[ft28jags]

looks like it just hit

[joe callahan13]

Good call, thanks for the head's up sir!

[ft28jags]

np..been looking since i have a few and sat it was up so thought i'd share

Good call, thanks for the head's up sir!

[Rjasiak]

im losing all faith in beckett, the rookies & stars mark ingram auto books more than a mark ingram contenders auto?

aj greens playoff contenders books almost double aj greens rookies & stars auto

then the r & S ingram books almost double the AJ green rookies & stars, but now the playoff contenders aj green book more than the ingram rookies & stars?

dont understand it at all, maybe im just biased since i pulled the ingram on my break.

[fishtaco02]

Thanks for the heads up

[diablo71]

im losing all faith in beckett, the rookies & stars mark ingram auto books more than a mark ingram contenders auto?

aj greens playoff contenders books almost double aj greens rookies & stars auto

then the r & S ingram books almost double the AJ green rookies & stars, but now the playoff contenders aj green book more than the ingram rookies & stars?

dont understand it at all, maybe im just biased since i pulled the ingram on my break.

In realty the beckett price guide can be used as a guide line if you want but to me the real "value" in the cards has more to do with who is hot, what cards are hot now and so on... Why is it that some cards can sell for twice book value, while others only merit 1/2 to 1/5 value... It always has to do with what the particular flavor of the day is!! I have sold 90's inserts for well above book value before and others well below. I guess what i am saying is anyone going by book value for trading/selling is highly misconstured to what the "actual" value/worth of the card is. Going by beckett value, while at times can make you feel good or bad doesnt usually depict an accurate depiction of the "value" or worth of the card. This is just my opinion, but i would like someone to disprove this "thoery".

---

In realty the beckett price guide can be used as a guide line if you want but to me the real "value" in the cards has more to do with who is hot, what cards are hot now and so on... Why is it that some cards can sell for twice book value, while others only merit 1/2 to 1/5 value... It always has to do with what the particular flavor of the day is!! I have sold 90's inserts for well above book value before and others well below. I guess what i am saying is anyone going by book value for trading/selling is highly misconstured to what the "actual" value/worth of the card is. Going by beckett value, while at times can make you feel good or bad doesnt usually depict an accurate depiction of the "value" or worth of the card. This is just my opinion, but i would like someone to disprove this "thoery".

If book value meant anything i would have around 100K worth of cards... i bet i couldnt sell my collection for more than 12-15K if I were lucky..

[Rjasiak]

i understand that, but why is the value of mark ingrams rookie auto in rookies and stars almost double the value of AJ greens rookie auto in rookies in stars, yet in playoff contenders mark ingrams rookie auto is less than aj greens rookie auto? comparing the rookies & stars product to the contenders product it seems everyones values doubled, yet mark ingrams drops?? i just dont understand that part, mark ingrams rookies & stars rookie auto should decreased in value then as well, i always try to trade by the book but now im starting to see that why people trade at sell value, its more logical. yes mark ingram is no longer as hot but if i was to trade at book value as i normally do, id have to give a mark ingram contenders rc auto (which is almost double the retail box value of rookies & stars) and something more for a mark ingram rookies & stars auto, if they plan on not pricing mark ingrams autos with the range they were before then they should drop the prices of his other over priced rc autos from other sets. i would feel if im trading an ingram contenders auto for a ingram rookies & stars auto i should be the one getting a little more and not giving a little more. theres no logic in the way the cards are priced, and with no logic i begining to question why im paying $10 a month for something so unbalanced.

[diablo71]

You make a very valid point, this is why I put absolutely no stock into book values. It doesnt make much sense. At least to me. To me the best way to gage value is sales value.

Prime example...
I have worked in the mortgage industry for 10 years in CA. I let people know all the time what their house is worth and they tell me.. No way is it that low "the other houses that sold were all foreclosures and mine is not"
I have to remind them that if I was a buyer and i could pay 325K for your house but 225k for any of the other 3 foreclosures on your street, being it that they are identical homes. which would they pick? Market value is determined by sales. Not buy what you 'think" the value is. same goes true for any tangible item out there especially cards.

Again, this is why i dont put stock into book values or paying to see them. JMHO

---

i understand that, but why is the value of mark ingrams rookie auto in rookies and stars almost double the value of AJ greens rookie auto in rookies in stars, yet in playoff contenders mark ingrams rookie auto is less than aj greens rookie auto? comparing the rookies & stars product to the contenders product it seems everyones values doubled, yet mark ingrams drops?? i just dont understand that part, mark ingrams rookies & stars rookie auto should decreased in value then as well, i always try to trade by the book but now im starting to see that why people trade at sell value, its more logical. yes mark ingram is no longer as hot but if i was to trade at book value as i normally do, id have to give a mark ingram contenders rc auto (which is almost double the retail box value of rookies & stars) and something more for a mark ingram rookies & stars auto, if they plan on not pricing mark ingrams autos with the range they were before then they should drop the prices of his other over priced rc autos from other sets. i would feel if im trading an ingram contenders auto for a ingram rookies & stars auto i should be the one getting a little more and not giving a little more. theres no logic in the way the cards are priced, and with no logic i begining to question why im paying $10 a month for something so unbalanced.

OH and to answer your initial question... NO IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE other than one product may hold more desireablity than another or one card. but it does not make sense to me either

[fishtaco02]

Maybe it just me, but I can't really put stock in "SV". Just due to the fact, so many sale prices are shille.? I mean, ppl that quote the last # of ebay sales, take a look and see how many are shilled? Although BV may not be perfect, it does give a starting point. I personally just can't base things on sale value when there is no real "control" on them.

[diablo71]

Maybe it just me, but I can't really put stock in "SV". Just due to the fact, so many sale prices are shille.? I mean, ppl that quote the last # of ebay sales, take a look and see how many are shilled? Although BV may not be perfect, it does give a starting point. I personally just can't base things on sale value when there is no real "control" on them.

I understand the "shilling" concern , but if someone is willing to pay the final sales price even if it was shilled, that means the buyer was "willing" to pay that much for the card. If they werent they wouldnt have bid that much in the first place. So it still would be a good barometer of what it is worth to that buyer.