Anyone follow the Hunt auction today?

[hcv123]

HOLY CRAP!! Some of the prices were NUTS!! For Common midgrade post war cards. Blown away - some of the prewar was off the charts also. Who are all these bidders!!??

[moeson]

A 1969 set with several trimmed cards, including the Jackson rookie, went for $11K!

[jayshum]

I was bidding on some of the T3 lots. I was able to win one of them even though it went a little higher than I was hoping. Some of the others ended up much higher than seemed reasonable to me.

[sflayank]

Yes howard I watched
Mid grade 60s sets selling for ridiculous #s
That 69 set should have been 1100 not 11000
Crazy

[jayshum]

My 69 Topps set is probably worth around $1100. I wish I could find someone to pay $11K for it.

[toppcat]

Some sets seem almost in line, others are just nuts. WTF?

[sflayank]

I would like to know what people's theories are on this set selling for 11k + the bp
In order for it to get there, there also has to be at least 1 underbidder at 10k
Based on the description of cards including the trimmed cards, which included the jackson rookie and no white letters
You could purchase this set at the national from 20 different dealers for 2000 and under with no problem
In fact his estimate was 1000-2000
What do you guys attribute this price to?
I'll post my theory later

[hcv123]

The set is but a single example of cards (many of them common available cards) selling for 20%-100% higher than recent sales. I have no theory - I am just dumbfounded.

[puckpaul]

Only explanation is new collectors/investors entering the market who are panic buying what they like because prices are exploding on many cards, and there is just too much money around.

[cardsagain74]

The '67 set went for 4500, which actually seems a bit low in the current market (given how nice it seemed).

Something has to be up with that 11 k '69 price.

[Exhibitman]

Is it possible that Hunt has a cadre of bidders who simply don't follow the market?

[sflayank]

What does everyone think of this theory
Auction houses in general set aside a number of lots
That don't really sell at these outrageous prices in order to advertise those prices, in order to get more consignments

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by sflayank

What does everyone think of this theory
Auction houses in general set aside a number of lots
That don't really sell at these outrageous prices in order to advertise those prices, in order to get more consignments

I would think particularly for the big houses that the risk of getting found doing that outweighs the benefit. There also seem to be plenty of legit sales that are "bragging" fodder for the bugger houses.

[Gorditadogg]

I bet it was two fat finger bids. One guy bid $10,000 instead of $1,000 and the next guy bid $11,000 instead of $1,100. It wouldn't be the first time.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[cannonballsun]

Originally Posted by hcv123

I would think particularly for the big houses that the risk of getting found doing that outweighs the benefit. There also seem to be plenty of legit sales that are "bragging" fodder for the bugger houses.

That didn't seem to stop Mastro, and they were maybe the biggest at the time. So it's possible.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by hcv123

There also seem to be plenty of legit sales that are "bragging" fodder for the bugger houses.

"Bugger houses"

Love it!