1952 Topps Mickey Mantle PSA 8 in PWCC Auction

[Santo10Fan]

Originally Posted by drcy

It's best to accuse PWCC when there are facts (and there a many cases where there are facts).

It is plausible that someone who doesn't ordinarily use eBay, or wants to make sure he purchases a half a million-dollar item anonymously, signed up just to buy this card.

I deal with the former frequently when I sell current concert posters/prints. Normally they are non-ebay conertgoers scrambling to get a print they just missed since designs change in each city.

Considering PWCC circumstances and the final price, the Mantle buyer hit a good price point. The consigner's ROI was likely not as good as would be expected from PWCC pre-scandal imo, although it was a short turnaround (flip). The buyer has a 14-day NQA return window to examine the card personally and potentially have one or more third parties weigh in. He/she has the backing of ebay, paypal, and PSA. The buyer could choose to challenge PSA directly on its guarantee.

Under those circumstances, I don't find the purchase to be much of a risk, on the contrary it seems a perfect time for an astute buyer to get a nice Mantle.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by Santo10Fan

I deal with the former frequently when I sell current concert posters/prints. Normally they are non-ebay conertgoers scrambling to get a print they just missed since designs change in each city.

Considering PWCC circumstances and the final price, the Mantle buyer hit a good price point. The consigner's ROI was likely not as good as would be expected from PWCC pre-scandal imo, although it was a short turnaround (flip). The buyer has a 14-day NQA return window to examine the card personally and potentially have one or more third parties weigh in. He/she has the backing of ebay, paypal, and PSA. The buyer could choose to challenge PSA directly on its guarantee.

Under those circumstances, I don't find the purchase to be much of a risk, on the contrary it seems a perfect time for an astute buyer to get a nice Mantle.

I could be mistaken, but didn't PSA claim to have $700K in reserves for their potential "Guarantee" payout?

If that figure is correct, this one card would wipe out 71.4% of their total reserves. Not that they'd ever actually pay out, but that would be a hoot, if it happened.

[Santo10Fan]

Originally Posted by perezfan

I could be mistaken, but didn't PSA claim to have $700K in reserves for their potential "Guarantee" payout?

If that figure is correct, this one card would wipe out 71.4% of their total reserves. Not that they'd ever actually pay out, but that would be a hoot, if it happened.

If PSA reexamines it and determines "the card can no longer receive a numerical grade under PSA's standards" it guarantees to "buy the card from the submitter at the current market value." I think determining that value is going to involve a judge.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by perezfan

I could be mistaken, but didn't PSA claim to have $700K in reserves for their potential "Guarantee" payout?

If that figure is correct, this one card would wipe out 71.4% of their total reserves. Not that they'd ever actually pay out, but that would be a hoot, if it happened.

especially since the card has been soaked in bleach or peroxide and had the corners trimmed, IMHO...and won by a bidder with ZERO feedback.

You can't make this stuff up...

[CuriousGeorge]

Did you happen to notice that the underbidder, who bid $100 less, has feedback of 1315? So do you think that means for the extra $100 Brent decided to pull a maneuver or that perhaps a guy with zero feedback just happened to win the auction?

I mean I know everyone wants to crucify the guy but 10 seconds of checking eBay and a little common sense can show you this isn’t the one to pick on.

You can’t make this stuff up.

Originally Posted by Fuddjcal

especially since the card has been soaked in bleach or peroxide and had the corners trimmed, IMHO...and won by a bidder with ZERO feedback.

You can't make this stuff up...

[Johnny630]

I'm waiting to see if this same card will be relisted within the next few months by same seller.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by CuriousGeorge

Did you happen to notice that the underbidder, who bid $100 less, has feedback of 1315? So do you think that means for the extra $100 Brent decided to pull a maneuver or that perhaps a guy with zero feedback just happened to win the auction?

I mean I know everyone wants to crucify the guy but 10 seconds of checking eBay and a little common sense can show you this isn’t the one to pick on.

You can’t make this stuff up.

The skeptics are saying it was a fake bid... attempting to drive the price up further. So the actual price realized would not be an extra $100... it would be a "no sale".
PWCC has already admitted to, and attempted to justify shill bidding.

That said... I think it's very possible that a legitimate "zero feedback" person was made aware of the auction, and was authorized to bid. It's not like a card of this magnitude is widely available, and a distinct possibility that a non-ebayer would want it. So while it does raise suspicion, I agree it's best we stick with discussing concrete evidence and facts, and what we KNOW to be true (which is a lot... and keeps mounting with no perceptible end in sight).

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by perezfan

The skeptics are saying it was a fake bid... attempting to drive the price up further. So the actual price realized would not be an extra $100... it would be a "no sale".
PWCC has already admitted to, and attempted to justify shill bidding.

That said... I think it's very possible that a legitimate "zero feedback" person was made aware of the auction, and was authorized to bid. It's not like a card of this magnitude is widely available, and a distinct possibility that a non-ebayer would want it. So while it does raise suspicion, I agree it's best we stick with discussing concrete evidence and facts, and what we KNOW to be true (which is a lot... and keeps mounting with no perceptible end in sight).

or maybe this is a ploy to show the fbi or others that zero feedback "buyers" are common ebay as a way to justify past shilling/no sale auctions?

My guess is this sale will not take place.

[CuriousGeorge]

I hope you’re right because I would love to have it. But I don’t believe you are.

Originally Posted by ullmandds

or maybe this is a ploy to show the fbi or others that zero feedback "buyers" are common ebay as a way to justify past shilling/no sale auctions?

My guess is this sale will not take place.