[I've read various threads on different boards claiming a downward spiral in the stamp market, and this was in the back of my mind as I sat through (online) the U.S. revenue portion of today's Spink/Shreves auction. I thought I'd put my thoughts down while they were still fresh in my mind.]Pardon the stream-of-consciousness ramble...
Bidding was quite spirited overall. Floor, phone, SAN, and Spink Live were all well represented. The few lots that didn't have active bidding were, in most cases, lots that had heavy pre-auction runup via mail/fax, so when they opened they were already well above original opening estimates.
I had two lots that I really was interested in and about eight others that were "contingency" or "if the price is right" lots. The only major problem was that one of my primary lots was early on, the other towards the end, and the contingency lots in between... Do I bid on contingency lots and risk not having funds remaining to get one I really wanted, or do I hold up for the one I want, and if blown out, will have lost out on the contingencies?
Ahh, the joys of auction bidding!
[I cannot link to individual lots, as for whatever reason, SAN does not add a simple <a name="lotnumber"></a> tag to their lot listings, but I can link you to the pages the lots in question are on.Links are in blue.]As it turns out, the first "must-have" lot went beyond what I was willing to pay:
Lot 641, R53a. I would have put it on extension anyway as fakes outnumber real ones 10:1 (or possibly even infinity:1 as there is a school of thought that it does not legitimately exist as an imperf; many of the ones with clear certs I wouldn't touch with a 10-ft pole). This one looks to have sufficient margins and the cancel date and impression look good (bonus points in my mind for the handstamp cancels), but the crookedness of the cuts give me pause... possibly indicative of "hesitation marks" by someone trying to trim as close to perfs as possible. At $1,700 + 20% juice (!) against a catalog value of $1,500, it was too high for me. I was involved up to about the $1,100 + juice level. A number of people above me liked it.
Other lots of note (to me):
Lot 630 (R2a). Exceptionally well centered; wonderful margins. Someone got a very nice example.
631 (R2b pair). Someone got a great deal, in my opinion. The centering is actually the norm for this issue. At $640 net against a catalog value of $3,850, it is a bargain. If it had not come before all the lots I was considering, I would have bid. In retrospect, maybe I should have.
634 (R13b pair). This was on my watch list. It went just high enough for me not to bid as I still had many lots to go, and I already have several R13bs (but no multiples). Decent price.
636 (R16b pair) and 637 (R18b pair). I had these on my list in the possibility they might go for close to opening amounts. At the prices they wound up at, I was out as they both have considerable problems and their appearances aren't the best.
647 (R79a). Someone got a nice deal on this one at $400 net. Even though it is not perfectly sound, it has exceptional eye appeal.
648 (R80a). I hate this stamp! I still need one, but this would never be it. I would love to know the reasoning for it getting a clean PF cert. These margins absolutely scream out "FAKE!" The cancel and impression are good, but any time margins are offset uniformly in a single direction with the overall size insufficient to preclude trimming, warning bells go off in my mind. I would not have bought this stamp with someone else's money. Even though it went for a "bargain price" against catalog value, I think someone bought a fake... or at least one that should have the dreaded "no opinion" cert. I just can't see giving this stamp "the benefit of the doubt."
651 (R83a pair). Bargain price, but man is this thing ugly.
656 (R96a). Attractive enough stamp, but someone paid full freight on it.
657 (R97a). Very attractive appearance at a nice price.
658 (R99a). This was my other "must-have" lot, as I've been looking to fill this hole for quite a while, but I wanted one that had good eye appeal and bold color (many of these are found faded). The bidding was quite active, and it finished nowhere near the silly opening of $350, but ultimately it was mine. I'm content with the price... not sure how much higher I would have gone though.
2nd issue multiples were all over the map, with some going for heavy discounts, and others going well above catalog.
The big rugs went for close to Scott; nice examples.
Lot 681, the R133ATC proof, just went on for ever and ever and ever, winding up at $24,000 (including juice) against a catalog value of $7,500. I'm guessing this one goes up in the 2013 Scott...
687, 691, and 695 all went for large dollars compared to Scott. Again, some multiples went cheap and others high, the difference being quality.
700 (RB9a). One of the most attractive appearing examples I've seen. Not dirt cheap, but a good price for one this nice.
701 (RB10a). I actually expected this one to go higher, but maybe the blunted corner put people off (also it looks like there may have been an attempt to lighten the cancel).
702 (RB10a). You know, I
actually considered bidding on this just to be able to fill the hole, and it went for cheap money, but good Gawd, is it fugly.
705 (RB17c). This actually was an impulse buy on my part. I hadn't really given it much thought prior to the auction. I have the other tougher roulettes (RB16c and RB18c) with certs, but don't have an RB17c. Buying a multiple takes the guesswork out of the equation (and I don't own any roulette multiples) and the price was right coming in at a little over 25% of Scott after juice. The blunted upper left corner is somewhat immaterial, because if the vertial roulette between the stamps is where I think it is based on the picture, the left stamp is superflous... it's the ginormous stamp on the right that is worth the attention, and I'm still at just over half Scott for a single.
The beer stamps aren't my area (but they ARE gorgeous stamps to behold), and the few examples appeared to bring strong money.
I didn't stick around for
the M&Ms as I don't collect them.
All in all it was quite an active session. I don't see the gloom & doom "sky is falling" in this area of the hobby...
Posted 08/20/2011 2:40 pm
