SCP Winnings

[Jlighter]

Ok am I missing something here.

All Red Hindu

Danny Murphy (batting) PSA 2- 31,328

Frank Chance (portrait) PSA 3- 16,980

Walter Johnson (hands at chest) PSA 4- 9,799

[atx840]

Even crazier as its not a 1/1, not even 1/2

Cy Seymour (THROWING) VG PSA 3 (1/1) - $12,173

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Jlighter

Ok am I missing something here.

All Red Hindu

Danny Murphy (batting) PSA 2- 31,328

Frank Chance (portrait) PSA 3- 16,980

Walter Johnson (hands at chest) PSA 4- 9,799

Collectors with the resources going for cards they needed, not the ones normally expected to go for more. My guess is that each of the very expensive Red Hindu commons, if/when another comes out, will go for significantly less.

[sb1]

I would think the T206 collector's would have a pretty good idea of whom would be trying to assemble a complete T206 matrix. Thus the buyer would be fairly apparent. Perhaps I am wrong?

[Gradedcardman]

SB1 you are correct...If you pay attention to these boards you can certainly narrow the list down quite a bit. And I agree with Leon, when and if these cards are for sale again in my lifetime they likely will sell for less money.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Just curious, was there anything else in the auction besides the $100K Jackson and T206 cards?

[Jlighter]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Just curious, was there anything else in the auction besides the $100K Jackson and T206 cards?

There was this.

https://catalog.scpauctions.com/LotD...px?lotid=23694

[Jaybird]

I find it slightly strange that people are talking about "pissing away" money for certain cards. It's not just one person that wanted it that badly. It takes 2 to bid it up there. I agree that if they sell again in the near future, they would likely sell for less because you are taking one bidder out of the equation. But who's to say another wouldn't take their place?

I for one am happy that there are people passionate about cards. I also like the fact that you cannot value everything on past sales. This is what makes auctions fun. For non-collectors, spending $500 on a card is insane. So, drawing the "sensible" line at your own personal limit seems arbitrary.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Jaybird

I find it slightly strange that people are talking about "pissing away" money for certain cards. It's not just one person that wanted it that badly. It takes 2 to bid it up there. I agree that if they sell again in the near future, they would likely sell for less because you are taking one bidder out of the equation. But who's to say another wouldn't take their place?

I for one am happy that there are people passionate about cards. I also like the fact that you cannot value everything on past sales. This is what makes auctions fun. For non-collectors, spending $500 on a card is insane. So, drawing the "sensible" line at your own personal limit seems arbitrary.

I get your point, but you can't knock people for considering 'market value'. It's a good discussion - one that we haven't had in a while (thank God) - but 'market value' is a slithering little beast. The crux of past arguments...I mean 'discussions'... has been: how many bidders are necessary to create 'market value'. I don't think 2 is sufficient.