Omnious sign in market?

[Snowman]

As far as the differences in hammer price between the SGC 5 Mantle that recently sold on REA for $306k and the one that sold on Goldin the other night for $146k, I think it's actually pretty straight-forward.

The $306k example looks like a true 5 condition-wise. It is in EX condition. And, most importantly, it is dead-centered left to right with no tilt. For centering-obsessed OCDers like me, that L/R centering is often far more important than top/bottom centering. Buyers will pay a significant premium for the centering on this Mantle.

Contrast that with the $146k Mantle, and you can clearly see an evil tilt to the image, most noticeable on the left edge. Image tilt is the spawn of Satan to centering OCD collectors. It's not enough for the image to be in or near the middle of the card. The lines need to be parallel and border widths equal. Sure, the one on the right I would still expect to outsell a comparably conditioned card with a more significant shift in centering, but this isn't a card that eye-appeal guys are going to be jumping up and down for, whereas the one on the left most definitely is.

However, there's one more factor that surely played into the hammer price here. That SGC "5" on the right from Goldin is NOT an EX card. Those bottom two corners would NEVER grade at a 5 today. Not from PSA or SGC. This card was graded back in 2014, when standards were quite a bit looser (whereas the one on the left was graded in 2019). High-end vintage buyers are getting smarter. They know the one on the left is EX and the one on the right is a VG-EX card wearing an SGC 5 tuxedo. They're bidding accordingly. It's the other side of the same coin for why I keep having to "overpay" when I find cards that are under-graded.

Here they are side-by-side. You can decide for yourselves whether or not the differences are worth an extra $160k, but the centering difference is worth a lot, and the fact that one is EX while the other is VG-EX is probably worth a lot more, in my opinion.

Also, the one on the left is a Type 1 Mantle, and the one on the right is the Type 2 (and supposedly less desireable). Though I think this matters less than people argue.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Snowman

As far as the differences in hammer price between the SGC 5 Mantle that recently sold on REA for $306k and the one that sold on Goldin the other night for $146k, I think it's actually pretty straight-forward.

The $306k example looks like a true 5 condition-wise. It is in EX condition. And, most importantly, it is dead-centered left to right with no tilt. For centering-obsessed OCDers like me, that L/R centering is often far more important than top/bottom centering. Buyers will pay a significant premium for the centering on this Mantle.

Contrast that with the $146k Mantle, and you can clearly see an evil tilt to the image, most noticeable on the left edge. Image tilt is the spawn of Satan to centering OCD collectors. It's not enough for the image to be in or near the middle of the card. The lines need to be parallel and border widths equal. Sure, the one on the right I would still expect to outsell a comparably conditioned card with a more significant shift in centering, but this isn't a card that eye-appeal guys are going to be jumping up and down for, whereas the one on the left most definitely is.

However, there's one more factor that surely played into the hammer price here. That SGC "5" on the right from Goldin is NOT an EX card. Those bottom two corners would NEVER grade at a 5 today. Not from PSA or SGC. This card was graded back in 2014, when standards were quite a bit looser (whereas the one on the left was graded in 2019). High-end vintage buyers are getting smarter. They know the one on the left is EX and the one on the right is a VG-EX card wearing an SGC 5 tuxedo. They're bidding accordingly. It's the other side of the same coin for why I keep having to "overpay" when I find cards that are under-graded.

Here they are side-by-side. You can decide for yourselves whether or not the differences are worth an extra $160k, but the centering difference is worth a lot, and the fact that one is EX while the other is VG-EX is probably worth a lot more, in my opinion.

Wow those bottom corners on the card on the right (the one sold by Goldin) are BAD. Goes to show that just because you put it in a new slab does not mean people are going to pay (much) more money for it. You can't polish a turd.

Damn, that really shows you just how much grading has changed since 2014. Great side-by-side comparison.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Wow those bottom corners on the card from the right (the one sold by Goldin) are BAD. Just goes to show that just because you put it in a new slab does not mean people are going to pay (much) more money for it. You can't polish a turd.

Damn, that really shows you just how much grading has changed since 2014. Great side-by-side comparison.

Ya, they have moved the goalposts on us by quite a bit. It's a shame. The crazy thing is that there are even some graders at PSA today that would put that Mantle on the right in a PSA 3 holder (though I doubt they'd be the ones who actually get to grade it, surely that would be Reza). But they are definitely there, and I've gotten some cards recently that are nicer than this Mantle in PSA 3 holders (all of which I cracked out and got grade bumps from).

I'm not sure though which standard I prefer. I suppose it's somewhat arbitrary, but the lack of consistency is a major problem. Maybe the card on the right *should* be the 5 and the one on the left *should* be a 6? I don't know, but with today's standards, the one on the left is a 5 and the one on the right is a low-end 4 at best.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Ya, they have moved the goalposts on us by quite a bit. It's a shame. The crazy thing is that there are even some graders at PSA today that would put that Mantle on the right in a PSA 3 holder (though I doubt they'd be the ones who actually get to grade it, surely that would be Reza). But they are definitely there, and I've gotten some cards recently that are nicer than this Mantle in PSA 3 holders (all of which I cracked out and got grade bumps from).

I'm not sure though which standard I prefer. I suppose it's somewhat arbitrary, but the lack of consistency is a major problem. Maybe the card on the right *should* be the 5 and the one on the left *should* be a 6? I don't know, but with today's standards, the one on the left is a 5 and the one on the right is a low-end 4 at best.

Yeah, goalposts keep moving. I agree that you could make the case the one on the left (sold by REA) should be a 6, even by today's standards. Would love to see any pics you have of cards you have cracked out of PSA slabs and gotten a bump from a different TPG. I think that could be its own thread.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Yeah, goalposts keep moving. I agree that you could make the case the one on the left (sold by REA) should be a 6, even by today's standards. Would love to see any pics you have of cards you have cracked out of PSA slabs and gotten a bump from a different TPG. I think that could be its own thread.

I probably won't post them, unfortunately. The current landscape of social media and hobby heroes aiming to crucify people for the crime of "cracking a card out of it's holder" as if that were some sort of deceitful tactic or some such nonsense is just something I don't care to deal with. I could write a book on it though lol. Sometimes it's the same TPG in fact. I just depends on the card and what's "wrong" with it that determines who I decide to send it to (well, that and the cost). One thing I can tell you with 100% certainty though is that PSA is NOT using their Genamint "AI" tech to determine whether or not a card has been previously graded and to reassign that same grade when it shows up again. Or at least their computer vision algorithms are failing to detect them if so, because I've cracked out numerous under-graded cards and sent them in for grade bumps. Even cards that I submitted myself and resubmitted one month later using the same account. They are not consistent at all. I used to be able to predict my grades with a high degree of accuracy with each TPD, rarely being even 1 grade off. That's still true for me with SGC, but with PSA, I get cards back that are off by 2 full grades with at least some degree of regularity. In both directions even, though more often they are undergraded than they are overgraded (per their own standards that is).

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I probably won't post them, unfortunately. The current landscape of social media and hobby heroes aiming to crucify people for the crime of "cracking a card out of it's holder" as if that were some sort of deceitful tactic or some such nonsense is just something I don't care to deal with. I could write a book on it though lol. Sometimes it's the same TPG in fact. I just depends on the card and what's "wrong" with it that determines who I decide to send it to (well, that and the cost). One thing I can tell you with 100% certainty though is that PSA is NOT using their Genamint "AI" tech to determine whether or not a card has been previously graded and to reassign that same grade when it shows up again. Or at least their computer vision algorithms are failing to detect them if so, because I've cracked out numerous under-graded cards and sent them in for grade bumps. Even cards that I submitted myself and resubmitted one month later using the same account. They are not consistent at all. I used to be able to predict my grades with a high degree of accuracy with each TPD, rarely being even 1 grade off. That's still true for me with SGC, but with PSA, I get cards back that are off by 2 full grades with at least some degree of regularity. In both directions even, though more often they are undergraded than they are overgraded (per their own standards that is).

That's interesting that their Genamint "AI" doesn't seem to work at detecting if a card has been previously graded. I thought that Kevin Lenane, PSA's current President founded/developed Genamint, and its "success" was one reason why he was elevated to President. Perhaps Genamint is being used in other ways besides determining if cards had been graded previously?

There was so much buzz around AI being used for grading for a while. And now again with the Brian Lee/ Derek Jeter sports card grading venture that is supposed to utilize blockchain/AI it is back in the news.

Has any company actually successfully utilized AI for grading yet?

I personally would not have a big problem with it if it could lead to more consistent grading.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

That's interesting that their Genamint "AI" doesn't seem to work at detecting if a card has been previously graded. I thought that Kevin Lenane, PSA's current President founded/developed Genamint, and its "success" was one reason why he was elevated to President. Perhaps Genamint is being used in other ways besides determining if cards had been graded previously?

There was so much buzz around AI being used for grading for a while. And now again with the Brian Lee/ Derek Jeter sports card grading venture that is supposed to utilize blockchain/AI it is back in the news.

Has any company actually successfully utilized AI for grading yet?

I personally would not have a big problem with it if it could lead to more consistent grading.

I'm a data scientist and I write very similar AI code for work, although my work was more geared toward detecting anomalies in images due to things like cancer or genetic abnormalities in imaging scans. However, at the core, it's a very similar problem to detecting flaws in card scans. Somewhere around here, I made a (very lengthy) post or three about the challenges that any TPG would face when trying to use"AI" to grade cards. Cliff notes are that while I believe some tasks can be automated, ultimately I believe it is a fool's errand to attempt to truly automate grading through AI.

...found it. Here's a link to the first of 3 posts where I explain some of the intricacies of AI/machine learning and how those can present challenges for grading cards:

https://net54baseball.com/showpost.p...5&postcount=17

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

That's interesting that their Genamint "AI" doesn't seem to work at detecting if a card has been previously graded. I thought that Kevin Lenane, PSA's current President founded/developed Genamint, and its "success" was one reason why he was elevated to President. Perhaps Genamint is being used in other ways besides determining if cards had been graded previously?

There was so much buzz around AI being used for grading for a while. And now again with the Brian Lee/ Derek Jeter sports card grading venture that is supposed to utilize blockchain/AI it is back in the news.

Has any company actually successfully utilized AI for grading yet?

I personally would not have a big problem with it if it could lead to more consistent grading.

Not sure if Kevin was made President of PSA due to the alleged success of Genamint but both he and Nat did multiple interviews to let everyone know that initially it would be used to maintain grade integrity which is Nat's pet peeve. Not altered cards but that if the card was once graded a 5 that each time it is sent back in it would be a 5 every time. He cautioned the public to challenge his grading team.

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Damn, that really shows you just how much grading has changed since 2014. Great side-by-side comparison.

If both were raw, side by side, I'd seriously consider the one on the right. Yes, the corners have more wear, but the light surface wear on the left one is more distracting to me than the right's bad corners.

Especially if you said the one on the right is 1/2 the price.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by Snowman

As far as the differences in hammer price between the SGC 5 Mantle that recently sold on REA for $306k and the one that sold on Goldin the other night for $146k, I think it's actually pretty straight-forward.

The $306k example looks like a true 5 condition-wise. It is in EX condition. And, most importantly, it is dead-centered left to right with no tilt. For centering-obsessed OCDers like me, that L/R centering is often far more important than top/bottom centering. Buyers will pay a significant premium for the centering on this Mantle.

Contrast that with the $146k Mantle, and you can clearly see an evil tilt to the image, most noticeable on the left edge. Image tilt is the spawn of Satan to centering OCD collectors. It's not enough for the image to be in or near the middle of the card. The lines need to be parallel and border widths equal. Sure, the one on the right I would still expect to outsell a comparably conditioned card with a more significant shift in centering, but this isn't a card that eye-appeal guys are going to be jumping up and down for, whereas the one on the left most definitely is.

However, there's one more factor that surely played into the hammer price here. That SGC "5" on the right from Goldin is NOT an EX card. Those bottom two corners would NEVER grade at a 5 today. Not from PSA or SGC. This card was graded back in 2014, when standards were quite a bit looser (whereas the one on the left was graded in 2019). High-end vintage buyers are getting smarter. They know the one on the left is EX and the one on the right is a VG-EX card wearing an SGC 5 tuxedo. They're bidding accordingly. It's the other side of the same coin for why I keep having to "overpay" when I find cards that are under-graded.

Here they are side-by-side. You can decide for yourselves whether or not the differences are worth an extra $160k, but the centering difference is worth a lot, and the fact that one is EX while the other is VG-EX is probably worth a lot more, in my opinion.

Also, the one on the left is a Type 1 Mantle, and the one on the right is the Type 2 (and supposedly less desireable). Though I think this matters less than people argue.

I always enjoy reading your opinions

I agree with you that the REA Mantle is better than the Goldin Mantle. I just don't think it is double the price better. Maybe the one 5 is a reach at a 5, but the other higher grade 5, while nice, is still a 5.

[babraham]

Leland's sale prices on their auction ending tonight seemed to be down (at least on the lots I was watching).

15 CJ Jackson PSA 2 for under $30k
51B Mantle Rookie PSA 4 for $15k (recent comps between $18-23k)

Also...this boggled my mind:

86F Jordan Rookie PSA 10 $191k
86F Jordan Rookie SGC 10 $74k

$117k more for the same card/same grade with the PSA holder? Ouch.

[3-2-count]

In my opinion the Psa 2 1915 CJ Jax and Psa 4 1951 Bowman Mantle examples aren’t a reflection of much due to both having serious condition issues. I think their ending price was accurate.

The 15 CJ Jax was terribly faded due to God knows what with quite a bit of paper loss on the reverse and the 51 Mick had horrid centering with terrible registration.

The cards sold for what they are!

The final price discrepancy on the two Jordan rookies is absolutely ridiculous though! Just silly!

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by babraham

Leland's sale prices on their auction ending tonight seemed to be down (at least on the lots I was watching).

15 CJ Jackson PSA 2 for under $30k
51B Mantle Rookie PSA 4 for $15k (recent comps between $18-23k)

Also...this boggled my mind:

86F Jordan Rookie PSA 10 $191k
86F Jordan Rookie SGC 10 $74k

$117k more for the same card/same grade with the PSA holder? Ouch.

The 86 Fleer Jordan has been dropping pretty steadily in recent months. Leland's is the last place I would sell one. The basketball collectors just don't check Lelands like the vintage baseball guys do. It probably cost the seller 20k or more for that PSA 10 having it there. I bet it does $210-220 if it were on PWCC premier. Also, the basketball market HATES SGC slabs for some reason. They get no love at all. Much wider gaps than in other sports.

That Mantle RC price doesn't strike me as an outlier at all. It was about the worst-looking PSA 4 I've ever seen. I think it oversold its eye appeal, personally. It's so far OC that they'd have to mark it as a miscut if it were any further off. And the registration is difficult to look at without going cross-eyed. I feel like I need a pair of those red/blue 3D glasses to view it properly.

The Cracker Jack Joe Jackson is a bit surprising though. The 1915s don't get enough love, but still. $30k? Feels low to me, although I'm not well tuned in on CJ prices.

[3-2-count]

Originally Posted by Snowman

The Cracker Jack Joe Jackson is a bit surprising though. The 1915s don't get enough love, but still. $30k? Feels low to me, although I'm not well tuned in on CJ prices.

I am very well tuned in to CJ pricing and as I said this example wasn't going to meet or exceed any records due its condition and isn't a reflection of the current market for Cracker Jack blue chips such as Cobb and Jackson.

Not only did it have extensive back damage, but the front color is way off due to either being soaked incorrectly or color fade from excessive exposure to light. Color should be dark bold red. Its even more noticeable on the left and right sides as its almost pink in color.

Go look at other examples and compare the color and then you decide. That is what held this back from selling for more. Actually, $30K for this example is pretty hefty in my opinion and I'm also quite surprised it made its way into a 2 holder.

[Bicem]

Agreed with Tony, I'm actually surprised that washed out Jackson reached 30k.

[Johnny630]

If we get any Down Turn on these they should be bought And put away. When you’re talking about nicer grades centered examples are Ruth Cobb Jackson Mantle and Mays. The 50s and back to me to buy.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by babraham

Leland's sale prices on their auction ending tonight seemed to be down (at least on the lots I was watching).

15 CJ Jackson PSA 2 for under $30k
51B Mantle Rookie PSA 4 for $15k (recent comps between $18-23k)

Also...this boggled my mind:

86F Jordan Rookie PSA 10 $191k
86F Jordan Rookie SGC 10 $74k

$117k more for the same card/same grade with the PSA holder? Ouch.

Prices on the Jackson and the Mantle reflect the quality to the cards, not the market. Most of the vintage I looked at had solid numbers. Market is still healthy enough.

The disparity in the Jordan prices is also expected.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Prices on the Jackson and the Mantle reflect the quality of the cards, not the market. Most of the vintage I looked at had solid numbers. The market is still healthy enough.

The disparity in the Jordan prices is also expected.

Extremely healthy I agree. I think next year it’s only going higher. REA will probably have record numbers in their fall auction that starts in November bank on that.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

Extremely healthy I agree. I think next year it’s only going higher. REA will probably have record numbers in their fall auction that starts in November bank on that.

REA had pretty solid numbers on stuff from tonight's auction. Maybe not on weaker examples of cards but on decent looking examples, prices were very respectable.

[sreader3]

Someone asked for more than anecdotes. I can offer these year-over-year median price data for "true" T206 commons (not "premium" commons which are in shorter supply) sold in the last three months or so:

PSA 2: $82 v. $75 (+9.3%)
PSA 3: $125 v. $100 (+25.0%)
PSA 4: $190 v. $143 (+32.9%)
PSA 5: $280 v. $221 (+26.7%)
PSA 6: $510 v. $450 (+13.3%)
PSA 7: $2100 v. $1980 (+6.1%)

N for this data collection effort is around 1000.

T206 prices seem to be tracking right now about the same as they were three months ago -- maybe a slight increase -- after rising substantially earlier in the year. The midgrade market (PSA 3 - PSA 5) seems to be the strongest. This was not true last year when lower grades fared better on a percentage basis.