1952 Bowman Mantle...this current bidding can't be real, can it?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by thatkidfromjerrymaguire

I think they are really comparable. Agreed that last night's corners are touched a little more. But the $40K one has a rougher left edge.

Here they are for all to judge. The one on the left sold for $15K. The one on the right sold for over $40K (allegedly).

I'd rather have the one on the left and an additional $25K in my pocket.

Attachment 442708

Disagree. The corners aren't touched, they are missing. If the 15k is a real sale then 40k is more than fair for a card 2 grades better. I would take the nicer card everytime, though I think they are both over priced.

[GasHouseGang]

This was tough to get but I tried to capture the top and bottom up close detail from the ebay listings. It's the only real way to examine the corners, edges, and surface. Here is the top and bottom detail of the card that sold for $15.6K and then the top and bottom detail of the card that sold for $42.6K.

[thatkidfromjerrymaguire]

Man, you guys are TOUGH graders I guess I'm expecting a card graded a 7 to have some noticeable imperfections (which is why it's not an 8, 9, or 10).

I honestly view them as much closer to equal. I can obviously see the corners are better on the $40K card...but you guys seem to be giving the rough edge on the expensive card a free pass. Also, those imperfections do stand out more in the hi def auction scans because they are huge. In real life, at roughly 2 x 3 inches, I would still consider those corner touches and not missing corners.

But this friendly disagreement brings to light how that first card could have realistically gotten to 40K.

Let's say three of us were in the market for an SGC 7 Bowman mantle. BOTH cards would meet that criteria for me...and I would bid up to a certain amount for each.

But it sounds like I would be the ONLY one of us bidding on the cheaper card...while you guys battled it out for the other one.

With that lens, maybe the $40K was indeed a real sale.

[dio]

Originally Posted by thatkidfromjerrymaguire

Man, you guys are TOUGH graders I guess I'm expecting a card graded a 7 to have some noticeable imperfections (which is why it's not an 8, 9, or 10).

I honestly view them as much closer to equal. I can obviously see the corners are better on the $40K card...but you guys seem to be giving the rough edge on the expensive card a free pass. Also, those imperfections do stand out more in the hi def auction scans because they are huge. In real life, at roughly 2 x 3 inches, I would still consider those corner touches and not missing corners.

But this friendly disagreement brings to light how that first card could have realistically gotten to 40K.

Let's say three of us were in the market for an SGC 7 Bowman mantle. BOTH cards would meet that criteria for me...and I would bid up to a certain amount for each.

But it sounds like I would be the ONLY one of us bidding on the cheaper card...while you guys battled it out for the other one.

With that lens, maybe the $40K was indeed a real sale.

Agree

[GasHouseGang]

I actually agree with you John. The other thing everyone is REALLY hung up on is centering. I like a card centered, but I'm not OCD about it and not willing to pay 10 times as much for a slightly better centered copy. But that's just me.

[Johnny630]

If that sale was real was it bought back and covered by investors??

[thatkidfromjerrymaguire]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

If that sale was real was it bought back and covered by investors??

For the record, I'm still skeptical of that price for the $40K Mantle. Which is why I started this thread initially.

The bidding pattern it took (getting exponentially high early in the bidding) combined with the high price doesn't feel right.

However, I have found it interesting to read other's opinions on the desirability of that card vs the lower priced example. I don't think ANYONE is saying that they would have paid $40K for it....but clearly it is viewed as a premium value to some collectors. And as we all know it only takes two bidders that really want a card to run up a price.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by thatkidfromjerrymaguire

For the record, I'm still skeptical of that price for the $40K Mantle. Which is why I started this thread initially.

The bidding pattern it took (getting exponentially high early in the bidding) combined with the high price doesn't feel right.

However, I have found it interesting to read other's opinions on the desirability of that card vs the lower priced example. I don't think ANYONE is saying that they would have paid $40K for it....but clearly it is viewed as a premium value to some collectors. And as we all know it only takes two bidders that really want a card to run up a price.

I think we are all skeptical of what is going on with card prices. However, with an Authentic graded t206 Wagner selling for 2.5 million last night, a card too small to get a number grade and missing half it's back. There has to be some element of authentic sales. There are clearly new buyers with a lot of money buying up premium cards. Like you said, if two of these guys saw this card and wanted it, it could be a real sale. The 51 Bowman has taken a huge jump, so it follows that the 52 would too.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by thatkidfromjerrymaguire

Man, you guys are TOUGH graders

but you guys seem to be giving the rough edge on the expensive card a free pass. Also, those imperfections do stand out more in the hi def auction scans because they are huge.

Actually, it's hard to say because lighting of a room can play significantly when taking a photo, but I think the cheaper card has dirtier white edges. The bottom scans look much whiter, which would give me the impression that the cheaper card has more surface wear / imperfections.

[thatkidfromjerrymaguire]

Originally Posted by todeen

Actually, it's hard to say because lighting of a room can play significantly when taking a photo, but I think the cheaper card has dirtier white edges. The bottom scans look much whiter, which would give me the impression that the cheaper card has more surface wear / imperfections.

Agreed that lighting can have a big impact. In trying to compare, I usually scrutinize the labels. The SGC flip would theoretically be the same shade of white on both...so if the label looks darker on one, then the borders might look darker, when in reality the cards are actually the same color. I *think* that might be what's going on between those two.

[bobsbbcards]

Originally Posted by thatkidfromjerrymaguire

...but you guys seem to be giving the rough edge on the expensive card a free pass.

The card came out of the pack with that edge, so that's probably why the market "ignores" it. I like rough cuts (OPC.......mmmmmm), so I'd always rather have the $40K one, although not for more than 1.3333 x the other one.

[dio]

Rough edge guarantee not trimmed. Should hold even bigger premium. Trimmers can't trim it to be rough edge

[irv]

Originally Posted by dio

Rough edge guarantee not trimmed. Should hold even bigger premium. Trimmers can't trim it to be rough edge

Others can correct me if I am wrong but I believe some of these card doctors can now mimic the rough cut edges?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by irv

Others can correct me if I am wrong but I believe some of these card doctors can now mimic the rough cut edges?

I know that they are trimming Sports Illustrated for Kids cards and replicating the perforated edges, so it wouldn't surprise me if they could.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

This was tough to get but I tried to capture the top and bottom up close detail from the ebay listings. It's the only real way to examine the corners, edges, and surface. Here is the top and bottom detail of the card that sold for $15.6K and then the top and bottom detail of the card that sold for $42.6K.

Are the bottom corners really 7 quality on the first one? Both have pretty noticeable dings.