Curious on the T205 lots in Mastros

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Koteles

I was certain that I had won lots 1974 & 1975...the
Cobb & JOhnson T205's ,well...none of the group of
that section is showing the bids of any T205's incl
others, but those lots before & after do....am i a
bonified crack addict or is there something I just
didnt get ????..........HELP !

[Archive]

Posted By: Shawn Adkins

The reason why the individual lots don't show a price is because the set had a higher bid than the combined total of the lots (1960 - 1990. They were working it both ways and the bidding would decide whether the cards were sold in the lots or as a set. I was hoping for a couple of lots myself.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

I bid on a couple of those lots too. They were part of a group of lots that made up a complete set. A person could bid on either individual lots or the set as a whole. If the totals of the individual lots added up to more than the high bid on the set as a whole, then the individual lots would go to the individual winners. However, if the high bidder on the set as a whole bid more than the combined total of the individual lots, then all of the lots would go to that bidder. And that is what happened. So high bidders on individual lots lost to the high bidder on all the combined lots.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

talking about milking a group of cards. Wonder if this is the start of a new trend? I'd really pissed if I was the person with winning bid on the individual lots and then didn't win.

Jay

I like to sit outside, drink beer and yell at people. If I did this at home, I would be arrested. So, I go to baseball games and fit right in.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony

Mastro started this about a year ago and ran a few sets this way- '54 Red Heart, and '59 Ted Williams, and possibly some others.
I refuse to bid on anything that is auctioned like this on general principle.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

I recall when Lipsett initially concluded that frequently with baseball cards the value of the whole is less than the value of the sum of its parts. He termed this the "break factor". It doesn't initially seem right that a set is worth less than the individual cards. But it applies to other things as well, such as automobiles.

If this phenomonon is coming to an end, I applaud it. There is a lot of effort involved in putting a set together, and this effort should have a premium associated with it (some think).

Also it is good to think that collectors consider buying complete sets as an option. In coins, this has been going on for a long time: "You want a set of Buffalo nickles? What grade?"

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Koteles

this does stink !.....I guess had I understood this
and sure somewhere on 60 pages of reading it states it somewhere, well....I definetely would have focused on
2 different lots in comparison price & budget. Not good.

I feel it now was a waste of time and follow up. And
yes Jay....Iam teeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeEEDDIIDID !

These are becomming more complicated and not a true
auction lot. Should be that if a lot is by itself and
you are the high bidder, uh.........dont you win it ???

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

I can understand both sides. If I were the seller of the set, I would want to maximize my potential, but it is frustrating for the bidder on individual lots who will not know until it is potentially too later whether or not s/he should have concetrated on something else instead.
JimB
P.S. Dan, I was the underbidder on that Cobb.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

It seems like the best bet in an auction structured this way is to stay away from the individual lots b/c your chance of winning is dependent on the behavior and decisions of the bidders in many other lots, not just the one you are bidding on. Your fate is not in your own hands so to speak. Everyone has to collectively come up with enough to beat the high bidder on the whole set.

Were the rules shown in each indvidual lot description? I had looked at several, but may have missed it. I see that it is explained in #1959, but would you see it if you hadn't looked at that particular lot?

As to the seller wanting to max out the sale - that is surely true. But desire to get max price does have some limits. Seems like offering the same item to (arguably) two different people at once - the winner of the big lot plus the winner of the individual lot for a given card - should be one of the limits. Shouldn't the auction house be able to make a recommendation for max return? This kind of sounds like "I don't know, let's try it both ways and see."

What would be the reason for any consignor of a set or near set to ever pick one way or the other? Why wouldn't it always be the best-of-both-ways pick? I wonder if the comission was different, or something.

Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Someone said he didn't understand the set discount (price of set is less than the sum of the price of the cards sold singly).

I explained it by giving he following example: Say there is a two card set, one card is of Cowboys wide receiver Michael Irvin and the other is of Green Bay Packers wide reciever player Antonio Freeman. Cowboys fans may only want the Irvin card and may not want to pay anything for the Freeman card. The Packers fan may only want the Freeman card and have no interest in the Irvin. To whichever fan you sell, the set will go for a discounted price as each fan will only pay top dollar for one of the cards. If you broke the set and sold the Irvin card to the Cowboys collector and the Freeman card to the Packers collector, you will get more as you are meeting top demand for each card. The person I told this too was a Packers fan who hated the Cowboys, so he understood quickly.

It works similarly with large sets. No single collector wants each card in a set to the same degree. Type collectors, single player and team collectors by nature aren't interested in purchasing a set other than to get the few or one card needed.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

Yes DRC, however set collectors are the single largest focus in our hobby (as verified in our current poll), their interests may outweigh those of the subinterests which you cited.