Irrational Exuberance Low Number High Grade 1933 Goudeys

[Archive]

Posted By: bruce Dorskind

Irrational Exuberance Low Number High Grade 1933 Goudeys


Whilst the headline from last night's Memory Lane Auction will no doubt be
about the $275,000 paid for the PSA 10 Gehrig, the result that intrigued us
most was the vast difference in prices realized for two low number PSA 8 1933 Goudeys
and the fact that a number of other Goudeys with a similar population
realized only 10% of the price of their lower number cousins

#26 Chalmer Cissell PSA 8 NM-MT $7455 (pop 8 none higher)
#36 Tommy Thevenow PSA 8 NM-MT $8198 (pop 9 none higher)
#203 Lonnie Warneke PSA 8 NM-MT $670.00 (pop 12 one higher)

Only one example of the Thevenow has been auctioned in the past two
years. It realized a 21% higher price in the Spring 2005 REA auction.
We , by the way, were the winners of the Warneke example.

We would appreciate your views on why there is a such a significant
price differential for cards whose populations are quite similar?


Bruce Dorskind
America’s Toughest Want List

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve Murray

"none higher" vs. "one higher". Seems obvious to us.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Some of the reasons include: the difference in population and 'none higher' as Steve pointed out. Also, the first two cards are 2 point set registry cards and the latter 1. However, Bruce, to the rational mind these factors do not explain the 13x difference between those cards and yours. I recently bought #115 Cliff Heathcoate PSA 8 with a pop 10 and none higher for $697. I'd sell the card for a third of what the Cissell and Thevanow went for if I could get it.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Bruce- I know from my own auctions that when I get prices that seem crazy compared to similar items they are totally based upon who is bidding. If there is no particular bidding war going on my lots will sell in the range of fair market price.

When a similar lot sells significantly higher, it's usually two bidders going back and forth. Looking at prices realized alone doesn't tell you the full story.

It could have been two guys going back and forth all night on the Cissell and the Thevenow.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

As Barry suggested, I would guess it is simply a matter of two people who really need/want those particular cards.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: Rand Brotman

both low number cards are extremely tough, when you back out who already owns the other cards in the registry, you will realize there may be only 1 or 2 examples available to buy if you want that card. The Thevenow card is a bit different, his son buys up all the Thevenow cards (just like Evar Swanson's son) on ebay that come available. so if he was aware of this card and another person was looking to upgrade its a battle. in the end, i still dont trust the actual figues in any Mem Lane auction.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

The Dorskinds purchased a '33 Goudey Warneke in PSA 8 for over $650? Doesn't that seem a little high? Last weekend at the Tri-Star in San Francisco, I purchased a PSA 6 '54 Bowman Mantle for about the same price. I don't know about you, but I would rather have the Mantle.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Bruce's price was not high.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Jeff,

You are a New Yorker and I will assume that you are a Mantle collector. Would you rather have the PSA 8 Lonnie Warneke or the PSA 6 Mantle?

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

I'd rather have the Goudey because I collect the set. Now, if the question was a PSA 8 Mantle or the Goudey, no question the Mantle.

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

So, I take it that the consensus is that the populations stated: 8, 9 & 12 are numbers which are distinguishable from each other, and real. Real, in that they represent 8, 9 & 12 individual cards?

And what? All PSA 8s are equal .... none has a chance for becoming a nine?

Its not my game, but even spectators like to know the rules, and how to keep score.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Jeff,

That's reasonable. I collect '33 Goudeys also and if I was close to completing the set I might be tempted by the Lonnie Warneke. But right now my preference would be for the PSA 6 Bowman Mantle.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

Sorry to burst your bubble Bruce, but clearly you don't understand the high-grade 1933 Goudey market very well. Whilst you did get a decent purchase on the PSA 8 Warneke, it was nothing special as far as the price was concerned.

You paid $670.

The last few PSA 8 Warneke public sales in the last three years were:


$800
$700
$2,000
$700
$710

5 PSA 8 cards have changed hands. Why so many when the pop is only 12? Probably because there is a PSA 9 and a PSA 10 in holders right now, thus the guys that upgraded sold off their 8s.

Meanwhile, the Cissell and Thevenow are in a completely different universe when it comes to high-grade Goudeys. I'm surprised you aren't aware, I thought you were well-tuned into the high-grade market.

Previous PSA 8 public sales in the last three years - just one of each card (Thevenow and Cissell)

Thevenow PSA 8: $9700
Cissell PSA 8: $4945

Whilst the price difference between the Thevenow/Cissell compared to the Warneke vis-a-vi high grade cards may be surprising to those that don't understand the high-end market, it certainly is not surprising to well-tuned collectors in this hobby.



edited to add: based on all the information I have about the parties involved, I DO NOT think the PSA 10 Gehrig truly changed hands.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I very much respect your opinions on the board. You don't believe the PSA 10 Gehrig changed hands?.....pretty interesting.....I would prefer a reserve in auctions instead of the shell game....and for the record (not to try to change the subject) I don't have any issue with folks bidding on their own stuff in auctions, as I believe it should be stated as an acceptable rule, and then the buyer pays all associated fees. The buyers premium on that card would have been a good chunk of change to the auction house....I would guess if it didn't sell that there was an arrangement beforehand....(duh)....

[Archive]

Posted By: Zinn

"I don't have any issue with folks bidding on their own stuff in auctions, as I believe it should be stated as an acceptable rule."

Did you really mean to say that?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I do....as I believe that many (not me) people will get other people to bid on their items if they aren't selling at a high enough level in auctions. To me it's the old ostrich in the sand situation. Everyone knows it goes on but no one wants to talk about it. Sorry, that's not my way of thinking. This is a very debatable issue but I would rather just come out and say the reality instead of thinking otherwise....just my opinion....Most might disagree and that is ok. You don't see me running an auction, do you?

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

If Charlie were obligated to pay the buyer's fee on the Gehrig PSA 10 (e.g. >$30k) if it didn't sell -- perhaps that is incentive to not have a hidden reserve. But if there is a hidden reserve and the card doesn't sell, with no consequences to the seller for it not being met...it does not serve the collecting community as a whole; it just ends up being a museum piece with an unconfirmed sale with an unrealistic price (assuming the consignor bid it up)

[Archive]

Posted By: Zinn

"people will get other people to bid on their items"

I guess I'm just a naive boob but I would be personally embarassed to ask someone to do that. And, even I were to even consider asking someone, what would I think of the person if he or she agreed?

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

I agree with Leon on this one. Let's take a hypothetical example. Let's say I consign a card to Mastro that I believe is worth $12,000. There is one minute left in the 30 minute overtime period and the card has stalled at $4,000. I decide I would rather eat the $880 Buyers Premium and have the card back for $4400 + BP, than sell it for $4,000. What is morally objectionable about that, particularly given that Mastro sets the minimum bids at about 10% of market value and does not allow for reserves of any type other than this low minimum bid?
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

The way my software is set up, when I type up the lots on my spreadsheet I include the name of the consignor. That way, if a consignor tries to bid on his own lot he will be locked out.

That said, I know any consignor can ask a friend to bid. And while I will continue to lock out my consignors, I too couldn't care one way or the other. Jim B's example proves the point- why should I force a consignor to accept a miserable bid if that's what he faces? The only solution is a reserve, but I run a no reserve auction so that too is not the answer.

In the end, if a consignor asks a friend to bid on one of his lots, I just don't want to know about it. That keeps it simple and gets me off the hook. There is just so much I can do to police my own auction.

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

Leon wrote: "You don't believe the PSA 10 Gehrig changed hands?.....pretty interesting....."

I might be wrong, but that's my assumption unless I see something else that shows it did in fact change hands. The first piece of evidence would be to see Charles Merkel due his duty and delete the card from his top-notch 1933 Goudey PSA registered set if he in fact no longer owns the card.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

JimB,

There's nothing morally wrong with your example of a seller buying back their own card, but it is an unusual situation.

It is also collusion. The buyer and seller is artificially jacking up the price for another buyer. However, in this situation the buyer and seller is the same person.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

you said:

"There's nothing morally wrong with your example of a seller buying back their own card, but it is an unusual situation."

I agree it is not morally wrong if you disclose it. I disagree that it would be unusual as I think many sellers would prefer to buy back a card and pay the fees than lose a ton of money.


then you said:



"It is also collusion. The buyer and seller is artificially jacking up the price for another buyer. However, in this situation the buyer and seller is the same person."


I agree the price could be getting jacked up by the consignor but if the other bidder knows that going in then they can make an informed decision about how much they want to pay. Lets say I have 10k into a card and I consign it. At the ending of the auction it's sitting at 5k.....I don't want to sell it for that so I put in a bid of 5.5k....the other bidder says to themself...well, that's still a good price at the next increment so they bid 6k....Now I say to myself I will go ahead and let it go at that.....both parties are happy and the other bidder knows it very well might have been the seller on the other end bidding against him....but it's ok as he still feels he got a good deal......btw, this scenario happens in every single auction...REA, Mastro, SCP, etc etc.....it's just done through friends bidding for other friends....and no, I have never done this on either side. I know folks that do, and have, though. So then I say.....ok, then lets get it out in the open......total disclosure.....but I understand some won't agree with this mode of thinking.....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: PAS

I don't get it. I just don't get it. Is this non-Euclidean law or something?

"It is also collusion. The buyer and seller is artificially jacking up the price for another buyer. However, in this situation the buyer and seller is the same person."

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

You forgot the smiley face at the end of your post. All I'm saying is that a layperson would consider it collusion because it was undisclosed that the buyer and seller could be the same person.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

If an auction house were to disclose that consignors were allowed to bid on their own lots, I would not bid in that auction.

I understand you might not mean it, but at least kiss me and whisper in my ear, you know?

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: PAS

Al I respect your idealism but I think it's going to happen no matter what, if one can't bid oneself one can just have a friend bid for him to protect a card. So why not just be up front about it?

[Archive]

Posted By: Zinn

I'm with you Al. Until such time as the auctioneers put realistic estimates and or disclosed reserves I'm inclined to pass as well.

What's wrong with a reserve? If a seller wants to protect his investment that's what he should do. I know it stiffles the bidding process but the thought of having sellers bidding on their own auctions, albeit through a straw, is repugnant to me.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Guys, for the most part, all policy decisions of auction houses are dictated by money only. When the time comes that fairness, honesty and disclosure become a part of the calculus feel free to wake me up.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kevin Saucier

"Guys, for the most part, all policy decisions of auction houses are dictated by money only. When the time comes that fairness, honesty and disclosure become a part of the calculus feel free to wake me up."


Well said!

This is the reason I no longer bid on any cards from any auction.

That, plus I think I have seen too many graded altered cards from many different auction houses. Some I believe knew what they were selling, while others probably didn't have a clue.

I for one won't take the chance. I simply can't understand why anyone else would either.



Kevin

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

So Kevin, are you suggesting that the whole auction business should cease and desist? I guess that would put me out of business.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Kevin,

If we adapt your view, then we should buy only retail and avoid E-Bay and auctions and Barry would be out of business.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

To know why we bid in auctions you can go to my site and look at my personal collection. About 80%-90% of my best cards came from auction houses....I have bid and won items from almost every auction house you can think of. Since I don't collect high grade I doubt 1% of my cards have issues that I don't know about....or have been over looked by a grading company. Contrary to a few opinions I will never ever believe there are as many tainted cards (in a deceitful way) in lower grade than there are in higher grade, holders or not....It doesn't make cents (sic)...

edited grammar....still not perfect but better...

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

Can't buy retail either, Peter. You never know where those cards came from. Perhaps the seller is asking too much for them, perhaps they've been altered, perhaps they once were purchased on eBay or through an auction house.

Can't buy on eBay, can't bid in auctions, can't buy at retail. The sky is, indeed, falling.

Well, that's it, I guess. No more cards. Barry, time to pack up shop and get back into academia.

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

I more or less agree with Kevin here. Auction houses are generally to be avoided unless you know the complete background of the card or its obvious nothing has been done. Seldom can someone can look at a card in a holder on a screen and determine that it hasn't been altered. Buy your expensive cards from a dealer with a money back guarantee.

I think the hobby will move back toward the Steve Novella way with buying expensive cards personally from a dealer with a money-back guarantee.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Al- no more academia for me. Next career move is retirement.

Jim- how on earth am I to know the background of all the cards in my auction? Do you know how many of the cards I have that I can tell you about their past- exactly zero. So what should I do, just pack it in?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

The sky is not falling and Barry need not endeavor to learn of ways to earn a living through his Seinfeld trivia knowledge. However, if you're concerned about unfair auction practices and buying cards that are knowingly altered then Kevin and Jim are right. Obviously there needs to be a happy medium that each collector can live with. Mine is that I avoid 90% of the auction houses now and assume that I am still being victimized by shill bidding. Unfortunately, whether you buy from ebay or Mastro or Memory Lane the same issues may exist.

And for anyone that doubts my comments on the prevalence of shill bidding in auction houses, go ahead and buy 5 esoteric items from an auction house and resell them on ebay and let me know if you get back more than 50% of what you paid to that auction house.

Jim C, etc: how about we make an auction house challenge? We offer a large cash donation to the charity of the auction houses' choice if their top executives will agree to undergo a polygraph examination (and pass) with the following question presented: are you aware of any shill bidding practices in any of your auctions over the past 10 years?

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Al, Guys

Through this thread we have pretty much decided that there's no future way of doing things in this hobby, and that we need to go back to the good old days.

Guess what...it's not going to happen.

So how do we improve the future of our hobby?

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Barry,

You can do what you like. I cannot tell from looking at your graded cards(or others) whether they have been altered or not.

In my opinion(since you asked), you should set up a mail order business with a money-back guarantee. Collectors could buy with confidence.

By the way Barry if I bought something at your auction and sent it to Kevin to look at and he told me the card looked suspicious would you let me return the card?

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Jeff,

I love it--we could even expand the question to have you knowingly sold altered cards.

And your comments about shill bids and auction houses in general are dead on.

[Archive]

Posted By: PAS

Jim, the answer would probably depend on the definition of altered.

[Archive]

Posted By: bruce Dorskind

Whilst, we are aware that from time to time, there are cards found in PSA/SGC Holders that
have been altered , it would not be an efficient use of time and resources for an auction
house and/or agent of one to alter every card.

While our general operating philosophy is trust no one and double check everyone,
we think that our friends at the Auction Houses are wise enough not to alter $500
cards.

We also believe that the sense of paronia with regard to shill bidding affirms our
believe that those who choose not to acquire ultra high grade cards defend their
position by implying that all ultra high grades are bad.

We have countless cards that achieved grades of 8 or 9 which we obtained from
Sir Edward Wharton Tigar, Charles Bray, Cliff Lambert,and others...long before
there ever was a grading system.

As for the coming collapse in the graded card market, if it were going to happen
anywhere it would have happend in the coin market. The coin market's trading
activity is valued at least 50x the card market. Slabs are broken day in and day out...
yet the market marches on...and has been extremely healthy.

Whilst you may not agree, this hobby is now a big businees...every big business
has its regularlory issues...but the rare card market is basically solid...and while
the poor (and we do mean_poor) cry babies sit on the sidelines and complain,
the astute, educated saavy collector investors will continue to thrive.


Bruce Dorskind
America's Toughest Want List

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Lets let Barry answer it Peter--Barry if I bought 5 high end cards in your auction, sent them to Kevin and Kevin said in his opinion only two could he say with confidence have not been altered could I return the other 3???

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Bruce, your position is directly related to your desire to maintain the value of your collection -- fair enough. However, I'm paranoid about shill bidding and altered cards and I spend 6 figures on cards every year, as does Jim Crandell I presume, another "paranoid" one.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I think I'm getting a job at Starbuck's making vanilla lattes.

Jim- a few points. First, the majority of the material I get is consigned to me with the request that I auction it. I don't know if I would get the material I do under any other circumstance.

As far as a return privilege after showing it to Kevin: I can't say it's totally unreasonable, but just for argument's sake, what if I disagree with Kevin? What if I say I think the card in question is fine? What if I think between Kevin and SGC I'll go with SGC's opinion?

Not saying you don't have a point, but I would have to think about it.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Barry,

Forget about working at Starbucks, come to my law office and edit my papers.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

(In Captain Kirk voice): "must... resist... responding ... to ... that ... last ... post.."

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Barry,

Lets say for sake of argument I consider Kevin an expert and that his opinion carries the day.

Not telling you how to run your business but without the guarantee I am unlikely to bid much in any auctions.

Don't blame you for saying you would have to think about it--what would your consigners think? Its a tough issue.

But to reiterate if I bought a $15,000 card off a dealer's sell list, I would say its contingent upon Kevin's seal of approval. Dealer sends me card--I send to Kevin, Kevin returns card to me with his opinion and I either then send check to dealer or return the card.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I think the whole world's gone crazy.

Or as Jerry said to Babu Baht: "Babu, the shrimp is a bit stringy" (don't ask me how that relates to this discussion).

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Jim- because 99% of my customers are happy with the graded cards I sell, I would probably say we're still friends but it might be best if you didn't bid.

No disrespect to you or Kevin, but sometimes I guy's gotta do what a guy's gotta do!