$8,105.00

Reid · May 11, 2004 6:28AM

1953 Bowman Color George Shuba #145 PSA 8

spacktrack · May 11, 2004 6:36AM

Another great showing for the 53 Bowmans. Oh, how it must feel to lose an $8000 snipe. Congrats to the winner.

koby · May 11, 2004 6:45AM

amazing

population fifteen 8s and one 9

I wonder how much the PSA 9 is worth.... maybe $50000?

Basilone · May 11, 2004 6:48AM

The scary thing is you could buy a straight PSA 8 1965 Topps set (598 cards) for less than the total bids of the Lockman, Atwell, and Shuba PSA 8 1953 Bowman Color Commons and still have a couple grand left over!!

chrisrenaud · May 11, 2004 6:56AM

can anyone tell me who phm2000 is, just out of curiosity

burrite · May 11, 2004 7:04AM

$50k sounds fair for a pop 1 psa 9...i'd even give someone a 5% discount if they bought all 23 of mine.

acowa · May 11, 2004 7:12AM

Chris,

It's Phil Minard. I have sold some cards to him.

Regards,

Alan

bxb · May 11, 2004 7:17AM

Again this is a great set with widespread interest, as evidenced by the number of bids on high quality cards. My 1953 set is in constant need of upgrades, and these are surprisingly tough to find at 8 or above and with good centering and color.

Live long and prosper.

Basilone · May 11, 2004 7:32AM

<< $50k sounds fair for a pop 1 psa 9...i'd even give someone a 5% discount if they bought all 23 of mine. >>

I was looking for your set....are you on the registry?

uniship · May 11, 2004 7:36AM

phm2000 does not play games when it comes to bidding. He usually gets what he wants - at least when I was selling him 58 psa 8 cards. I was just hoping and praying he would bid on all my cards - he only bid on about 25% of them as I presume that was all he needed. One of ebay's best to say the least.

mikeschmidt · May 11, 2004 8:23AM

FWIW - the PSA 9 may not realize a record price in auction-type format. As discussed in other forums/posts - when you have a low population PSA 8 - the premium is based on the PSA 8, and the PSA 9 does not necessarily realize a significant multiple off of the PSA 8...

Wayne8348 · May 11, 2004 8:27AM

It seems that I picked a great time to start a 53 bowman set!

It's kind of like the stock market - if I buy then you should sell.

Wayne

tribeman · May 11, 2004 8:29AM

In 1994, I sold a set of '53 color bowmans in which looking back, I'm sure at least 33% would have been psa 8's had they been sent in, maybe more. Of the rest, most would have been 7's with a few 5's and 6's, but it was some of the best 53's I've seen. Almost all the commons and minor stars were like they were just out of a pack. In the same deal, I sold a '53 topps Mantle that would have been a high end 6, maybe a 7, and a '33 Goudey Gehrig that would have probably been a 3 or a 4. I wish everyday that I had those cards back.

koby · May 11, 2004 8:30AM

Is fifteen considered "low pop"?

Wayne8348 · May 11, 2004 8:31AM

Koby,

It must be low pop for 53 bowmans.

Wayne

mikeschmidt · May 11, 2004 8:35AM

<< Is fifteen considered "low pop"? >>

Koby:

It depends on the set. For 1955 Bowman - low population is basically anything with a population of 7 and under.

For 1933 Goudey - it can be wildly divergent - despite thousands of graded examples, there are still a handful with populations of 5 and under. I've seen a Critz PSA 7 go for nearly $8,000 in the pasts - I'm sure an 8 would top $20k if/when one would appear publicly.

koby · May 11, 2004 8:51AM

The reason I ask is because when I took a peek at the registry for the 1953 Bowman Color set, I note that there are six complete sets with GPA of 8 or better. Number seven is quickly closing in on completion as well as GPA. But really, there are only these seven guys going for the set in 8 or better.

Now if there are fifteen 1953 Shuba cards, I imagine that these seven collectors will either already have one in their collections or are pursuing one. (The other guys are not even close so I imagine they would not pay that much for commons at this point.) Once this void is filled in these seven sets, this leaves approximately eight in circulation. At that point, is the Shuba card an $8000 card?

The following observations could be true:

1) The registry is not representative of the entire PSA community of collectors. There are many high-graded sets out there that people have not bothered to register. Thus we see intense competition for commons despite the registry suggesting only seven active competitors.

2) When someone wants a card, even if the population report suggests that it will turn up eventually, collectors lack patience to wait for the next one. That combined with very deep pocketsl lead to this kind of spike in prices for commons such as this Shuba card.

tribeman · May 11, 2004 9:02AM

I think there is definitely some over-inflated pop #'s on some cards due to people cracking out and resubmitting the same card, sometimes more than twice to see if it will grade a 9. Same thing on some tough 8's even. This doesn't apply for all cards, but I do think for some, there are actually fewer available out there than the pop report would seem to indicate.

mikeschmidt · May 11, 2004 10:04AM

<< 1) The registry is not representative of the entire PSA community of collectors. There are many high-graded sets out there that people have not bothered to register. Thus we see intense competition for commons despite the registry suggesting only seven active competitors.
>>

Koby - this above statement is true. Many advanced collectors are:

a) Not computer literate
b) Not ego-driven (that's what the Registry is for many - a ranking of my collection or set versus yours....)
c) Not willing to disclose their collections.

Heck - I can name two people that aren't on the registry solely because of divorce proceedings/alimony. There are many on the Registry - but there are many more that are not.

Another item along such lines? How many Wagners are registred. One. How many Wagners are graded? Twenty-three. How many exist? At least double that number. Although the Registry is a lot more than the 1%'ers - please always remember that the true power in this hobby often remains behind the scenes with those collectors whose names you don't know - and many times with collections that are ungraded.

MS

scottsusor · May 11, 2004 10:18AM

<< FWIW - the PSA 9 may not realize a record price in auction-type format. As discussed in other forums/posts - when you have a low population PSA 8 - the premium is based on the PSA 8, and the PSA 9 does not necessarily realize a significant multiple off of the PSA 8... >>

Given PSA's recent tightening of grading standards (whether admitted or not, its happened), I think we can change the references in the above from 9 to 8 and from 8 to 7 for the future.

Scott

mikeschmidt · May 11, 2004 10:21AM

<< 
Given PSA's recent tightening of grading standards (whether admitted or not, its happened), I think we can change the references in the above from 9 to 8 and from 8 to 7 for the future.

Scott >>

Scott - the question is whether it is a one off experience or a definitive change? I would rather argue it is more inconsistency than anything. I had two invoices that were for the February special. One was graded correctly, and the other was graded 75% correctly and 25% inconsistently.... It could be a single grader or so that is causing the problem and not a systematic change.

MS

Basilone · May 11, 2004 11:08AM

<< Given PSA's recent tightening of grading standards (whether admitted or not, its happened), I think we can change the references in the above from 9 to 8 and from 8 to 7 for the future. >>

Who was the head grader back in those days?

toppsgun · May 11, 2004 12:17PM

Yep.

$8,105.00

Comments