Matty Portrait SGC 5 for $4k+

[Touch'EmAll]

Also odd was the ending result bid for the T206 W. Johnson portrait PSA 1.5 that went for $1,650.

On ebay recently a PSA 1 went for $375. And there is currently up on ebay a PSA 2 with BIN for $1,299.99

So, is someone really buying the PSA 1.5 for $1,650. and passing on the PSA 2 for $1,299.99 ?

[3-2-count]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

Also odd was the ending result bid for the T206 W. Johnson portrait PSA 1.5 that went for $1,650.

On ebay recently a PSA 1 went for $375. And there is currently up on ebay a PSA 2 with BIN for $1,299.99

So, is someone really buying the PSA 1.5 for $1,650. and passing on the PSA 2 for $1,299.99 ?

Curious. What is the eye appeal of the Psa 1 and Psa 2 example you mention? The Psa 1.5 in PWCC last night was stellar for the grade, thus the ending price.

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by 3-2-count

Curious. What is the eye appeal of the Psa 1 and Psa 2 example you mention? The Psa 1.5 in PWCC last night was stellar for the grade, thus the ending price.

I actually took a look at both, and I can certainly understand why someone would pay more for the 1.5 over the 2.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

I actually took a look at both, and I can certainly understand why someone would pay more for the 1.5 over the 2.

I've noticed that there are more and more lower graded cards selling for big money these days.

The new REA catalog is full of them.

Could it be that Net54's BST has enough clout to change shopping habits?

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

I've noticed that there are more and more lower graded cards selling for big money these days.

The new REA catalog is full of them.

Could it be that Net54's BST has enough clout to change shopping habits?

I think you're spot on with your observations.

And I also believe in the premise that N54 has a big influence on pricing trends.

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

Also odd was the ending result bid for the T206 W. Johnson portrait PSA 1.5 that went for $1,650.

On ebay recently a PSA 1 went for $375. And there is currently up on ebay a PSA 2 with BIN for $1,299.99

So, is someone really buying the PSA 1.5 for $1,650. and passing on the PSA 2 for $1,299.99 ?

It’s ALL about the eye appeal. People rather have an extremely nice 1.5 (with a negligible technical defect that lowers the grade) than a borderline eye appeal 2 or 3. That is EXACTLY where the hobby has leaned towards. Bottom line is VCP is useless without an image.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Vintageclout

Bottom line is VCP is useless without an image.

+1

[bounce]

VCP has images, they aren't hard to get. Here you go.

I feel like the price for the SGC was too high. Market value for their "holders" isn't really the same, and in these mid grades there are often flaws that PSA probably downgrades. I know I'm speaking broadly, but I think most that try and cross would tell you the same thing - expectation from SGC to PSA should normally be a grade lower. There are exceptions, and this might be one.

As someone who collects T206 portraits I can say the Matty is a tough one to find in the mid-grades that really ticks all the boxes. I've owned 4-5 of them at different times between 3-6, but don't currently have one as I still have not found the right one.

I don't think the auction bidding looks all that suspect, the winner put in two bids. One at $100, one to win.


This one sold in REA in May for $3,600
Registration is off, centering is good, color is really good



This one sold in PWCC in April for $3471, and in PWCC in February before that (...no additional comment) for $3018
Registration is really good, centering is great but color isn't quite as vivid



This one sold in Memory Lane in January for $2827
Registration is a little off, centering is great and color is great



This on sold in Goldin last November for $3300, and in PWCC in March 2017 for $3450 (oops...)
Registration is a little off, centering is great and color is great



And the SGC 5 Certified High End for $4209
Registration is great, centering is great, color is great

[Throttlesteer]

My original point was really focused on the continued escalation of the T206 "big boys". But, you have to be careful comparing color from different scans. There's a lot of variability in scanners, as well as how much an image has been processed to look good. You can tell a lot just looking at the differences in border colors on the PSA flips.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Throttlesteer

My original point was really focused on the continued escalation of the T206 "big boys". But, you have to be careful comparing color from different scans. There's a lot of variability in scanners, as well as how much an image has been processed to look good. You can tell a lot just looking at the differences in border colors on the PSA flips.

Yeah I have made this point time and again when people compare 52T Mantles. It drives me crazy when you see an obviously nuked scan and people ooh and aah at the color.

[bounce]

STRING BIDDING - I know a lot about this because Brent and I talked about it as I was doing it as they define it, and they asked me about it. It's still one of the least understood bidding practices out there. I don't agree with their policy, but I understand why it exists.

PWCC defined it as bumping the minimum bid multiple times without actually taking the lead. I understand how it could look odd when you can't see the names and broader bidding history, but without that you don't have all the facts or context. This was one of the big downsides of eBay not displaying the user IDs in the bid history.

For me, it's strategic to help manage my time bidding. I bid on literally hundreds if not thousands of items every week, so sniping isn't effective but I also don't want to have to come back to everything. Those "string bids" helped me rule out somewhere between 10-25% of auctions.

I wanted to either (1) get right behind the high bidder on something I really did want to win, or (2) drop out from any continued bidding because the high bid was sufficiently higher than I would want to pay. I normally did this a day or two prior to auction end to rule some auctions out, but sometimes did it late in the auction on things I really was trying to win.

When you're already high bidder in an auction, you don't have much incentive to bump your bid higher unless you've been outbid. If you know someone else is right there, it may put you to the test sooner - which for me is good because it helps me rule some things out so I could focus elsewhere.

Maybe other people did it to shill, but for me it was mostly time management.

[MichelaiTorres83]

I think the psa 5 in 2017 is the nicest. The corners are sharper.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by MichelaiTorres83

I think the psa 5 in 2017 is the nicest. The corners are sharper.

+1

[boneheadandrube]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

+1

I think they are the exact same card...

[bounce]

Originally Posted by boneheadandrube

I think they are the exact same card...

I had thought the same thing, but wanted to see what others thought before I said anything. I suspect this was a crossover that didn't go as expected, and then did.

Couple of final thoughts

1) The price didn't bother me because it was $500 higher than the last one, but because it was 50% higher than a comparable card from 9 months ago. That's a big increase.

2) If it is the same card (and sure seems like it is), anyone else think it's weird that it WAS NOT Certified High End the first time PWCC sold it, but it was this time?

[MichelaiTorres83]

I suppose it is possible it is the same card. The images are a tad fuzzy on my phone.

[Andrew1975]

This thread has been particularly interesting (and entertaining) to me, due to the fact that I am the buyer of the card. The price was high, but not insane in my opinion, and I am happy with the purchase. I researched past sales carefully to determine a price that I was comfortable with. For me, it simply came down to the fact that this particular card (IMO) had significantly better eye appeal than other recent mid grade sales (listed on VCP), and I bid accordingly. Incidentally, I think the SGC 5 card that I purchased last night and the PSA 5 card (posted above by bounce) with cert # ending in 146 are the same card. Contrast is definitely different in the scans, but appears to be the same card... I am a collector, with no intention of selling the card, and could not care less about the PWCC sticker (that I will probably remove), or set registries. Mid grade T206 portraits of elite HOFers, that are very well centered with good color and registration, just aren’t that easy to find, and I knew that I would have to bid strong to have a chance of winning the card. I bid twice on the card. Once at $100 (which was pretty pointless), and the final bid that I placed with about 10 seconds left in the auction. I hope that there was no shilling, but I guess it is always possible in an online auction. This was definitely no bargain purchase, but I am happy to have won the card and look forward to getting it in hand and adding it to my collection. I appreciate all the comments in this thread, including those that say I way overpaid. Thanks all!

Andrew

[RedsFan1941]

Originally Posted by Andrew1975

This thread has been particularly interesting (and entertaining) to me, due to the fact that I am the buyer of the card. The price was high, but not insane in my opinion, and I am happy with the purchase. I researched past sales carefully to determine a price that I was comfortable with. For me, it simply came down to the fact that this particular card (IMO) had significantly better eye appeal than other recent mid grade sales (listed on VCP), and I bid accordingly. Incidentally, I think the SGC 5 card that I purchased last night and the PSA 5 card (posted above by bounce) with cert # ending in 146 are the same card. Contrast is definitely different in the scans, but appears to be the same card... I am a collector, with no intention of selling the card, and could not care less about the PWCC sticker (that I will probably remove), or set registries. Mid grade T206 portraits of elite HOFers, that are very well centered with good color and registration, just aren’t that easy to find, and I new that I would have to bid strong to have a chance of winning the card. I bid twice on the card. Once at $100 (which was pretty pointless), and the final bid that I placed with about 10 seconds left in the auction. I hope that there was no shilling, but I guess it is always possible in an online auction. This was definitely no bargain purchase, but I am happy to have won the card and look forward to getting it in hand and adding it to my collection. I appreciate all the comments in this thread, including those that say I way overpaid. Thanks all!

Andrew

back in my lurking days, i read many posts from a former member who would come on here the day after an auction and bemoan the crazy high price a piece of Negro League memorabilia or a HOF rookie card sold for. i mean he would nearly call the buyer stupid. then as these threads evolved, it would turn out the member more often than not was the underbidder. so his bid wasn't idiotic. only the person who went one click higher was.

the moral of the story is it's easy to criticize other people's purchases when they don't fit your perception of what's acceptable. more often than not these people find themselves doing more bitching than buying.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Andrew1975

This thread has been particularly interesting (and entertaining) to me, due to the fact that I am the buyer of the card. The price was high, but not insane in my opinion, and I am happy with the purchase. I researched past sales carefully to determine a price that I was comfortable with. For me, it simply came down to the fact that this particular card (IMO) had significantly better eye appeal than other recent mid grade sales (listed on VCP), and I bid accordingly. Incidentally, I think the SGC 5 card that I purchased last night and the PSA 5 card (posted above by bounce) with cert # ending in 146 are the same card. Contrast is definitely different in the scans, but appears to be the same card... I am a collector, with no intention of selling the card, and could not care less about the PWCC sticker (that I will probably remove), or set registries. Mid grade T206 portraits of elite HOFers, that are very well centered with good color and registration, just aren’t that easy to find, and I knew that I would have to bid strong to have a chance of winning the card. I bid twice on the card. Once at $100 (which was pretty pointless), and the final bid that I placed with about 10 seconds left in the auction. I hope that there was no shilling, but I guess it is always possible in an online auction. This was definitely no bargain purchase, but I am happy to have won the card and look forward to getting it in hand and adding it to my collection. I appreciate all the comments in this thread, including those that say I way overpaid. Thanks all!

Andrew

I worry that while you paid what you were WILLING to pay, you paid more than you HAD to pay. If you're happy that's great, but would you be happier if it was $800 cheaper?

[Andrew1975]

Yes, obviously. Since I want to continue to participate in the hobby, and since I typically seek out the type of cards that appear mainly in larger online auctions, I choose to bid what I am willing to pay, and hope for the best.

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

I worry that while you paid what you were WILLING to pay, you paid more than you HAD to pay. If you're happy that's great, but would you be happier if it was $800 cheaper?

[bounce]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

I worry that while you paid what you were WILLING to pay, you paid more than you HAD to pay. If you're happy that's great, but would you be happier if it was $800 cheaper?

not really, considering there was an underbidder that was $50 less

or is that a bogus bid? that bidder dropped in $1600 earlier on so doesn't really seem nefarious

it's really RedFan's fault, considering if he had just passed the other bidder would have won the card at just over $3700 and then we're not talking about it

it's a great card, and it's not an easy find in that grade with that eye appeal

it was steep, but we've gotten a reasonable explanation as to what happened, which is actually kind of cool if you ask me

if you're building a collection of cards like this, you'll never miss that $500 - just make it up somewhere else

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by bounce

not really, considering there was an underbidder that was $50 less

or is that a bogus bid? that bidder dropped in $1600 earlier on so doesn't really seem nefarious

it's really RedFan's fault, considering if he had just passed the other bidder would have won the card at just over $3700 and then we're not talking about it

it's a great card, and it's not an easy find in that grade with that eye appeal

it was steep, but we've gotten a reasonable explanation as to what happened, which is actually kind of cool if you ask me

if you're building a collection of cards like this, you'll never miss that $500 - just make it up somewhere else

Good point, but still if a bunch of bogus bids aren't entered it could have affected the final number.

[DeanH3]

Andrew - Congrats on a FANTASTIC acquisition. Well done. You will not regret that purchase one bit. I have over-paid for most of my collection and now glad I bought them when I did.

[QUOTE=bounce;1819999]VCP has images, they aren't hard to get. Here you go.

I feel like the price for the SGC was too high. Market value for their "holders" isn't really the same, and in these mid grades there are often flaws that PSA probably downgrades. I know I'm speaking broadly, but I think most that try and cross would tell you the same thing - expectation from SGC to PSA should normally be a grade lower. There are exceptions, and this might be one.

David - While I don't completely disagree with your sentiment. And I know you are speaking more in a general sense, however, I do believe that PSA is intentionally harder on crossovers. I've seen too many stories where a card is rejected in its slab, but have a very high rate of success once it's submitted raw.

Also, PSA and SGC are tougher on different flaws so their grades reflect that. We also know there a many PSA cards out there that wouldn't even receive the same grade today due to their tightening the screws. So de-valuing any SGC card graded years ago because it won't cross isn't completely fair because many PSA cards would fail as well.

I guess my main point is using the blanket sentiment that SGC cards should be viewed a 1 grade lower is not entirely fair. Each card is it's own unique situation. Many are worthy and many are not. Tough to put a percentage on it.

As someone who collects T206 portraits I can say the Matty is a tough one to find in the mid-grades that really ticks all the boxes. I've owned 4-5 of them at different times between 3-6, but don't currently have one as I still have not found the right one.

This I am in total agreement. Many of the top tier portraits are tough to find that check all the boxes. I think collectors are really honing in on that. I couldn't be happier with my 4.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

Also odd was the ending result bid for the T206 W. Johnson portrait PSA 1.5 that went for $1,650.

On ebay recently a PSA 1 went for $375. And there is currently up on ebay a PSA 2 with BIN for $1,299.99

So, is someone really buying the PSA 1.5 for $1,650. and passing on the PSA 2 for $1,299.99 ?

I think most people would take the 1.5 over the 2 even at the higher price.

Johnson 1.5.jpgJohnson 2.jpg

and that's not paper loss on the left border of the 1.5 is a print
flaw that is found on a few Johnson Portraits.

Johnson Border Flaw.jpg

[boneheadandrube]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I think most people would take the 1.5 over the 2 even at the higher price.

Attachment 331502Attachment 331503

and that's not paper loss on the left border of the 1.5 is a print
flaw that is found on a few Johnson Portraits.

Attachment 331504

That does look like paper loss to me