward here I have to assume based on my observations that the two highest bidders for the set were from outside of this board.
Rbeaton - The all PSA 10 set is a long way from completion, LOL. I'm still working on other all PSA 9 sets, and as you know, it's very tough finding some of those commons.
Do you think I have been inconsistant. I said it was not a vintage set then--I still believe. I recall placing a bid to help my friend gemmint then but passing because it got too high. That I think was a good decision--I have been able to complete a 9 set very easily and cheaply. The game is in the 10s as gemmint well knows. The only reason I got involved is gemmint and zardoz egging me on---someone point out the inconsistantcy?
Vic, "Howitallbegan" is pointing out (for reasons unknown) that YOU HAVE BEEN CONSISTENT in your thinking. It sounds like he's on Team Vic, but I can't really tell. He's just stirring the pot. Why, I don't know, that's why I asked him why he's hiding behind a new user name. He's obviously a regular here so why not post under his regular user name.
If you read my bottom line i said " You were consistant" meaning that you have not wavered from this set being non-vintage from the beginning.
I personally consider anything older than 1972 vintage but thats my opinion only and im sure there are at least 80 different opinions on this.
Vintage or not its a great set. Im not sure its worthy of selling PSA 9 51 Bowman 1 of 1's to buy PSA 10 1 of 1 Kelloggs but thats the choice every collector has to make
<< <i>Vintage or not its a great set. Im not sure its worthy of selling PSA 9 51 Bowman 1 of 1's to buy PSA 10 1 of 1 Kelloggs but thats the choice every collector has to make >>
Vic -- do you have scans of any of your cards? I was curious about your 1955 Bowman Aaron PSA 9. I (think) that you got it from the Copeland sale, and I was wondering how it compared to the other PSA 9 Aaron I've seen (I do not presently know where the third example is).
Marc
I am actively buying MIKE SCHMIDT gem mint baseball cards. Also looking for any 19th century cabinets of Philadephia Nationals. Please PM with additional details.
Both parts of this are true but there is no link. Yes, I have sold psa 9 pop1 cards to John Branca for what I would consider to be attractive prices. I have also bought Kellogg psa 10s. But I am not selling the Bowman 9s to buy the Kelloggs. Any card in my collection is for sale at the right price but my prices are usually very high--occasionally someone meets it so I sell. I have sold vintage basketball psa 9s and 10s to the premeir bball collector in the hobby who shall go unnamed as he has not registered his sets. Even the famous David Vargha before he gave up the quest has bought 9s from me---but that is not financing my mission in Kelloggs.
I was being a little sarcastic in the line " im not sure if its worth selling PSA 9 1951 Bowman 1 of 1's and then buying PSA 10 1 of 1's"
I was referring to Davalillo earlier this year selling some of his PSA 9 Bowman's 1 of 1's for a Kings Ranson and now paying large prices for PSA 10 Kellogs.
The actual math may be 7 PSA 10 Kellogs for the PSA 9 1951 Bowman. but just to point out the sales ARE NOT Related except for the fact that is all money
I am sort of a low tech guy and do not know how to do scans.
The Aaron is an interesting story. I bought the 55 Bowman set advertised nrmt-mt many years ago without inspection and hoped for the best. I got it back and a lot of cards were o/c some with corner wear etc. I thought about complaining but there was a nice Aaron so I kept it. I sent in a dozen or so cards for grading--four came back altered, there was one 8 and the Aaron graded 9 more than making up for the cost of the set. Just recently I sent in 16 cards and got 1 psa 8 out of that set. Maybe the most unusual way I ever got a 9.
Thanks for the story. Sounds like your set wasn't the Copeland set, then. It does sound like a very intriguing set nonetheless. Did you keep any of the altered cards? I am always looking for examples to better educate myself on the various methodologies employed in altering cards....
Would you be able to open a scanned photo if I sent you one? I have a photo of a (slightly overgraded) Aaron 1955 Bowman PSA 9 that I was curious as to how it compared to yours. Have a great day!
Marc
I am actively buying MIKE SCHMIDT gem mint baseball cards. Also looking for any 19th century cabinets of Philadephia Nationals. Please PM with additional details.
HOWITALLBEGAN brought up the usual argument of what year constitutes vintage or modern. He stated 1972 was his cutoff, some choose 1973 as the last Topps set sold in series, others choose whats right for them. My opinion varies...it all depends if I'm Buying or Selling ...jay
Comments
Thank you very much to everyone here who bid!
The high bidder won a tremendous set, and I'm very confident that he will enjoy it thoroughly. Congratulations to the high bidder!
Congratulations! I agree with you that you did well. I wish I could say I was the owner. That looked like a great set!
aconte
Regardless, a bold move putting the set on the auction block. It is always a tricky thing to be the first to offer such an item, but it certainly reinforces the fact that the 1970 Kelloggs set is finally getting the recognition and credibility it so richly deserves.
Congratulations Gemmintman!
Despite the "Nabobs of Negativism" that proclaimed that the only bidders for this set would come off this board, it seems as though the majority of bids (including the winner) came from outside our fraternity.
Congrats on the sale of your Set
When does the all PSA-10 set go up for auction
Robert
Any high grade OPC Jim Palmer
High grade Redskins (pre 1980)
Rbeaton - The all PSA 10 set is a long way from completion, LOL. I'm still working on other all PSA 9 sets, and as you know, it's very tough finding some of those commons.
Davalillo
Good to know that Davalillo has been consistant in his thoughts about this set
"Howitallbegan" - that's a cute name, but why do you have to hide? If you want to join the Kellogg's Fracas just jump in.
BTW are you any relation to the "MagicianReveals" guy? Why not just jump in?
Do you think I have been inconsistant. I said it was not a vintage set then--I still believe. I recall placing a bid to help my friend gemmint then but passing because it got too high. That I think was a good decision--I have been able to complete a 9 set very easily and cheaply. The game is in the 10s as gemmint well knows. The only reason I got involved is gemmint and zardoz egging me on---someone point out the inconsistantcy?
Davalillo
Moi???????
I resemble that remark
If you read my bottom line i said " You were consistant" meaning that you have not wavered from this set being non-vintage from the beginning.
I personally consider anything older than 1972 vintage but thats my opinion only and im sure there are at least 80 different opinions on this.
Vintage or not its a great set. Im not sure its worthy of selling PSA 9 51 Bowman 1 of 1's to buy PSA 10 1 of 1 Kelloggs but thats the choice every collector has to make
<< <i>I personally consider anything older than 1972 vintage >>
<< <i>its a great set >>
Well at least we now know he's on ZardoMintMan's team.
Guess I think everyone is being sarcastic these days.
Dav
<< <i>Vintage or not its a great set. Im not sure its worthy of selling PSA 9 51 Bowman 1 of 1's to buy PSA 10 1 of 1 Kelloggs but thats the choice every collector has to make >>
Whose mouth dropped when they read this line?
"hand raised"
John
WOW
Vic -- do you have scans of any of your cards? I was curious about your 1955 Bowman Aaron PSA 9. I (think) that you got it from the Copeland sale, and I was wondering how it compared to the other PSA 9 Aaron I've seen (I do not presently know where the third example is).
Marc
<< <i>selling PSA 9 51 Bowman 1 of 1's to buy PSA 10 1 of 1 Kelloggs >>
Ouch...
CU turns its lonely eyes to you
What's the you say, Mrs Robinson
Vargha bucks have left and gone away?
hey hey hey
hey hey hey
Davalillo
John
I was being a little sarcastic in the line " im not sure if its worth selling PSA 9 1951 Bowman 1 of 1's and then buying PSA 10 1 of 1's"
I was referring to Davalillo earlier this year selling some of his PSA 9 Bowman's 1 of 1's for a Kings Ranson and now paying large prices for PSA 10 Kellogs.
The actual math may be 7 PSA 10 Kellogs for the PSA 9 1951 Bowman. but just to point out the sales ARE NOT Related except for the fact that is all money
I am sort of a low tech guy and do not know how to do scans.
The Aaron is an interesting story. I bought the 55 Bowman set advertised nrmt-mt many years ago without inspection and hoped for the best. I got it back and a lot of cards were o/c some with corner wear etc. I thought about complaining but there was a nice Aaron so I kept it. I sent in a dozen or so cards for grading--four came back altered, there was one 8 and the Aaron graded 9 more than making up for the cost of the set. Just recently I sent in 16 cards and got 1 psa 8 out of that set. Maybe the most unusual way I ever got a 9.
Davalillo
Thanks for the story. Sounds like your set wasn't the Copeland set, then. It does sound like a very intriguing set nonetheless. Did you keep any of the altered cards? I am always looking for examples to better educate myself on the various methodologies employed in altering cards....
Would you be able to open a scanned photo if I sent you one? I have a photo of a (slightly overgraded) Aaron 1955 Bowman PSA 9 that I was curious as to how it compared to yours. Have a great day!
Marc
Website: http://www.qualitycards.com
I believe in was a Sotheby's auction(?) and I do know how to open a scan.