Hunt Auctions "Est. Price Range"

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Was anyone else surprised by the number of lots in the Hunt auction today that didn't sell? Looking at lots 700-820 (the prewar cards) it looks like approximately every 3rd lot didn't sell. I don't exactly understand their system, but it seems they reserve lots at something like 80% of their estimated range, and if no bid comes in above that, then they hold the lot. Aside from the "hidden reserve" some of their estimated prices seemed very high, which caused them not to sell.

[Archive]

Posted By: Sean

yeah, i bid on a lot that says it did not sell. That sucks! grrrrrrr
Granted, my bid was almost a 1/4 of their est price range. Lesson learned: no cheap deals through Hunt. Back to ebay now

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Lots 723-819 were their pre-war card offerings in this auction; 97 lots. 42 of those lots went unsold due to hidden reserves not being met.

Sort of feels like a fixed price offering except the prices aren't being disclosed.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

Matt:



That's exactly what it is. I saw a few lots that got through with no apparent reserve. But they do have reserves on very many lots... which are not disclosed.



I believe this holds true for their own pieces as well as at the request of their consignors. This can be frustrating to bidders, as you have demonstrated.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

And won 4 lots but non of which were cards. They blew through the card lots because they were running behind. The auction started at 10:00 and was still going at 6pm. The auctioneer took only a 5 minute break during that whole time. Don't know how he did that. Seemed like the card prices, other than the Kalamazoo Bats, were pretty low. Didn't mention that they weren't selling so that wasn't apparent in the room.

[Archive]

Posted By: jdrum

Was there as well. No sense that there were hidden reserves. If so, I think they suffered the fate of a soft economy with a combination of optimistic estimated values for generally lower grade material.

Well run auction and I agree with Tom, it was a speedway in there!

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I just took a quick look at the prices realized for pre-war cards. They look indicative of the soft market we are in. The items that did not sell (DNS) were quite a few in number. I can empathize with that, unfortunately. I guess no auction house will be immune to some of this kind of behavior in this crappy economy. regards

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I certainly felt the sting of the economy last Thursday night. Not much you can do about it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

There is a big difference between a reserve disclosed while the auction is ongoing and this, where "Didn't mention that they weren't selling so that wasn't apparent in the room." Being able to see all the bids before disclosing if a lot has sold opens a giant black hole.

I always though the point of an auction was to let the market determine the value of a lot. I understand there may be cases where the consignor wants protection, but if approximately half your lots have reserves above market, it doesn't feel like an auction any more. Just my two cents.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

We are in agreement. I can only speak for myself but in our last auction our consignors dictated a lot of the openings and reserves. I know we will be more careful in the future. I would expect to see more of this though, in this economy. I too have a personal issue on bidding on cards where the reserves are not known....but again, each company has to do what they think is best for their business. There is a fine line between taking a loss and not selling something at all..... regards

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Unless you financially have to sell, I think in a down economy the seller is more willing to have an item not sell and hold it for later date. If the economy is doing well, then you are willing to let things fly. From a practical standpoint, if the market is down, I don't know why a seller would have that market dictate his prices, when he can wait and potentially have a better market dictate prices. Thus, the stop gap in the down market is higher minimums and/or reserves. Again, this works if the seller doesn't have to to sell at any given moment.

Buyers of course want the system that allows them to buy things for as cheaply as possible. Sellers don't necessarily subscribe to that system. A free down market dictating prices is what the buyers what, not the sellers. It shouldn't surprise that sellers put up a road blocks in a down market and bidders dislike them.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

"if the market is down, I don't know why a seller would have that market dictate his prices, when he can wait and potentially have a better market dictate prices."

Because the market may not turn around for quite some time?

[Archive]

Posted By: LetsGoBucs

Buyers of course want the system that allows them to buy things for as cheaply as possible. Sellers don't necessarily subscribe to that system. A free down market dictating prices is what the buyers what, not the sellers. It shouldn't surprise that sellers put up a road blocks in a down market and bidders dislike them.
--------------------------------------------

I don't have any issue with sellers wanting to sell their items for a certain price. There are many mechanisms to do that.....they can consign the item to a dealer, they can place the item for sale through several channels at a set price, etc.

What I strongly object to is the notion that my time is worthless.....and that is what Hunt Auctions said to me with their most recent auction. It wasn't an auction IMO.

Regards,

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I agree with your truth in advertising point. An advertised auction should be an auction. At some point, if there are too many unmet and unreasonable reserves and minimums, the auction feels more like a sale than an auction. The Graduate is a fine movie, but viewers answering the theatre's ad for Chinatown are anticipating that Chinatown will be shown.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jamie

I believe this is actually common practice in the art world. At Christie's, recently 2/3's of the paintings did not meet estimates. Christie's had already guaranteed money to all the consigners, so they got it pretty bad.

I wouldn't be totally surprised if the baseball card world moved in this direction in the future (I wouldn't like it either, just wouldn't be totally surprised). Sure hope it doesn't.

It seems like almost all card prices are getting bitten by the economy. On average, perhaps 10-15% off? My guess is that pre-war vintage material has actually been affected the least, and that modern cards will get hammered the most.

Once the cash begins to dry up, it could get really ugly. My mother works for Christie's, and she said that only stuff hitting its estimates were things that were really, truly rare. I believe that is the case for cards as well. Very rare items will always do a better job of holding their value.

On the plus side, I did some research on different markets that were kind of fringe markets of items that were sold at Christie's in the last month - rare guns, antique furniture, musical instruments, and ancient manuscripts. Like baseball cards, these are all items with very specific markets.

I noticed that most of the guns, furniture and instruments hit their estimates. The manuscripts even sold for far more than their estimates. This is probably a good sign for the card market.

A more interesting example is the African Art Market. A lot of the more valuable items hit or doubled their estimates, but the pedestrian items such as masks, which are a dime a dozen, went about 33% below their estimates.

This is what I believe will happen to the card market. I believe you will see cards like, say, a 1968 Topps Mickey Mantle PSA 8, of which there are 753 of in the population report, lose considerable value. Meanwhile, very rare cards may continue to be chased.

Just my opinion.

Regards,

Jamie

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob C

I won the Police Gazette Boxing Lot for well below my estimated market price. Good news bad news.
Dynamics are shifting in many arenas to be sure, but I'm not sure what to make of this just yet. Is it a buying opportunity or a trap?
I used to say people are feeling poorer. Now I say people ARE poorer.
I remain cautiously optomistic - looking for what I hope to be opportunities to add to my collection and for resale.
But hey, that's just me.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jamie

Bob,

I believe it is a value trap. The old adage is, "never catch a falling knife". Unless you can identify types of cards that are showing positive momentum in this distressed market, I would avoid.

Just my humble opinion.

Regards,

Jamie

(In the interest of full disclosure, I just purchased two T206 PSA 8's with rare backs, which I believe have shown some recent positive momentum).

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcyleback

It's best not to catch a knife whichever direction it's moving.

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

The Kalamazoo Bat Harry Wright seemed to do ok.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bobby Binder

They got some insane prices for the T205

$2900 for a SGC 40 Baker

$1300 for a SGC 50 Chance

They don't show the backs of these cards but the front look pristine. That is the only reason I can see for these values, very misleading by the auction company because in this grade they only sell for a couple hundred each at most.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I would be careful about talking about "misleading" concerning descriptions of these 2 cards. Both have common backs but if you had looked at the auction you would know that both of these cards look like NRMT-MT on the front and both are said to have light residue on the backs, which account for their lower technical grade. Someone bought the cards and not the holders.......Nothing misleading at all.....TO me the prices were a little high on these 2 but they are spectacular cards....For the record I have no affiliation at all with Hunt Auctions.....though I do bid in some of their auctions. regards

ps...this is also why I have repeatedly said that realized prices without scans are almost worthless....(at least to me)

[Archive]

Posted By: Bobby Binder

Leon,

What did I say that was bad?

"They don't show the backs of these cards but the front look pristine." To me by only showing a scan of the front which looked perfect and not the problems on the back of the cards is misleading.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Hunt did not show the backs in the catalog but that did not mean you could not request scans or see the cards for themselves. I saw the backs of the T205s and don't feel they were described consistently with their condition. Residue is not the word that was used. Toning is the word that was used. The entire backs of the cards looked like they were darkly stained with coffee and could in fact be tobacco but in all likelihood is glue residue. Some of the ungraded examples had significant paper loss and even with the first layers of paper missing the staining was present.

These were not purchased by a collector but someone who is going to see if the stains can be removed and the cards get placed into SGC or PSA NM-MT holders.

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

The lot of 12 back-stained T205 HOFers (lot 762) did not meet the hidden reserve in their last live auction 6 months ago and was re-offered in this one, where it, again, failed to meet the hidden reserve.

I'm curious how their hidden reserves work at the live event - their TOS say they open the bidding at the increment above the second highest absentee bid, but that would open them to selling below their reserve to a present live bidder, unless, they had a reserve/shill account that they bid from to drive up the live bidder to ensure it ended above the reserve price.

I have a call in to Dave Hunt to clarify their policies.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Since the backs had the issues they should have been shown.....I can agree that that was something they should have done....I used the word residue from memory but if they said toning then so be it....Good luck to whomever tries to get the backs cleaned up....They are really nice fronts......

[Archive]

Posted By: MikeB

I also attended the auction. One of the people there told me the toning was due to the cards
being housed in a display for years with a wood backing, and they felt the tone was due to wood.
I don't know if this can be removed, but the fronts of the cards were almost perfect.

Mike

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

If the cards had "slat burns", the term used for an object that is discolored from being in contact with wood, they are almost impossible to remove. If the buyer is faced with that he is not going to be happy with his purchase.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

Matt...

Please let us know what David Hunt says, once you've spoken with him. For the lots with reserves... my belief has always been that the auctioneer starts the bidding with the high absentee bid, and then "the house" bids against floor/phone bidders until the reserve has been met.

Once the reserve is met, the "house" stops bidding. If the reserve is not met, it is simply a "no sale".

Also... a friend of mine (who is close to David) told me that when there is a reserve, it is usually the low estimate within the range posted in their catalogs. Hopefully David will clarify for you, as I have wondered about this for some time as well.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

and they were incredible cards. BUT.........cards with back stains as Greg said. Otherwise, they'd minimally been 7's, 8's, 9's. I'd agree that someone is going to attempt something on those backs to move them into much higher holders. Who knows......science is ever evolving..........couple of them were bought by people in the room.

The Harry Wright Kbats card was absolutely stunning card. Looked undergraded at a 4 but as we know SGC does tend to grade tightly. I thought could have been a 6 from a cursory glance but I didn't look at it really closely.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Barry said,
"I certainly felt the sting of the economy last Thursday night. Not much you can do about it."

I did not notice it on the card I won or the several I lost. E94 prices were strong.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: quan

yea jim, i even had the winning bid on the e94 young but lost (someone was there first)...and i refused to be the first to push an e94 young 30 over the 2k mark.

[Archive]

Posted By: Evan

I had consigned a consigned a couple of items to the auction. Although I did not request a reserve I was happy with the results. With the present financial climate, I think that those consigners who may have bought at the high point are trying to recoup their "investment" before things get any worse. The auction house may allow the consigners to set a minimum sale price. It may seem annoying to the bidders, but the auction house does "work" for the seller. Many auction houses don't care about their consigners, maybe we should appreciate the fact that Hunt seems to. Just one mans opinion.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Jim and Quan: the E94's were the strongest segment of the auction. The other areas were pretty soft, with of course some lots doing well.

[Archive]

Posted By: Fred C

In an effort to have everyone understand the bidding I think that auction houses should either set the minimum bid as the reserve or let everyone know which lots may have a reserve price that has to be met. My rationale for this is simple. Lots of us aren't made of money and we bid in auctions based on what we have to spend. Maybe I'm not going to bid on something because I feel the $2K that I have on one card may be the winning bid so I forgo bidding on other lots. If I knew there was a reserve price and I didn't meet it then I might bid on other lots because the $2K is not a potential obligation as a winning bid.

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

I consigned a lot but don't remember giving him a reserve on it yet it DNS.

I have always been under the assumption that the house bids against the floor until the reserve is met and then the house stops. I won my Orange Bordered Cobb from one of David's live auctions years ago and I knew it was his personal card so I knew I was bidding against him. It got to what he wanted for it and he stopped and I won it for significantly less than I was willing to pay.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob D.

Dan,

If the scenario you described with the Cobb -- assuming there was no stated reserve -- happened on eBay, it would be called "shilling."

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

It might be called shilling, but Ebay allows reserves as well. People often find themselves bidding against the Ebay reserve, rather than against other bidders.

Seeing that the dynamics of a live auction are different than Ebay, I simply perceive Hunts' method as a different way of getting to the reserve. I can understand why some people might find it deceiving, but they do it to protect consignors.

On the last batch of consignments I sent to Hunt's, they suggested reserves on 4 of the 7 items. I think they do it for most items valued over $500, and don't bother with reserves on less-expensive lots. That has been my experience, anyway.

[Archive]

Posted By: jdrum

Mark,
I see your point, but on ebay you bid against the reserve but the house (ebay) doesn't bid back do they until the reserve is met (if that is in fact what happens here, I don't know).

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob D.

Mark,

If there's a reserve in an eBay listing and I place a bid that doesn't meet it, I really don't care if someone shills me higher; if I don't meet the reserve, I'm not liable to pay the price of my bid. Plus, legitimate reserves on eBay are not hidden. It clearly states in the listing "Reserve not met."

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

I think I know what Mark means. On Ebay, say the opening bid is $10 and the reserve is $100, and you bid $120. No one else bids the entire auction. For the duration, the auction will show the actual bid at $10 and "reserve not met". But upon auction closing, your bid will be put in at the reserve price and you will win the item at $100.

Hence, you are bidding against the reserve.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

It's just a different method to get you up to the consignor's lowest accepted price. Nobody forces you to keep bidding against the house (if the price exceeds your parameters), and are able to stop at any time.

As far as Hunt's hidden reserves vs. Ebay's stating "reserve not met"... I personally assume that ALL of Hunts lots have the hidden reserve (and that the reserve is equal to the low estimate given within the range). I don't think there are any blockbuster bargains, like in the old days.

Like you guys, I would prefer full disclosure as a bidder. But I really appreciate the reserves as a consignor. I remember 8 or 9 years ago (before the "reserve" days), consigning a late 1940s All Star Game Pennant that sold for about $65. This was one that I bought for close to $500. So there are certainly both pros and cons to having the reserves.

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Since they know your absentee bid, what stops them from bidding you up until one slot below your max and saying that was the hidden reserve? Hunt has a decent reputation and I'm not saying they do this, but the slope is a slick one.

Also, as a bidder, especially on items that are unique, sometimes you are more comfortable bidding on something when you know there is someone else willing to bid one increment below you. It's a security in case you need to sell, you have knowledge that someone else out there was willing to pay about what you were.

[Archive]

Posted By: Fred C

Jim,

Are you sure that's how ebay reserve auctions work? I always thought that once you bid the reserve price the bid automatically goes to the minimum reserve amount. In other words, if the reserve is $100 and you bid $120 the bid amount will go to $100 and you still have $20 more in bids in case someone else bids higher.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

Matt:

That's the best argument yet, as your fate relies completely upon trusting the Auction House. I hate it when I win something for the full amount of my ceiling bid... it creates suspicion, and that has happened quite a lot more often as of late.

I tend to trust Hunt's in this regard, but would NEVER leave high ceiling bids with AMI or Grey Flannel.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Fred,



I'm not 100% sure. Call it 90%. I remember it happening to me once about a year ago. I was surprised when the bid jumped at the end.

Edited to say- I just re-read their policies which are nearly unintelligible. I'm lowering my "sureness %" to 70%.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob D.

I think Fred is correct: When you place a bid in an eBay reserve listing, and your bid matches or surpasses the reserve, the high bid becomes the reserve price immediately.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Well, I certainly could be wrong. (Just ask my wife.)

So if the opening bid is $10, the reserve is $100, and I bid $120 the bid instantly jumps to $100?

But if I bid $50 (well below the reserve) the bid stays at $10?

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob D.

Jim, unless things have changed recently on eBay, your examples are correct.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

Fred and Rob are correct. As the reserve is met, the new bid stands only at the exact dollar amount of the reserve which was set... no matter how much higher the amount of the actual bid that was placed.

[Archive]

Posted By: Fred C

Jim,

If you bid below the reserve price then the auction will work as normal (as you described in your last post). The auction will also let bidders know that the reserve price has not been met. Once the reserve price is equaled or exceeded the auction will automatically change the high bid to the minimum reserve price.