Wagner in April Auction

I know this auction finished in April but is the first I have seen of it. Does anyone have any clue what exactly it is? At just under $4500 it seems like a bargain to me for an obviously rare/scarce card.

http://sports.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=714&Lot_No=81021&src=pr

Lee, there was some discussion about these on N54.


http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=114211

Interesting card and topic Lee.

Just a thought re the first reply: instead of a link to a discussion about the Wagner card on another forum, I think it would be nice to have our own discussion here. We are not trying to act as if net54 doesn't exist, but we'd prefer that the discussion be held to actual original posts, therefore adding value to our forum. I might add that links to Full Count threads are forbidden on net54 and will be deleted if/when they are posted.

Re: the Wagner card, to me it's legit, extremely rare, but not one of a kind. A number of other examples of different players with the same style/font type have surfaced (ie. Doyle), but until now they remain uncatalogued and a bit of an anomaly. $4500 seems like a fair deal for the Wagner - and if the set ever gets cataloged, it could turn out to be a bargain (I'm of the opinion that cataloging a set can only do good things for its value).

fisherboy7 wrote:Interesting card and topic Lee.

...if the set ever gets cataloged, it could turn out to be a bargain (I'm of the opinion that cataloging a set can only do good things for its value).

There seems to be a large camp that thinks that if a card is uncatalogued that it has greater value. There may be a few collectors who place a premium on that, but for the most part, I think most collectors won't "recognize" a card until it catalogued. Case in point, the e90-3 Hofman error that I found. It was scoffed at by most people until SCD added it to the checklist and SGC agreed to slab. All of the sudden, the went from no interest at $500, which what I tried to sell it for, $2750 which what it sold for in the REA auction I consigned it to. I'm sure someone will bring up OJs, but that seems to be more of an anomaly than the norm. My other experiences with uncatalogued cards were the e104-3s. Exposing them publicly and getting them added to the known checklist didn't hurt their value any.

Jay

Ben,
Sorry if I bent the rule on attaching a thread from N54. I was unaware it was forbidden here. Was only adding it for reference purposes
since other cards from this set are shown in that thread. Please feel free to delete if necessary. As far as my opinion on the Wagner card
I personally would spend my $4K+ elsewhere on a differnt Wagner card from a known set before spending it on this issue.
Just looks to generically made for my liking. Would be interesting to find out though if these were inserted into some sort of candy circa
1910 as many seem to think that is the era these are from.

Tony, no harm-no foul. We aren't going to delete it. The pretty much the only things Ben and I have deleted or some very nasty posts, most directed at Leon.

Jay

Lee

Email Greg Schwartz (spelling) or Frank Ward. They will know the most about the card and issue and I think Greg owned the card.

No problem at all Tony, I know your intentions were good. Links to net54 aren't forbidden and we won't delete them, but we'd like to encourage inclusive discussions over here as well.

I had that Wagner in an "orphans" file during my pre-2006 cataloging days. With the surfacing of a second example, as well as an O'Hara and a McCormick, I've decided to add the issue to the 2011 Standard Catalog of Baseball Cards. It will probably be listed as 1909 E-UNC.