Non-Sport Update's Card Talk NSU Home | NSU Store | In The Current Issue... | Contact Us |
Page 1 2 3 4 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
2021 Non-Sport Almanac #7
 Login/Join
 
Member
posted
It's that time of year again! We are working on the new book and we are going over a lot of ideas. Your comments and suggestions are always welcome. We will keep you all posted with updates!
 
Posts: 241 | Location: Dallas, Texas | Registered: June 02, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Bronze Card Talk Member
Picture of Heroes For Hire
posted Hide Post
It’s time to let them know all those crazy price increases over the last year on those older sets! Dance
 
Posts: 614 | Location: Long Beach, CA | Registered: October 15, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Platinum Card Talk Member
Picture of Raven
posted Hide Post
Nice to see this news, looking forward to the new book. We happened to just be discussing the 2021 Non-Sport Almanac in the 2020 Non-Sport Almanac thread. Wish I could pick numbers like that. Big Grin

I won't repeat myself, my general comments are there. I would expect to find increases for 2021 on nearly all good, in-demand autograph cards from older mainstream titles, and by good I mean ones already having mid-range and upper tier prices. Although Marvel base cards were the big exception and vintage has its own appeal, the most non-sport card money is undoubtedly tied up in the modern certified autograph card.
 
Posts: 8857 | Location: New York | Registered: November 20, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Gold Card Talk Member
posted Hide Post
Hi Matt,

What's the deadline for sending updates for the Almanac?

Jess
 
Posts: 2640 | Location: San Jose, CA, USA | Registered: December 23, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by catskilleagle:
Hi Matt,

What's the deadline for sending updates for the Almanac?

Jess


July 31st.
 
Posts: 241 | Location: Dallas, Texas | Registered: June 02, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Platinum Card Talk Member
Picture of Raven
posted Hide Post
So I've been trying to look over the last Almanac to come up with a more meaningful and specific adjustment and I find I have too many examples to mention on the autograph cards. I just think that a lot of the ranges are off. However my big problem isn't with the high prices, which may at least have a chance of being found. My big issue is with the low prices, which are just impossible in some of the mid-range and higher tiered autographs.

The general formula seems to be that the low price is established at about 50% less than the high column for all types of hits. If the card is priced higher, the low column may be a bit more than 50%, but it is always a pretty wide gap in comparison. Too much of a gap many times. Here are just a couple:

Daniel Radcliffe Order of the Phoenix $400 - $650
Daniel Radcliffe Update Phoenix $250 - $400
Daniel Radcliffe Update Goblet $400 - $800
Emma Watson Phoenix $500 - $1000
Cate Blanchett Fellowship of the Ring $100 - $200
Cate Blanchett Twin Towers $75 - $150
Christopher Lee Return of the King $75 - $150

Now I don't know if you can find a Radcliff for $400, but I don't think you can get one for $250. Can you find a Watson at $500? Or a Lee at $75? If anyone wants to sell me a Blanchett at $75 or $100 I'll take it, because I have never seen one offered for that little.

So you get the idea. Well known names on well known autograph cards aren't changing hands at these low column values. Maybe in a distressed situation, but those low prices would fall outside the average.

My suggestion would than be, even if the high values are deemed to stay, the low values should be increased on in-demand signers. Just randomly looking at some of these better autographs listed in the Almanac, a card collector knows that they will never find many of them at the low price range. So I would recommend almost an across the board reduction in the gap between the columns for autograph cards that are not in the common signer class and increase the minimum.
 
Posts: 8857 | Location: New York | Registered: November 20, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Platinum Card Talk Member
Picture of Raven
posted Hide Post
Just two other thoughts about Almanacs and price guides in general and then I'll leave it alone. Is card condition left as a constant in the pricing process and through whose lenses are we looking at these prices and sales transactions?

I don't know what Beckett would say, but I would say condition should be at a constant and pricing should be based on the average range that normal card buyers, who are not dealers or sellers themselves, will pay. That's tricky, so I have to explain what I mean.

There has to be a constant condition, probably near-mint, where the card has no noticeable areas of significant point deductions. The low column should not include and be based on cards in lesser conditions that pull down the range. It has to be all the same condition and a premium would be in order for anything claiming that "10" or pristine or gem mint status.

For the second part, the range should also be based on what the normal buyer can expect to find in the normal market. This would seem easy since we have eBay sales, but traditionally that low column was used more by dealers looking to see the price they should buy at. Then the high column would be the price they turned around and sold it for.

That was a general rule until dealers started to decide that they had to buy at half the low price because they wanted to give "bargains" and sell at the low column. At that point if you tried to sell cards to a dealer they only wanted to offer 25% of the value, but they had no trouble selling for as much as they could. Big Grin If a price guide looks through their eyes, that low column can get very low without being a price that a card collector could ever find.

That's what I mean by tricky and why we all agree that price guides are inherently flawed. However if the sales are at least judged "apples to apples" and not "apples to oranges", it is possible to come away with more practical, real world ranges then we have for many cards now in MHO.
 
Posts: 8857 | Location: New York | Registered: November 20, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Bronze Card Talk Member
Picture of Heroes For Hire
posted Hide Post
I think the 2012 Marvel Beginnings 3 base card of Mary Jane should be elevated from a common to listed card in the $2.00 to $5.00 range. That sounds crazy, right? It’s not even a “rookie card” so why so much?

The J. Scott Campbell drawn image that is utilized for the card has gain renewed popularity since early May when it was “fixed” by a “fan” and he replied and made it a “teaching moment” on his social media account. Not sure if providing a link is appropriate so you’ll have to do your own web search.

Since mid-May, I’ve seen it sold at a comic shop for $4.00 a couple of times and noticed that one sold on the ‘bay for $9.95 on June 26.
 
Posts: 614 | Location: Long Beach, CA | Registered: October 15, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Gold Card Talk Member
posted Hide Post
Yeah, when you look at a lot of the ranges, there are some that are unrealistic. The market for any kind of collectible is almost never as structured to the point that the high is twice the low especially for rare cards. Assuming a dealer wanted to buy a card going for $800 because he has a waiting buyer for around that price, he can't hope to double his money because sellers aren't going to let it go as cheap as $400. The dealer and seller are more likely to settle around $600-650 as the seller weighs a sure-thing quick sale vs. maybe more money but certainly waiting longer for it. If the dealer has a waiting buyer, he'll take less profit to nail down a quick sale.

When I watch "American Pickers," the guys often offer more than I expect for items and it must be because they know what sells in their stores in a heartbeat. They almost never pay half the going rate. Sometimes, they offer around 70% the going rate for something rare and in-demand.

The funny thing is sometimes the sales numbers do average out to something like the high being double the low.

I think when Beckett started doing the Almanac several years ago, it had data for a lot of it but some of it was old and the researcher(s) had to ballpark other listings because few sales were found. It's more accurate now with more input from more eyes.

Jess


quote:
Originally posted by Raven:
So I've been trying to look over the last Almanac to come up with a more meaningful and specific adjustment and I find I have too many examples to mention on the autograph cards. I just think that a lot of the ranges are off. However my big problem isn't with the high prices, which may at least have a chance of being found. My big issue is with the low prices, which are just impossible in some of the mid-range and higher tiered autographs.

The general formula seems to be that the low price is established at about 50% less than the high column for all types of hits. If the card is priced higher, the low column may be a bit more than 50%, but it is always a pretty wide gap in comparison. Too much of a gap many times. Here are just a couple:

Daniel Radcliffe Order of the Phoenix $400 - $650
Daniel Radcliffe Update Phoenix $250 - $400
Daniel Radcliffe Update Goblet $400 - $800
Emma Watson Phoenix $500 - $1000
Cate Blanchett Fellowship of the Ring $100 - $200
Cate Blanchett Twin Towers $75 - $150
Christopher Lee Return of the King $75 - $150

Now I don't know if you can find a Radcliff for $400, but I don't think you can get one for $250. Can you find a Watson at $500? Or a Lee at $75? If anyone wants to sell me a Blanchett at $75 or $100 I'll take it, because I have never seen one offered for that little.

So you get the idea. Well known names on well known autograph cards aren't changing hands at these low column values. Maybe in a distressed situation, but those low prices would fall outside the average.

My suggestion would than be, even if the high values are deemed to stay, the low values should be increased on in-demand signers. Just randomly looking at some of these better autographs listed in the Almanac, a card collector knows that they will never find many of them at the low price range. So I would recommend almost an across the board reduction in the gap between the columns for autograph cards that are not in the common signer class and increase the minimum.
 
Posts: 2640 | Location: San Jose, CA, USA | Registered: December 23, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Gold Card Talk Member
posted Hide Post
Hey Raven,

On page 4 of the 2020 edition you find that Nrmt-Mint is assumed in the pricing.

As long as the prices printed reflect actual sales, I don't know what else to say. We might see a card apparently undervalued but I have been surprised at how low some cards have sold when I check Ebay's end/BIN prices.

Right, a dealer might see the low price as what he/she should pay, but as I said above, that same dealer might have his/her own idea of what could be paid based on what it should sell for. Dealers might like to pay half of the low but most sellers value their stuff too much to take that. Paying half of the low seems like a policy more for buying lots or collections where it's assumed some cards will sell slower than others.

Jess


quote:
Originally posted by Raven:
Just two other thoughts about Almanacs and price guides in general and then I'll leave it alone. Is card condition left as a constant in the pricing process and through whose lenses are we looking at these prices and sales transactions?

I don't know what Beckett would say, but I would say condition should be at a constant and pricing should be based on the average range that normal card buyers, who are not dealers or sellers themselves, will pay. That's tricky, so I have to explain what I mean.

There has to be a constant condition, probably near-mint, where the card has no noticeable areas of significant point deductions. The low column should not include and be based on cards in lesser conditions that pull down the range. It has to be all the same condition and a premium would be in order for anything claiming that "10" or pristine or gem mint status.

For the second part, the range should also be based on what the normal buyer can expect to find in the normal market. This would seem easy since we have eBay sales, but traditionally that low column was used more by dealers looking to see the price they should buy at. Then the high column would be the price they turned around and sold it for.

That was a general rule until dealers started to decide that they had to buy at half the low price because they wanted to give "bargains" and sell at the low column. At that point if you tried to sell cards to a dealer they only wanted to offer 25% of the value, but they had no trouble selling for as much as they could. Big Grin If a price guide looks through their eyes, that low column can get very low without being a price that a card collector could ever find.

That's what I mean by tricky and why we all agree that price guides are inherently flawed. However if the sales are at least judged "apples to apples" and not "apples to oranges", it is possible to come away with more practical, real world ranges then we have for many cards now in MHO.
 
Posts: 2640 | Location: San Jose, CA, USA | Registered: December 23, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Bronze Card Talk Member
Picture of Heroes For Hire
posted Hide Post
The mystery of the HI and LO columns along with those up and down arrows . . .

https://www.beckett.com/news/h...eckett-price-guides/

https://www.beckett.com/news/h...beckett-price-guide/
 
Posts: 614 | Location: Long Beach, CA | Registered: October 15, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post



Platinum Card Talk Member
Picture of Raven
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by catskilleagle:
Right, a dealer might see the low price as what he/she should pay, but as I said above, that same dealer might have his/her own idea of what could be paid based on what it should sell for. Dealers might like to pay half of the low but most sellers value their stuff too much to take that. Paying half of the low seems like a policy more for buying lots or collections where it's assumed some cards will sell slower than others.
[/QUOTE]

Hey Jess,

Never watched American Pickers, but certainly if a dealer knows they have a ready buyer they will pay more. Now if they will admit to it is another matter. Big Grin

Not trying to disparage card dealers at all. They are in the card selling business and not in the buy-back business. There are so many new products and collector interest wanes so quickly, they don't need inventory that lays around.

So having said that, the first thing a dealer will tell you is that your card is not in the best of condition and the second thing is that he has no ready buyers and may be stuck with it. No seller is forced to sell low, but if you want to go to a dealer rather than try to do it yourself, you can forget about any price guide range. Dealers may or may not make an offer, but they will let you walk if you don't like it.

I do agree with you that if its a hot card they will pay more. As to agreeing about the unrealistic ranges, I can only look at autograph cards because that's what I buy as individual cards. I get annoyed when I see cards listed in the low column at values I could never find as a normal buyer. You may be right that they were never updated or I might be right that there are distressed or low ball dealer sales counted in there.

Its pretty easy to criticize a price guide and a lot harder to make it more accurate. Any good faith effort helps, but it's all an estimate that will change between the times and I think card collectors know all that already.
 
Posts: 8857 | Location: New York | Registered: November 20, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Bronze Card Talk Member
Picture of Heroes For Hire
posted Hide Post
Inspired by Raven’s mentioning of Lord of the Rings, I took a look at the 2001 Topps autographs Eek

2001 Lord of the Rings, Fellowship of The Ring, autographs:

Christopher Lee ($120-$250)
April 25 - $331.00
May 10 - $374.99
May 17 - Best Offer taken from $300 listing
May 29 - $299.60
June 6 - $399.99

Cate Blanchett ($100-$200)
April 9 - Best Offer taken from $350 listing

Dominic Monaghan ($30-$80)
April 24 - $300.00
May 10 - $324.99

Ian McKellen ($125-$250)
April 11 - $504
April 25 - $565
June 6 - $660
June 7 - Best Offer taken from $749 listing
June 16 - $630

Liv Taylor ($90-$175)
April 22 - Best Offer taken from $350 listing

Orlando Bloom ($150-$250)
May 10 - $449.99

Peter Jackson ($75-$150)
April 13 - $349.99
May 9 - $329.99
June 21 - $399.95
 
Posts: 614 | Location: Long Beach, CA | Registered: October 15, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Bronze Card Talk Member
Picture of Heroes For Hire
posted Hide Post
2000 X-Men Movie Autographs:

Hugh Jackman ($120-$250)
April 11 - Best Offer taken from $699.99 listing
May 6 - $665
May 19 - $710

Sir Ian McKellen ($60-$120)
May 18 - $239.99
July 3 - $187.50
 
Posts: 614 | Location: Long Beach, CA | Registered: October 15, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Platinum Card Talk Member
Picture of Raven
posted Hide Post
Oh yeah HH, Lord of the Rings autograph card listings are way, way off, but to be fair a good portion of the increases have occurred since the last Almanac. The bi-monthly price guide is lagging.

When I look at signed cards that I know well like Blanchett and Maggie Smith in Potter, just terrific actors, they were always criminally undervalued compared to the likes of an Alba or Fox. However in the last few months their sale prices have jumped 50% and more.

I'm not talking about graded cards either, the raw cards, but no doubt it could be in part due to the intention of getting them graded and the demand that it generates. I'm actually very happy to see worthy undervalued autograph cards like these rise to where they deserve to be.

Beckett does have to catch up on many of the better "premium hits" in that 2001 - 2010 era because as you pointed out, the sales are few because most are imbedded in long time collections, but when they come up they are trading much higher than that old template range.
 
Posts: 8857 | Location: New York | Registered: November 20, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Bronze Card Talk Member
Picture of Heroes For Hire
posted Hide Post
Yeah, there probably are tons of cards that could use some updating.

2009 X-Men Origins Wolverine Autographs

Ryan Reynolds ($150-$300)
May 14 - $860
May 25 - $811
June 13 - $754.63
 
Posts: 614 | Location: Long Beach, CA | Registered: October 15, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Gold Card Talk Member
posted Hide Post
I'm curious to where the pricing comes from.

Outside of sealed wax I can't think of any source that makes sense besides eBay.

How many significant entertainment card dealers are there -- 2 dozen? Fewer? If I wanted to buy an Emma Watson autograph how many dealers have any Watson autographs at all? How many have more than 1?

While I am using Watson as an example I think those statements are true for a lot of less common cards.

If the dealers do have the cards for sale where are they selling them? I've only been able to find about half a dozen dealer websites where they are selling individual cards. None have a Watson listed, and nearly of those dealers also list on eBay.

I don't think show sales are valid for a price guide because most of the country doesn't have entertainment card shows. Most comic/sports card shows feature few, if any entertainment card dealers and across all shows how many dealers are going to have a specific card -- i.e. a Watson autograph for sale?

Across all of those venues how many the dealers who have the cards are using eBay sales to price their cards? Probably many if not most of them.

For better or worse eBay seems to be the only significant source of sales data for entertainment cards that are accessible to most collectors.

Looking through PWCC's market research you have to go back to 2016 to find a Watson autograph that sold for less than $600. I'm not sure when the last Almanac was published, so maybe dipping down to $500 for a value was valid when it was published.

That said for an individual card a price range of $500-1000 is also a challenge. What does that $500 spread indicate? Certainly outside of something extreme happening cards don't swing in value between $500 and $1000.
 
Posts: 4921 | Location: Parts Unknown. | Registered: January 25, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Bronze Card Talk Member
Picture of Heroes For Hire
posted Hide Post
I’m sure RDJ auto cards are selling higher than $2500 these days, but the 2008 Iron Man autograph of Greg Clark has been pretty strong lately, too.

Greg Clark ($25-$60)
May 11 - $157.50
June 15 - $250
June 27 - $165
 
Posts: 614 | Location: Long Beach, CA | Registered: October 15, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Wow! As usual, thank you for all the feedback. I always make sure to take everything into account when doing the price guide/database.

I'll try to be brief with my comments as I'm getting ready to start working on things at around 3:00 am CST. Our pricing is done through the sales data that our market gatherers compile for us. As you can imagine, with sales doubling, tripling, or even quadrupling in some genres throughout the pandemic, it is almost impossible to weed through everything. We also have to be careful because of shill bidding, BIN, graded cards, etc. It's a lot to go through for an entire team let alone one person.

Another major factor in making adjustments is time. Time is a valuable commodity in what we do and as crazy as it sounds, sometimes we just don't have enough time to get to certain sets. Combine the amount of vast pricing info and the amount of time it takes to get through it, sometimes things are just going to get overlooked. It's inevitable. I do the best I can to keep up with non-sports but I also have gaming which includes all the major properties in their own separate category: Magic, Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, etc; MMA (UFC cards are hotter than they've ever been), Wrestling, Miscellaneous sports, Tennis, Boxing, Cricket, Rugby, Australian Rules Football, Vinyl (Funko, Kidrobot, Tokidoki, Loyal Subjects), Action Figures & Figurines (McFarlane, NECA, Starting Lineup, Imports Dragon, etc). Needless to say, there is a lot to do day-to-day.

That is where collectors and dealers can come into play. We encourage everyone to let us know trends that they are noticing in the market or reminders of things to check. I've already had several of you do so, so please keep those emails coming. I'm getting into the very thick of this almanac this week and I will be heavily focused on the last 20 years of autographs and Marvel stuff. So, if you notice anything that you want me to look at, email me at mbible@beckett.com. I'll be happy to check it out!
 
Posts: 241 | Location: Dallas, Texas | Registered: June 02, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Platinum Card Talk Member
Picture of Raven
posted Hide Post
Appreciate your efforts Mr. Bible, but that sounds like a lot of territory to cover. I think you may get more emails than you can handle. I would suggest you take a look at all the autograph cards already $100 + high and all of the very recognizable name signers. Especially in the 2000 - 2010 years, they may be way off because they were presumed to have stabilized and didn't adjust much, if at all. There is no such thing as stabilization now.

The other problem that I have already mentioned is that these very popular autograph cards have found the homes of true collectors and they aren't changing hands often unless an offer is too good to turn down. You aren't going to see many eBay transactions, but when you do it may not be anywhere near even your high column price.

One example would be the RA Famke Janssen Bond signatures. A quick look has your listing at:

2007 Complete A56 $150 - $300
2009 Archives FJ1 $100 - $150

Of the handful of recent eBay sales for her RA cards I don't see one less than $600 and there aren't many. Those ranges are not valid.

Now strangely enough, on the Janssen 2019 Bond autographs from UD you have a much higher price. The inscription is $600 - $850, while the plain just has $400. I say its strange because there are a couple of recent sales on eBay for both those cards just under $300. But its not that surprising from a collectors point of view. The RA Bond autographs have much more demand than the UD cards if its the same repeat signers.

I think you can reevaluate all of the higher tiered Bond RA autographs because the big factor that has changed is that the run is finished for them and Bond card collectors have not embraced UD for a lot of reasons.

If you want specific opinions about a certain title or section of the Almanac, I'm sure you would get them here if you just asked. Not sure you'd want to ask. Big Grin
 
Posts: 8857 | Location: New York | Registered: November 20, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4  
 


© Non-Sport Update 2013