The Radicards® Thread

[RustyGreerFan]

Here are two different auction results of the BGS9 example, serial number: 0007352477, of the Frank Thomas 1990 Topps #414A NNOF. https://bit.ly/2JoPDVM

That's amazing.

 

[patrick182]

For those who own and/or collect PSA graded THICK cards like relic cards and releases featuring high quality thick cards i.e., Topps Five Star etc., you'll appreciate these. We recently relaunched our Fitted PSA Graded Card Bags for Thick Slabs. These bags should fit *most* thick PSA slabs. If you've got stuff like this in your collection, these bags are nice to have on hand. Bulk orders also available.

Link to listing > https://bit.ly/31s2MmB

Link to listing > https://bit.ly/31s2MmB

 

[patrick182]

This Jay Bruce Superfractor was listed four times over the past month. Here's a review of each listing and what the last one could mean to collectors. https://bit.ly/2XBqQnV

 

[patrick182]

Rare Babe Ruth road jersey sells for over $5.6 million, making it the most expensive piece of sports memorabilia on earth to date. See it here. https://bit.ly/2KNBa6n

 

[Letch77]

Rare Babe Ruth road jersey sells for over $5.6 million, making it the most expensive piece of sports memorabilia on earth to date. See it here. https://bit.ly/2KNBa6n

Here’s what I hate about “relic game used” stuff. Here’s an iconic piece of historic sports memorabilia that is incredibly limited in existence. For all we know, Topps Co. purchased this piece to basically shred and glue fragments into some future card releases...thereby destroying the original artifact, all in the name of a few dollars.
I equate it to having a one of a kind auto of an historical figure and cutting it into 20+ pieces so that many people can own a piece. After it’s cut all to hell, it’s basically is insignificant as a rare piece. I just don’t like it. End rant [emoji51]

 

[banjar]

Yes, yes, and yes again. I really wonder how Topps and others have impacted the supply of truly priceless rare items. There are plenty of Barry Bonds bats, but Lou Gehrig jerseys? I also blame collectors who get all hot and bothered over a scrap of jersey, or a cut auto. For what you pay for a couple of 1/1 Ruth cut autos, couldn't you buy the real thing? It's bananas.

Here’s what I hate about “relic game used” stuff. Here’s an iconic piece of historic sports memorabilia that is incredibly limited in existence. For all we know, Topps Co. purchased this piece to basically shred and glue fragments into some future card releases...thereby destroying the original artifact, all in the name of a few dollars.
I equate it to having a one of a kind auto of an historical figure and cutting it into 20+ pieces so that many people can own a piece. After it’s cut all to hell, it’s basically is insignificant as a rare piece. I just don’t like it. End rant [emoji51]

 

[patrick182]

In this video, we discuss a Mark McGwire 1999 Topps Stars Foil parallel, and a Pete Kozma 2007 Bowman Sterling Red Refractor parallel. https://bit.ly/2XoGHSJ

 

[patrick182]

Fake Frank Thomas 1990 Topps NNOF Makes it Passed BGS and Probstein https://bit.ly/2xUGfkF

 

[patrick182]

In this episode, we discuss a Mark McGwire 1994 SP Holoview Red, and a Stephen Strasburg 2010 Bowman Sterling Purple Refractor. https://bit.ly/2LxjufO

 

[patrick182]

Notable Mike Tyson signed Punch-Out photo display with original NES controller makes its way to auction and sells for a bargain. See it here. https://bit.ly/2YjaBw6

 

[patrick182]

After a full week of post-production, the following three episodes are finally live and ready for your viewing.

#241: Mark McGwire 2019 A&G Glass and Craig Kimbrel 2011 Topps Hope Diamond + 2019 NSCC: https://bit.ly/2ZYO1Xt
#242: 2019 National Sports Collectors Convention Review: https://bit.ly/2Tv7JHM
#243: Interview: Tim Getsch – Founder & CEO, COMC.com (Round 2): https://bit.ly/31uabRE

 

[patrick182]

In this video, we discuss a Kirby Puckett 1990 Donruss Aqueous and a Frank Thomas 1997 Leaf Fractal Matrix Die Cut. https://bit.ly/2Zyco0V

 

[mrmopar]

I was actually just thinking about a similar situation this week. What I mean is that I was wondering if a ridiculously high BIN price with Best Offer activated is ultimately hurtful to the market and does it always need to be? Could we ever get to a point where a high BIN is the norm, just to allow more reasonable offers and not risk being taken advantage of? Here is my thought behind this.

If you have a card like this Jay Bruce, where the market is not necessarily established, but you'd like people to submit offers, setting a BIN price can backfire if you are not careful. Nobody wants to give away money, but unless you study the Jay Bruce/Superfractor market, you really don't have a great idea what this card might be worth to most. You always hope someone comes strong, but maybe you just want to get a certain amount out of the card. If you set a BIN too low, someone is going to grab it fast and it's likely to be a flipper just looking to make a fast buck and exploits a seller mistake in the process. Maybe you don't care, but it still stings to leave money on the table and everyone can always use a little more. If you list it too high though, it might not receive any offers because many bidders seemingly are too worried about "offending the seller" with a low ball offer. I tried this on a smaller scale and although I had many watchers, the offers were few and far between. I ultimately accepted every offer that was made, but I still feel that some bidders may have been reluctant to offer, even though I specifically stated in the listings that my BIN prices were high on purpose and that I was just looking for fair offers!

You see it ALL THE TIME in whiny threads on these forums about how bidders are frequently described as cheap or lowballers, but it seems that the market has set up a general expectation that many sellers are looking to get about 50% of their asking price, much the same way that Beckett seemed to set the market for card show deallers who would list at Hi Beckett, expecting to get about half that in reality.

I think it would be nice if "unrealistic" BIN prices with BO were just a way to get a card in front of people to make offers without risking a huge loss of potential profit. In fact, it would be nice if ebay would just do away with a required BIN price and allow open offers only. Lets be honest here, a fair amount of BIN prices are way too high anyway and the seller is simply trying to get you to aim somewhere under that value anyway, but some sellers seem to be ultra offended when a 50% offer is placed on their items. However, don't even try to offer less than 50%, even if your offer would be considered fair to 98% of the selelrs, because THAT seller is probably going to have an aneurysm if your offer is not 85% or higher of BIN.

Buyers and sellers are all trying to get the best deal, but the games keep a lot of sales from happening in my opinion.

This Jay Bruce Superfractor was listed four times over the past month. Here's a review of each listing and what the last one could mean to collectors. https://bit.ly/2XBqQnV

 

[patrick182]

A third variation of the 1989 Topps Gary Sheffield has been added to this post: https://bit.ly/2jZVVA1

 

[patrick182]

I was actually just thinking about a similar situation this week. What I mean is that I was wondering if a ridiculously high BIN price with Best Offer activated is ultimately hurtful to the market and does it always need to be? Could we ever get to a point where a high BIN is the norm, just to allow more reasonable offers and not risk being taken advantage of? Here is my thought behind this.

If you have a card like this Jay Bruce, where the market is not necessarily established, but you'd like people to submit offers, setting a BIN price can backfire if you are not careful. Nobody wants to give away money, but unless you study the Jay Bruce/Superfractor market, you really don't have a great idea what this card might be worth to most. You always hope someone comes strong, but maybe you just want to get a certain amount out of the card. If you set a BIN too low, someone is going to grab it fast and it's likely to be a flipper just looking to make a fast buck and exploits a seller mistake in the process. Maybe you don't care, but it still stings to leave money on the table and everyone can always use a little more. If you list it too high though, it might not receive any offers because many bidders seemingly are too worried about "offending the seller" with a low ball offer. I tried this on a smaller scale and although I had many watchers, the offers were few and far between. I ultimately accepted every offer that was made, but I still feel that some bidders may have been reluctant to offer, even though I specifically stated in the listings that my BIN prices were high on purpose and that I was just looking for fair offers!

You see it ALL THE TIME in whiny threads on these forums about how bidders are frequently described as cheap or lowballers, but it seems that the market has set up a general expectation that many sellers are looking to get about 50% of their asking price, much the same way that Beckett seemed to set the market for card show deallers who would list at Hi Beckett, expecting to get about half that in reality.

I think it would be nice if "unrealistic" BIN prices with BO were just a way to get a card in front of people to make offers without risking a huge loss of potential profit. In fact, it would be nice if ebay would just do away with a required BIN price and allow open offers only. Lets be honest here, a fair amount of BIN prices are way too high anyway and the seller is simply trying to get you to aim somewhere under that value anyway, but some sellers seem to be ultra offended when a 50% offer is placed on their items. However, don't even try to offer less than 50%, even if your offer would be considered fair to 98% of the selelrs, because THAT seller is probably going to have an aneurysm if your offer is not 85% or higher of BIN.

Buyers and sellers are all trying to get the best deal, but the games keep a lot of sales from happening in my opinion.

I appreciate the time you've taken to comment on this.

My only issue with the logic provided is that with a card at a BIN/OBO of $15,000 that's only actually worth around $250 (proven), a 50% offer would still mean overpaying by 2900%, which even in a robust economy is far from fair market value.

 

[banjar]

I hear the points you guys are making, and from my viewpoint you're both right. These games are ridiculous, and these sellers asking the moon for cards - including those with much lower proven sales history - are delusional. I think the key point is to remember that with these sellers, their priority is not to sell these cards.

What that priority is, who really knows, ask their therapists . But for me, I equate it to people with 900 tinder likes who are still wearing out their index fingers swiping left and right. It's not about meeting people, it's about looking for validation of self or some other disorder.

Now and then I've looked at the sales history of these hostage holders, and it's revealing. They do sell cards, and the sold prices are always 85% of their asking prices (or whatever). But the number of cards sold is low. Maybe they think they are realizing the greatest return by holding onto these cards until they get their 85%, but I seriously doubt it. Anyone in sales knows that the point of selling things is to sell things. Of course you can't give them away, but you also can't hold onto every card hoping for that 1 in a million buyer. They have huge inventories of awesome cards, priced at astronomical prices, with ebay listings set to infinite repeat.

And the little games that these sellers play with their "original" asking prices of say $1000, but immediately "marked down" to $400...well that is also revealing. Anyone who does that little sleight of hand simply so they can say "60% off" is not really the greatest seller.

So yeah. These kinds of games really blow. But there's no point in making a reasonable offer on any of these cards even if it's backed up by previous sales prices. Anyone who lists a card at 10x its market price and plays little games with it is not the kind of person who will accept an offer at 10% of asking, regardless of what the markets says it's worth.

 

[JVHaste]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgT0uzzX1bs

 

[banjar]

Chappelle! I miss that guy. It's like he just lost his fastball and disappeared. Kinda like Chris Sale ;-)

 

[patrick182]

In this video, we discuss two Mark McGwire 2019 Allen and Ginter cards, and an Andrew Luck 2013 Panini Crusade Purple parallel. https://bit.ly/2khSSTZ

 

[patrick182]

I hear the points you guys are making, and from my viewpoint you're both right. These games are ridiculous, and these sellers asking the moon for cards - including those with much lower proven sales history - are delusional. I think the key point is to remember that with these sellers, their priority is not to sell these cards.

...

You nailed it with that statement. I know exactly the type of sellers to which you're referring. Thankfully, I have every Frank Thomas card these sellers have listed. In observance of the absolutely ludicrous BIN prices, I've accepted that the listing interest of said sellers exists solely for exhibition, not sales.