Heritage “estimates”

[Snapolit1]

Great Heritage auction ending tomorrow, but damm some of their pre-auction estimates seem, shall we say, a bit aspirational. I’m looking at an item with a $40,000 estimate that I will bet money won’t get half of that, and maybe well less than 50%. I can’t imagine this is not intentional.

[obcmac]

I did actually laugh when I saw $400 estimate for the m116 Waddell with all the borders trimmed off. That would be a healthy price for such a card.

[parkplace33]

All part of of the “selling”

[Rhotchkiss]

I believe that the amount agreed upon for insurance purposes must be the same as their estimate. Many of these items were taken to the National, meaning the likelihood of theft, loss, damage was increased. So, perhaps the estimates in this auction are high to ensure insurance coverage in case of a best western plus, or similar, situation.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

I believe that the amount agreed upon for insurance purposes must be the same as their estimate. Many of these items were taken to the National, meaning the likelihood of theft, loss, damage was increased. So, perhaps the estimates in this auction are high to ensure insurance coverage in case of a best western plus, or similar, situation.

What insurance company would agree to pay significantly more than something is worth just because the owner claims that's the value?

[Rhotchkiss]

I don’t know the answer to your question. All I am doing is stating what I think I was once told (I think by Heritage), which, if accurate, could provide some justification for OPs point/question. No clue if it’s correct, no clue if an insurance company would honor the estimate, no clue about anything else

[bobbvc]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Great Heritage auction ending tomorrow, but damm some of their pre-auction estimates seem, shall we say, a bit aspirational. I’m looking at an item with a $40,000 estimate that I will bet money won’t get half of that, and maybe well less than 50%. I can’t imagine this is not intentional.

I need to start collecting whatever it is you're looking at. What I'm bidding on will be double it's estimate if I give it another bid.

[paul]

In the past, estimates were always low so that the auction house could claim they beat the estimated value. Has that changed?

[molenick]

At least on the items I bid on, the opening bid is always 1/4 of the estimate. I'm not sure if that explains how they come up with the estimates...it's just something I noticed.

[pureball22]

Originally Posted by bobbvc

I need to start collecting whatever it is you're looking at. What I'm bidding on will be double it's estimate if I give it another bid.

Totally agree bobbvc...many lots are above estimates if not more than half of them. For instance, the Mint 9 1962 Topps Mantle went for almost $500,000 while the estimate was $300,000- up. Auction houses do their best to get the best prices for consigners, not scare away bidders. Mr. Market has the final say and based on results so far, I would say the market/hobby is healthy.

[GasHouseGang]

What did Heritage estimate the 2007 UD Dual Logo Kobe/Jordan would sell for? I'm going to guess it was not even close to the final hammer price.

[Leon]

Some estimates go high, some go low. When I sold my first collection through Heritage they were within about 2%-3% of what they told me it would sell for. Not bad with over 500-600 lots.
.

[Bicem]

Anyone else surprised by the Ruth rookie photo that was a 1940's type-2 print that went for $22k?? Estimate was $5k I believe.

[scooter729]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

What did Heritage estimate the 2007 UD Dual Logo Kobe/Jordan would sell for? I'm going to guess it was not even close to the final hammer price.

They had the estimate at $6M+, and as of earlier on the final day, it was right on the money. It doubled in the last several hours to the $12.9M price.

(I assumed the $6M+ estimate was insane when I saw it early during the listing, and figured it wouldn't get halfway there. A good reminder why I don't dabble in modern.)

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by jayshum

What insurance company would agree to pay significantly more than something is worth just because the owner claims that's the value?

I imagine they'd be happy to sell the policy with higher premiums as long as they retain the right to careful scrutinize any suspicious losses prior to paying out.

[GasHouseGang]

Originally Posted by scooter729

They had the estimate at $6M+, and as of earlier on the final day, it was right on the money. It doubled in the last several hours to the $12.9M price.

(I assumed the $6M+ estimate was insane when I saw it early during the listing, and figured it wouldn't get halfway there. A good reminder why I don't dabble in modern.)

I too would have thought $6M+ as overly optimistic. I guess we both would be wrong.

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by Bicem

Anyone else surprised by the Ruth rookie photo that was a 1940's type-2 print that went for $22k?? Estimate was $5k I believe.

Ditto on my end Jeff. I would expect that number from a Type III, but not a Type II that is not period. Ground breaking sale in my opinion, and it’s obvious a majority of iconic images are currently exceeding their expected limits - classic photos are hot!