Caught up in the hype, or caught up in something else?
Was it truly a buyers group or was it really a sellers group trying to juice the market so they could sell their high-end cards for maximum dollars? Were there some who realized what was happening and took advantage of the situation by simply selling into the apparent "hot" market?
It would not come as a surprise to me if many of the high-priced reported sales were actual purchases by people who got caught up in this instead of unpaid bids from the "buyers" group.
@70ToppsFanatic said:
Caught up in the hype, or caught up in something else?
Was it truly a buyers group or was it really a sellers group trying to juice the market so they could sell their high-end cards for maximum dollars? Were there some who realized what was happening and took advantage of the situation by simply selling into the apparent "hot" market?
It would not come as a surprise to me if many of the high-priced reported sales were actual purchases by people who got caught up in this instead of unpaid bids from the "buyers" group.
It's a tough call but what had me leaning toward it was a buyers group was how so many of the bids and retractions had been from the same group of buyers.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
There are plenty of wrestling cards I collect that have fallen significantly from their peaks and plenty of others that are up as much as 1000+ percent from a prior recorded sale. The auctions can be highly volatile.
The one card that better fits this discussion is the 1986 Panini Supersport Mike Tyson Italian in a PSA 9. I have five and they went from where you could buy them raw for a $100 or so and the first graded and sold went for over $300 and zoomed all the way up to $1,250. In the past year they have settled back to the $800 to $900 range so a pretty decent pullback. My hope is they stabilize and perhaps one day head back up.
I think you can find loads of examples from various segments of card collecting.
One card I have always thought was cool was the 1961 Fleer Wilt Chamberlain. That card in a PSA 9 could be had for 7k in 2010 and it launched all the way to 37k and a recent copy I see went for 22k. Still up significantly but a big hit.
I think one of the most glaring examples of the correction is the very popular 1984 Topps John Elway. Those are down over 50% from their peak.
@Dpeck100 said:
There are plenty of wrestling cards I collect that have fallen significantly from their peaks and plenty of others that are up as much as 1000+ percent from a prior recorded sale. The auctions can be highly volatile.
The one card that better fits this discussion is the 1986 Panini Supersport Mike Tyson Italian in a PSA 9. I have five and they went from where you could buy them raw for a $100 or so and the first graded and sold went for over $300 and zoomed all the way up to $1,250. In the past year they have settled back to the $800 to $900 range so a pretty decent pullback. My hope is they stabilize and perhaps one day head back up.
I think you can find loads of examples from various segments of card collecting.
One card I have always thought was cool was the 1961 Fleer Wilt Chamberlain. That card in a PSA 9 could be had for 7k in 2010 and it launched all the way to 37k and a recent copy I see went for 22k. Still up significantly but a big hit.
I think one of the most glaring examples of the correction is the very popular 1984 Topps John Elway. Those are down over 50% from their peak.
If you look around it is pretty easy to see.
Wow just saw your 1982-1983 Wrestling All Stars album, Dpeck. Very nice!
Moreover it appears that these are some of the cards (the premium ones like Andre and Hogan) that have retained their value according to VCP. Perhaps it’s because you are buying them all up lol ... but the Hogan has been very consistent.
I can’t imagine what a PSA 10 might go for for either or those 2. Looking at your album I don’t see the cert numbers for those first 2 cards in VCP at all. Did you self sub them by any chance?
Also, and perhaps somewhat more to the point of this discussion ... if you were not so strongly involved in this area of collecting do you think prices would have been nearly as high as some of them have been? Meaning that perhaps prices have fallen because you got the cards you needed already.
The Andre I have is in the SMR liner notes as I over the years have helped PSA with reported sales of the cards from the set. They also seem to pick up sales from PWCC and Probstein on their own. I paid $1,820 for the Andre and the Hogan was purchased privately as well for $1,500. I actually own three PSA 9's with the first being purchased in 2009 for $50 to $75 depending on how you break down the purchase of the set. The second was at $565 after the card had moved up to $1,100 so there was a steep correction after the initial surge.
There is a bounty on the Hogan and Andre's of 25k and 50k that a dealer in CA has a buyer for. I still am skeptical one will ever hit but you never know. The Hogan you see came from a dealer who has been trying so hard to get a Hogan 10 and has a few 9's still that he has had reviewed numerous times to no avail.
I haven't purchased any of the graded copies of either of those two on EBAY in years so I am not responsible for their current prices. I have 20 Hogan's and close to 30 Andre's so I realize I couldn't simply liquidate and not impact the market.
I have certainly contributed to some of the prices in recent years as I actively bid on the cards but have become less and less the under bidder or an influencing bid on many. There are some examples where I have acquired a copy and prices have come down some but there are probably more examples where I might have the top graded copy or copies and it forces the 9 even higher. If you look at the standard sets and not the mega sets you will see I have quite a few complete sets and have a deep bench of some of the top cards in their second best grade and this is by design. I decided to pattern my collection after the person who dominates the Three Stooges sets and I also realize there is variance in a particular grade so I try and acquire the best looking examples I can.
I have paid through the nose for some bums in PSA 10 and the reason the 83 set is so close is I avoided buying many because in many cases you are just throwing good money after bad and bowed out of some auctions. The star cards are always going to be more in demand and as long as you have healthy registry competition the bums will hold but once population totals rise or someone backs out prices fall. I don't want to have too much money tied up in cards like that and more in the more marketable names. A large percentage of the cards I have from the sets were self subbed and I was fortunate to step in big years ago and so I have some serious gains in some areas. The Dusty Rhodes card from the set or the Superstar Graham are probably my two best scores. I have $71 in my two Rhodes 9's and $122 in my PSA 10 that is a Pop 1. I am not selling so it really doesn't matter but I think we can all agree it is nice to look at paper profits. The one thing that is nice about having lots of graded copies of lower priced cards like this is that if they go down it is a lot easier to stomach. I don't mind if a card that is $300 becomes $200 but that would be much more difficult to say if a $30,000 card became $20,000.
My lone toe into the buyer's group waters last summer was selling my PSA 7 '68 Ryan great centering for about 2K through PWCC; I notice if I wanted to buy similar back now, it'd cost me less. Conversely, most of my cards aren't high enough in grade to have experienced the runup much. Around the time of the summer hype (or maybe a bit before) I finally got my Rose rookie I'd wanted for awhile in a 5, just under about $600, and I think similar ones are still going for around that amount more or less.
I think most of us use the term Buyers-Club euphemistically. I don't know anyone purportedly admitting to be a member of this club, nor has anyone acknowledge the club even exists. Admitting to such membership would be paramount to revealing oneself as a schiller, manipulator, or at best, a very shrewd capitalist.
I note a lot of proselytising on the other end of the spectrum. Many members noting their economic prowess of selling high and buying low. Yet, not one noting the dreaded buying high and selling low.
There can't be a manipulator unless there is a manipulatee. We are all better off with knowledge of what is occurring, such as this '71 Aaron. Threads of this nature only help to educate our hobby. We will never stop the schilling, manipulating and greed, but we can prevent ourselves from being manipulatee's.
Collecting PSA 9's from 1970-1977. Raw 9's from 72-77. Raw 10's from '78-'83. Collecting Unopened from '72-'83; mostly BBCE certified boxes/cases/racks. Prefer to buy in bulk.
"I'll buy that card for 2-3X more than what it sold for last month" said no-one that has ever amassed wealth through hard work.
Collecting PSA 9's from 1970-1977. Raw 9's from 72-77. Raw 10's from '78-'83. Collecting Unopened from '72-'83; mostly BBCE certified boxes/cases/racks. Prefer to buy in bulk.
@ReggieCleveland said:
I think what I'm trying to get at is how wide of a scope it was. It seems to me that anything involving the now infamous "Buyer's Group" was limited to HOF cards from the 60s and 70s. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, got a shot in the arm
Arthur
it only takes a few piraña to entice the school into a feeding frenzy.
@mortiz said:
I think it’s funny when people talk about stability in the card market when it’s become crystal clear that the bottom has completely fallen out on A LOT of “premium” cards from the 60s and 70s.
Sorry but a lot of people simply got played and the data shows this.
When the population of something is low enough it’s pretty easy to keep the perception of it’s value high ... but as the pop increases people just get bored of shilling and just moved on.
Wasn’t there someone who was building a perfect 1978 set who was paying $1K a common a few years ago? You’re lucky to get $100 for the same card these days.
It’s certainly been fun to watch but the only thing that’s been steady these days has been the general decline in hammer prices.
This is about the 23rd time you've made the same post just in different language. Do you even collect sportscards? What do you collect? Do you plan to contribute to the board in a positive way or is this just your thing, bashing high grade cards from the 60s and 70s? Because at this point you just seem like a troll. Anytime someone has made a counterpoint to your argument you just rehash this post in a different form.
By your post frequency you obviously have a lot of time on your hands so it would be great if you could contribute in a positive way. Maybe share some of your collection or talk about what you like. But the whole "sky is falling and everyone that bought is an idiot" routine has run its course. I think it's time to retire that bit.
Arthur
He smells like an ALT...brand new account but knows more than everyone? Hmmmmm
@mortiz said:
I think it’s funny when people talk about stability in the card market when it’s become crystal clear that the bottom has completely fallen out on A LOT of “premium” cards from the 60s and 70s.
This is about the 23rd time you've made the same post just in different language. Do you even collect sportscards? What do you collect? Do you plan to contribute to the board in a positive way or is this just your thing, bashing high grade cards from the 60s and 70s? Because at this point you just seem like a troll. Anytime someone has made a counterpoint to your argument you just rehash this post in a different form.
By your post frequency you obviously have a lot of time on your hands so it would be great if you could contribute in a positive way. Maybe share some of your collection or talk about what you like. But the whole "sky is falling and everyone that bought is an idiot" routine has run its course. I think it's time to retire that bit.
Arthur
He smells like an ALT...brand new account but knows more than everyone? Hmmmmm
Me thinks there are several on here, and luckily they have been quiet for a while which has made the board a better place for dialogue and discussion about cards and collecting. What I don't comprehend is why would someone get into a hobby that is supposed to be fun, and spend a ton of time talking about the negative aspects of it/promoting a sky is falling attitude? If you are wanting to buy cards and prices are dropping wouldn't it be best to stay quiet and just rack up nice cards at good prices?
@ReggieCleveland said:
I think what I'm trying to get at is how wide of a scope it was. It seems to me that anything involving the now infamous "Buyer's Group" was limited to HOF cards from the 60s and 70s. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, got a shot in the arm
Arthur
it only takes a few piraña to entice the school into a feeding frenzy.
I've only been back on CU for a few months now but you seem like you've got your head on straight. You think prewar collectors pay attention to what's going on with high grade Ozzie Smith rookies (yes, I know, there are exceptions to every rule. I'm speaking in generalizations)? You probably spend some time on Net54, right? It's not a different planet from CU but it's certainly a different continent. Turn of the century cabinets, T206, caramel cards, rare backs, Cobb, Ruth, Walter Johnson, these things have a direct correlation with a PSA 10 Eddie Murray rookie from 1978?
Those are two entirely different markets with entirely different participants. Are there people that play in both? Certainly. But if Eddie Murray's rookie loses half its value tomorrow you think it affects the T206 Cobb green portrait?
I can't even begin to have the knowledge about market trends as some of you but is it possible with the Rose RC that the price fell due to the recent revelations about his past? I'm not being rhetorical, I'm really asking.
First, thank you to DPeck. I do the same - call a spade a spade. Some of you like it, some of you don't. That's fine.
It was plain as day what was happening in 15-16. I talked about it then. If any of you sold at that time, congrats. If any of you sold after reading my analysis at that time, you're welcome. If any of you stubbornly held on to your 55 Koufax or Clemente PSA 7's, well, that's a tough one.
And last but not least, regarding all of those replies about this being just a hobby and decrying the focus on the ups and downs of the market - just remember, if it wasn't about the money to a large degree you would be posting on the Cabbage Patch or Beanie Baby forum somewhere.
First, thank you to DPeck. I do the same - call a spade a spade. Some of you like it, some of you don't. That's fine.
It was plain as day what was happening in 15-16. I talked about it then. If any of you sold at that time, congrats. If any of you sold after reading my analysis at that time, you're welcome. If any of you stubbornly held on to your 55 Koufax or Clemente PSA 7's, well, that's a tough one.
And last but not least, regarding all of those replies about this being just a hobby and decrying the focus on the ups and downs of the market - just remember, if it wasn't about the money to a large degree you would be posting on the Cabbage Patch or Beanie Baby forum somewhere.
@AaronfromKy said:
I can't even begin to have the knowledge about market trends as some of you but is it possible with the Rose RC that the price fell due to the recent revelations about his past? I'm not being rhetorical, I'm really asking.
I think at the time of those revelations (if it bleeds it leads) but I think less so now. In particular, a lot of chickens are coming home to roost for a lot of personalities that I have to imagine never thought their actions would catch up with them, even as they were certainly of the type to claim for themselves the high moral view. I LOL in their general direction.
of course. because to them, money is money. and a card is a card. (auction houses*)
and in the grand scheme of things, a green t206 cobb isnt that far at all on the family tree from an eddie murray rc.
ie, i'd say 99% of the folks on here (vintage) are familiar w/ n54 (prewar).
the more important question is are there a couple of different groups of guys in each niche doing the same things and using the amonimity of the *auction houses?
If any of you stubbornly held on to your 55 Koufax or Clemente PSA 7's, well, that's a tough one.
its a lil too close to thanksgiving to be acting like some jive-arse turkey!
but i do wish i could cuss on this forum bc id have some choice words for you.
i make my living elsewhere, bud. i didnt contemplate it for one second about cashing in on my ryan 9's when they hit $50k. it wasnt a tough one at all. in fact im proud that i held on to them. shows true love.
now if i had bought one at that price, you might have some sort of validity. but ofcourse, you are you.
dont hear you gloating on all of those other pontifications youve bellowed, though?!?!
of course. because to them, money is money. and a card is a card. (auction houses*)
and in the grand scheme of things, a green t206 cobb isnt that far at all on the family tree from an eddie murray rc.
ie, i'd say 99% of the folks on here (vintage) are familiar w/ n54 (prewar).
the more important question is are there a couple of different groups of guys in each niche doing the same things and using the amonimity of the *auction houses?
I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I don't see the direct correlation between the two.
bc as dave mentioned above which hardly went noticed, it was a sellers group.
Gradual appreciation in high quality collectibles is one thing. Artificially driving up prices to unsustainable levels so that one can sell into a rising tide is completely different.
Consider the following questions:
1) What prevented a relatively small number of people from "juicing" the market so they could sell high end cards into it?
2) Wouldn't uninvolved people who recognized such actions occurring be able to innocently sell into the market because they expected that such a "sellers" group would have to support the hype they had created in advance of the "big dog" cards going under the hammer?
3) Wouldn't manipulators benefit from sales venues who, at the very least, could not have missed what they were doing but looked the other way because rising prices also worked to the advantage of the sales venues?
4) Would it be possible to use the semi-anonymized bidder ids available through some sales venues to identify that some people were winning items and then immediately re listing them and bidding on them themselves?
5) Are there sales venues with publicly staked out "high moral ground" positions that were contradicted by their own behaviors with respect to some of the questionable sales activities until questions started to be asked about those transactions?
Given what we collectively experienced together in 2015 and 2016, and armed with questions like these provided above, I am hopeful that manipulative episodes like these can be prevented because it would be easier to recognize if such an effort were attempted.
bc as dave mentioned above which hardly went noticed, it was a sellers group.
Gradual appreciation in high quality collectibles is one thing. Artificially driving up prices to unsustainable levels so that one can sell into a rising tide is completely different.
Consider the following questions:
1) What prevented a relatively small number of people from "juicing" the market so they could sell high end cards into it?
2) Wouldn't uninvolved people who recognized such actions occurring be able to innocently sell into the market because they expected that such a "sellers" group would have to support the hype they had created in advance of the "big dog" cards going under the hammer?
3) Wouldn't manipulators benefit from sales venues who, at the very least, could not have missed what they were doing but looked the other way because rising prices also worked to the advantage of the sales venues?
4) Would it be possible to use the semi-anonymized bidder ids available through some sales venues to identify that some people were winning items and then immediately re listing them and bidding on them themselves?
5) Are there sales venues with publicly staked out "high moral ground" positions that were contradicted by their own behaviors with respect to some of the questionable sales activities until questions started to be asked about those transactions?
Given what we collectively experienced together in 2015 and 2016, and armed with questions like these provided above, I am hopeful that manipulative episodes like these can be prevented because it would be easier to recognize if such an effort were attempted.
bc as dave mentioned above which hardly went noticed, it was a sellers group.
Gradual appreciation in high quality collectibles is one thing. Artificially driving up prices to unsustainable levels so that one can sell into a rising tide is completely different.
Consider the following questions:
1) What prevented a relatively small number of people from "juicing" the market so they could sell high end cards into it?
2) Wouldn't uninvolved people who recognized such actions occurring be able to innocently sell into the market because they expected that such a "sellers" group would have to support the hype they had created in advance of the "big dog" cards going under the hammer?
3) Wouldn't manipulators benefit from sales venues who, at the very least, could not have missed what they were doing but looked the other way because rising prices also worked to the advantage of the sales venues?
4) Would it be possible to use the semi-anonymized bidder ids available through some sales venues to identify that some people were winning items and then immediately re listing them and bidding on them themselves?
5) Are there sales venues with publicly staked out "high moral ground" positions that were contradicted by their own behaviors with respect to some of the questionable sales activities until questions started to be asked about those transactions?
Given what we collectively experienced together in 2015 and 2016, and armed with questions like these provided above, I am hopeful that manipulative episodes like these can be prevented because it would be easier to recognize if such an effort were attempted.
We need a special counsel to figure this out!
Being one here without any authority and pretty much without a single ounce of earned respect, I take it upon myself to name the new CU 'Special Counsel'. All here shall seek guidance from the CU Special Counsel, who have ultimate authority. The Counsel makes final decisions on anything, and if there is a split, the counsel puts the issue to the floor.
I hereby name Dpeck, Allen, Stone, and Sdub as the official 1st CU Special Counsel members. My lack of authority rules in this manner.
What if Dpeck decides to appoint the Crisser as Dictator of the CU boards for life?
There should be safeguards in place to prevent something like that.
@Darin said:
What if Dpeck decides to appoint the Crisser as Dictator of the CU boards for life?
There should be safeguards in place to prevent something like that.
There is a much higher probability that if that was the case I would nominate myself as the dictator. LOL
2.) Card prices go up my current cards are worth more
See also: stocks, bonds, equities, houses, vintage cars...
Hope everyone has a blessed Thanksgiving and was able to spend it with family and friends, and if you are fortunate to have these things hopefully you were able to share what you have with someone less fortunate.
So what do you know, in another thread I pointed out how the 1979 Ozzie Smith PSA 10 has been tanking. Now the 1979 Paul Molitor that was a pop 1 that last sold for $5K is now a pop 3 and is listed for $4K or best offer.
People have just been paying for late 1970s cards as if they were in short supply were in reality there are tons of high quality examples still out there to be discovered in factory sealed unopened.
I doubt it will sell for anywhere near to what the original pop 1 sold for. I also looked into a bunch of 1978 cards that had sold for $800-$1000 a year or so ago and now they’re listed for less than $200 and some less than $100.
If you sold during 2016 you did well.
For some people that have too much money to handle I’m sure they don’t care much about longevity of value with some cards they collect but there is no ignoring the facts.
Now if we’re talking about Mantles or other classics that’s with obviously a different story.
Please let me know when the price drops come for the 1976 Ed "Too Tall" Jones rookie in PSA 10 pop 8. It sold for between $400 and $725 for years. In March it sold for $1,028 and yesterday it sold for $1,612.
well when cards w relatively low pops sell for big prices, esp 10s and pop 1s, people start scouring for 9s to bump.
i remember the 79 rose 10 that went for almost $6k go from a pop 3 to a pop 10 almost overnight.
overnight code for less than a year. which is almost overnight considering it sat at a pop 3 for well over a decade.
the fact that a pop 1 rookie sold for $5k and now is a pop 3 and is now being offered for $4k is not that surprising to me, nor correlated to the nefarious actions of summer-sixteen.
@mortiz said:
So what do you know, in another thread I pointed out how the 1979 Ozzie Smith PSA 10 has been tanking. Now the 1979 Paul Molitor that was a pop 1 that last sold for $5K is now a pop 3 and is listed for $4K or best offer.
People have just been paying for late 1970s cards as if they were in short supply were in reality there are tons of high quality examples still out there to be discovered in factory sealed unopened.
I doubt it will sell for anywhere near to what the original pop 1 sold for. I also looked into a bunch of 1978 cards that had sold for $800-$1000 a year or so ago and now they’re listed for less than $200 and some less than $100.
If you sold during 2016 you did well.
For some people that have too much money to handle I’m sure they don’t care much about longevity of value with some cards they collect but there is no ignoring the facts.
Now if we’re talking about Mantles or other classics that’s with obviously a different story.
I speak for many when I say it feels like we have heard this same exact rhetoric not too long ago on the board. So what you are saying is cards fluctuate in regards to price, and if I want a sweet Murray or Molitor rookie they are now cheaper. I would think as a buyer that would be a good thing, and if you were buying would you want everyone to know they are "tanking" or stay silent and grab good cards on the dip while others run away in fear.
When cards, or stocks, or gold go up or down in price it creates either a buying or a selling opportunity depending on ones position. As for me I would vote for door #2 and buy when prices are down.
@muffins said:
well when cards w relatively low pops sell for big prices, esp 10s and pop 1s, people start scouring for 9s to bump.
i remember the 79 rose 10 that went for almost $6k go from a pop 3 to a pop 10 almost overnight.
overnight code for less than a year. which is almost overnight considering it sat at a pop 3 for well over a decade.
the fact that a pop 1 rookie sold for $5k and now is a pop 3 and is now being offered for $4k is not that surprising to me, nor correlated to the nefarious actions of summer-sixteen.
No it’s not surprising in the least. That’s why it seems silly to me that people pay such high prices for “low pop” cards from years where the pop is constantly increasing and there is publically available factory sealed unopened.
I touched on the 1978 Topps set in previous posts. Decided to look at VCP and see that someone paid $1,400 for a pop 1 common a few years ago that last sold for under $300. For some reason that seems to be a popular year but that kind of price fall in a short period of time just shows that these cards aren’t that rare or valuable.
Back to 1979, the Molitor has ended unsold and a pop 1 common from that year just sold for $1,500! Looks like you’re lucky to get $300 when it becomes a pop 2 and then it plummets to $50-$150 as a pop 3.
These certainly aren’t stable prices or cards to be “investing” so much money in but to each their own I guess. If it were me I’d have a sinking feeling in my stomach if I had paid so much to get a “low pop” card only to see it’s value drop substantially year after year.
Anyone ever see the documentary on the vintage Atari arcade game Donkey Kong called the King of Kong?
This guy who was the best in the world, Billy Mitchell, made a good point about people getting the highest score at certain arcade games by just spending the most quarters and how there’s not a lot of skill in that.
The Willie Stargell 1979 topps card.
I remember when it was a pop 6 card in PSA 9.
Now its a pop 50 in PSA 9.
The problem? Sellers still price it like its a pop 6. $200-300 for BIN's.
But I still don't think i've seen a nicely centered one yet.
This guy who was the best in the world, Billy Mitchell, made a good point about people getting the highest score at certain arcade games by just spending the most quarters and how there’s not a lot of skill in that.
@Darin said:
The Willie Stargell 1979 topps card.
I remember when it was a pop 6 card in PSA 9.
Now its a pop 50 in PSA 9.
The problem? Sellers still price it like its a pop 6. $200-300 for BIN's.
But I still don't think i've seen a nicely centered one yet.
A PSA 10 sold for $2,190 4 years ago. Very nicely centered.
That’s crazy about the PSA 9s. Such wishful thinking.
Comments
Caught up in the hype, or caught up in something else?
Was it truly a buyers group or was it really a sellers group trying to juice the market so they could sell their high-end cards for maximum dollars? Were there some who realized what was happening and took advantage of the situation by simply selling into the apparent "hot" market?
It would not come as a surprise to me if many of the high-priced reported sales were actual purchases by people who got caught up in this instead of unpaid bids from the "buyers" group.
Dave
OMG. sorry I couldn't finish it, my attention span isn't long enough.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
It's a tough call but what had me leaning toward it was a buyers group was how so many of the bids and retractions had been from the same group of buyers.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
There are plenty of wrestling cards I collect that have fallen significantly from their peaks and plenty of others that are up as much as 1000+ percent from a prior recorded sale. The auctions can be highly volatile.
The one card that better fits this discussion is the 1986 Panini Supersport Mike Tyson Italian in a PSA 9. I have five and they went from where you could buy them raw for a $100 or so and the first graded and sold went for over $300 and zoomed all the way up to $1,250. In the past year they have settled back to the $800 to $900 range so a pretty decent pullback. My hope is they stabilize and perhaps one day head back up.
I think you can find loads of examples from various segments of card collecting.
One card I have always thought was cool was the 1961 Fleer Wilt Chamberlain. That card in a PSA 9 could be had for 7k in 2010 and it launched all the way to 37k and a recent copy I see went for 22k. Still up significantly but a big hit.
I think one of the most glaring examples of the correction is the very popular 1984 Topps John Elway. Those are down over 50% from their peak.
If you look around it is pretty easy to see.
Wow just saw your 1982-1983 Wrestling All Stars album, Dpeck. Very nice!
https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/Album/180847
Moreover it appears that these are some of the cards (the premium ones like Andre and Hogan) that have retained their value according to VCP. Perhaps it’s because you are buying them all up lol ... but the Hogan has been very consistent.
I can’t imagine what a PSA 10 might go for for either or those 2. Looking at your album I don’t see the cert numbers for those first 2 cards in VCP at all. Did you self sub them by any chance?
Also, and perhaps somewhat more to the point of this discussion ... if you were not so strongly involved in this area of collecting do you think prices would have been nearly as high as some of them have been? Meaning that perhaps prices have fallen because you got the cards you needed already.
@moritz
The Andre I have is in the SMR liner notes as I over the years have helped PSA with reported sales of the cards from the set. They also seem to pick up sales from PWCC and Probstein on their own. I paid $1,820 for the Andre and the Hogan was purchased privately as well for $1,500. I actually own three PSA 9's with the first being purchased in 2009 for $50 to $75 depending on how you break down the purchase of the set. The second was at $565 after the card had moved up to $1,100 so there was a steep correction after the initial surge.
There is a bounty on the Hogan and Andre's of 25k and 50k that a dealer in CA has a buyer for. I still am skeptical one will ever hit but you never know. The Hogan you see came from a dealer who has been trying so hard to get a Hogan 10 and has a few 9's still that he has had reviewed numerous times to no avail.
I haven't purchased any of the graded copies of either of those two on EBAY in years so I am not responsible for their current prices. I have 20 Hogan's and close to 30 Andre's so I realize I couldn't simply liquidate and not impact the market.
I have certainly contributed to some of the prices in recent years as I actively bid on the cards but have become less and less the under bidder or an influencing bid on many. There are some examples where I have acquired a copy and prices have come down some but there are probably more examples where I might have the top graded copy or copies and it forces the 9 even higher. If you look at the standard sets and not the mega sets you will see I have quite a few complete sets and have a deep bench of some of the top cards in their second best grade and this is by design. I decided to pattern my collection after the person who dominates the Three Stooges sets and I also realize there is variance in a particular grade so I try and acquire the best looking examples I can.
I have paid through the nose for some bums in PSA 10 and the reason the 83 set is so close is I avoided buying many because in many cases you are just throwing good money after bad and bowed out of some auctions. The star cards are always going to be more in demand and as long as you have healthy registry competition the bums will hold but once population totals rise or someone backs out prices fall. I don't want to have too much money tied up in cards like that and more in the more marketable names. A large percentage of the cards I have from the sets were self subbed and I was fortunate to step in big years ago and so I have some serious gains in some areas. The Dusty Rhodes card from the set or the Superstar Graham are probably my two best scores. I have $71 in my two Rhodes 9's and $122 in my PSA 10 that is a Pop 1. I am not selling so it really doesn't matter but I think we can all agree it is nice to look at paper profits. The one thing that is nice about having lots of graded copies of lower priced cards like this is that if they go down it is a lot easier to stomach. I don't mind if a card that is $300 becomes $200 but that would be much more difficult to say if a $30,000 card became $20,000.
My lone toe into the buyer's group waters last summer was selling my PSA 7 '68 Ryan great centering for about 2K through PWCC; I notice if I wanted to buy similar back now, it'd cost me less. Conversely, most of my cards aren't high enough in grade to have experienced the runup much. Around the time of the summer hype (or maybe a bit before) I finally got my Rose rookie I'd wanted for awhile in a 5, just under about $600, and I think similar ones are still going for around that amount more or less.
I could use some "Cliffs notes"
You're better off without, Mike.
Arthur
I think most of us use the term Buyers-Club euphemistically. I don't know anyone purportedly admitting to be a member of this club, nor has anyone acknowledge the club even exists. Admitting to such membership would be paramount to revealing oneself as a schiller, manipulator, or at best, a very shrewd capitalist.
I note a lot of proselytising on the other end of the spectrum. Many members noting their economic prowess of selling high and buying low. Yet, not one noting the dreaded buying high and selling low.
There can't be a manipulator unless there is a manipulatee. We are all better off with knowledge of what is occurring, such as this '71 Aaron. Threads of this nature only help to educate our hobby. We will never stop the schilling, manipulating and greed, but we can prevent ourselves from being manipulatee's.
Collecting Unopened from '72-'83; mostly BBCE certified boxes/cases/racks.
Prefer to buy in bulk.
Mike, you asked.
"I'll buy that card for 2-3X more than what it sold for last month" said no-one that has ever amassed wealth through hard work.
Collecting Unopened from '72-'83; mostly BBCE certified boxes/cases/racks.
Prefer to buy in bulk.
The weird thing to me is that buying groups purchase at a reasonable price to make money
It took TWO people to bid up a 63 Rose psa 8 to $16,000
Why would they bid against each other
it only takes a few piraña to entice the school into a feeding frenzy.
He smells like an ALT...brand new account but knows more than everyone? Hmmmmm
Me thinks there are several on here, and luckily they have been quiet for a while which has made the board a better place for dialogue and discussion about cards and collecting. What I don't comprehend is why would someone get into a hobby that is supposed to be fun, and spend a ton of time talking about the negative aspects of it/promoting a sky is falling attitude? If you are wanting to buy cards and prices are dropping wouldn't it be best to stay quiet and just rack up nice cards at good prices?
KC
in my expierence, not all alts are trolls.
yet, there were alot of non-alts that trolled to get some of these alts booted in the first place.
isnt it ironic? dont ya think?
" it's death row pardon, 2 minutes too late"
I've only been back on CU for a few months now but you seem like you've got your head on straight. You think prewar collectors pay attention to what's going on with high grade Ozzie Smith rookies (yes, I know, there are exceptions to every rule. I'm speaking in generalizations)? You probably spend some time on Net54, right? It's not a different planet from CU but it's certainly a different continent. Turn of the century cabinets, T206, caramel cards, rare backs, Cobb, Ruth, Walter Johnson, these things have a direct correlation with a PSA 10 Eddie Murray rookie from 1978?
Those are two entirely different markets with entirely different participants. Are there people that play in both? Certainly. But if Eddie Murray's rookie loses half its value tomorrow you think it affects the T206 Cobb green portrait?
Arthur
I can't even begin to have the knowledge about market trends as some of you but is it possible with the Rose RC that the price fell due to the recent revelations about his past? I'm not being rhetorical, I'm really asking.
Well you just won this thread. Nicely done.
I think at the time of those revelations (if it bleeds it leads) but I think less so now. In particular, a lot of chickens are coming home to roost for a lot of personalities that I have to imagine never thought their actions would catch up with them, even as they were certainly of the type to claim for themselves the high moral view. I LOL in their general direction.
Are there people that play in both?
of course. because to them, money is money. and a card is a card. (auction houses*)
and in the grand scheme of things, a green t206 cobb isnt that far at all on the family tree from an eddie murray rc.
ie, i'd say 99% of the folks on here (vintage) are familiar w/ n54 (prewar).
the more important question is are there a couple of different groups of guys in each niche doing the same things and using the amonimity of the *auction houses?
If any of you stubbornly held on to your 55 Koufax or Clemente PSA 7's, well, that's a tough one.
its a lil too close to thanksgiving to be acting like some jive-arse turkey!
but i do wish i could cuss on this forum bc id have some choice words for you.
i make my living elsewhere, bud. i didnt contemplate it for one second about cashing in on my ryan 9's when they hit $50k. it wasnt a tough one at all. in fact im proud that i held on to them. shows true love.
now if i had bought one at that price, you might have some sort of validity. but ofcourse, you are you.
dont hear you gloating on all of those other pontifications youve bellowed, though?!?!
but happy thanksgiving though.
I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I don't see the direct correlation between the two.
Arthur
ok, maestro. hit it!
bc as dave mentioned above which hardly went noticed, it was a sellers group.
Gradual appreciation in high quality collectibles is one thing. Artificially driving up prices to unsustainable levels so that one can sell into a rising tide is completely different.
Consider the following questions:
1) What prevented a relatively small number of people from "juicing" the market so they could sell high end cards into it?
2) Wouldn't uninvolved people who recognized such actions occurring be able to innocently sell into the market because they expected that such a "sellers" group would have to support the hype they had created in advance of the "big dog" cards going under the hammer?
3) Wouldn't manipulators benefit from sales venues who, at the very least, could not have missed what they were doing but looked the other way because rising prices also worked to the advantage of the sales venues?
4) Would it be possible to use the semi-anonymized bidder ids available through some sales venues to identify that some people were winning items and then immediately re listing them and bidding on them themselves?
5) Are there sales venues with publicly staked out "high moral ground" positions that were contradicted by their own behaviors with respect to some of the questionable sales activities until questions started to be asked about those transactions?
Given what we collectively experienced together in 2015 and 2016, and armed with questions like these provided above, I am hopeful that manipulative episodes like these can be prevented because it would be easier to recognize if such an effort were attempted.
Dave
We need a special counsel to figure this out!
Being one here without any authority and pretty much without a single ounce of earned respect, I take it upon myself to name the new CU 'Special Counsel'. All here shall seek guidance from the CU Special Counsel, who have ultimate authority. The Counsel makes final decisions on anything, and if there is a split, the counsel puts the issue to the floor.
I hereby name Dpeck, Allen, Stone, and Sdub as the official 1st CU Special Counsel members. My lack of authority rules in this manner.
Almost like a CU illuminati....
What if Dpeck decides to appoint the Crisser as Dictator of the CU boards for life?
There should be safeguards in place to prevent something like that.
There is a much higher probability that if that was the case I would nominate myself as the dictator. LOL
Pretty simple to me.
1.) Card prices go down I can buy more.
2.) Card prices go up my current cards are worth more
See also: stocks, bonds, equities, houses, vintage cars...
Hope everyone has a blessed Thanksgiving and was able to spend it with family and friends, and if you are fortunate to have these things hopefully you were able to share what you have with someone less fortunate.
KC
So what do you know, in another thread I pointed out how the 1979 Ozzie Smith PSA 10 has been tanking. Now the 1979 Paul Molitor that was a pop 1 that last sold for $5K is now a pop 3 and is listed for $4K or best offer.
People have just been paying for late 1970s cards as if they were in short supply were in reality there are tons of high quality examples still out there to be discovered in factory sealed unopened.
I doubt it will sell for anywhere near to what the original pop 1 sold for. I also looked into a bunch of 1978 cards that had sold for $800-$1000 a year or so ago and now they’re listed for less than $200 and some less than $100.
If you sold during 2016 you did well.
For some people that have too much money to handle I’m sure they don’t care much about longevity of value with some cards they collect but there is no ignoring the facts.
Now if we’re talking about Mantles or other classics that’s with obviously a different story.
Please let me know when the price drops come for the 1976 Ed "Too Tall" Jones rookie in PSA 10 pop 8. It sold for between $400 and $725 for years. In March it sold for $1,028 and yesterday it sold for $1,612.
The Doomsday Collection
Dallas Cowboys Ring of Honor | All-Time Dallas Cowboys | Bob Lilly Master | Pro Football HOF Dallas Cowboys
well when cards w relatively low pops sell for big prices, esp 10s and pop 1s, people start scouring for 9s to bump.
i remember the 79 rose 10 that went for almost $6k go from a pop 3 to a pop 10 almost overnight.
overnight code for less than a year. which is almost overnight considering it sat at a pop 3 for well over a decade.
the fact that a pop 1 rookie sold for $5k and now is a pop 3 and is now being offered for $4k is not that surprising to me, nor correlated to the nefarious actions of summer-sixteen.
I speak for many when I say it feels like we have heard this same exact rhetoric not too long ago on the board. So what you are saying is cards fluctuate in regards to price, and if I want a sweet Murray or Molitor rookie they are now cheaper. I would think as a buyer that would be a good thing, and if you were buying would you want everyone to know they are "tanking" or stay silent and grab good cards on the dip while others run away in fear.
When cards, or stocks, or gold go up or down in price it creates either a buying or a selling opportunity depending on ones position. As for me I would vote for door #2 and buy when prices are down.
Yawn
No it’s not surprising in the least. That’s why it seems silly to me that people pay such high prices for “low pop” cards from years where the pop is constantly increasing and there is publically available factory sealed unopened.
I touched on the 1978 Topps set in previous posts. Decided to look at VCP and see that someone paid $1,400 for a pop 1 common a few years ago that last sold for under $300. For some reason that seems to be a popular year but that kind of price fall in a short period of time just shows that these cards aren’t that rare or valuable.
Back to 1979, the Molitor has ended unsold and a pop 1 common from that year just sold for $1,500! Looks like you’re lucky to get $300 when it becomes a pop 2 and then it plummets to $50-$150 as a pop 3.
These certainly aren’t stable prices or cards to be “investing” so much money in but to each their own I guess. If it were me I’d have a sinking feeling in my stomach if I had paid so much to get a “low pop” card only to see it’s value drop substantially year after year.
Anyone ever see the documentary on the vintage Atari arcade game Donkey Kong called the King of Kong?
This guy who was the best in the world, Billy Mitchell, made a good point about people getting the highest score at certain arcade games by just spending the most quarters and how there’s not a lot of skill in that.
It's definitely not surprising that you revived this post... but shocking you don't know that Nintendo made Donkey Kong, not Atari.
Atari was one of the developers. Nice try though!
At least you're on record for not knowing what you're talking about.
Video games aren't my area of expertise by any stretch of the imagination but it looks pretty clear it was Nintendo.
http://time.com/3901489/donkey-kong-anniversary/
The Willie Stargell 1979 topps card.
I remember when it was a pop 6 card in PSA 9.
Now its a pop 50 in PSA 9.
The problem? Sellers still price it like its a pop 6. $200-300 for BIN's.
But I still don't think i've seen a nicely centered one yet.
Good analogy
A PSA 10 sold for $2,190 4 years ago. Very nicely centered.
That’s crazy about the PSA 9s. Such wishful thinking.
So Nintendo made it for the Atari 2600? LOL again, thanks for playing though.