Sign of the times
 

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>The steroid scandal is taking its toll on sports memorabilia. Did anyone notice that the Bonds #700 HR ball just sold at Sotheby's auction for $102,000, as compared to its $804,000 initial sales price? As one of only 3 possible #700 balls in the world, I would find this shocking (although not half as shocking as the first buyer must have found it--ouch), if it wasn't for the rumors, etc., about Bonds. This is in the same auction where a PSA 1 Wagner brought $132,000. Think about that: one of only 3 baseballs ever hit for a 700th HR costs less than a Wagner card that has at least 50 known examples.

Sign of the times
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>But how much of it has to do with the fact that the vast majority of the public dislikes Bonds? If Mac had made it to 700 do you really think a ball like this would have sold for so little? Then there is also the recent debacle about the legitamacy of various pieces of memorabilia being tied to hostoric events. Granted, MLB has gone to great lengths to ensure that balls from recent historic events are identifiable, but there is still a growing cloud over the claims of hisotic pieces of memorabilia.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>My place is full of valuable, worthless junk.

Sign of the times
 

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>that we can be sure of. <br /><br />I'm not so sure McGwire would command the same bucks today as in the past after his performance in front of congress. He'd certainly command more than Bonds, since Bonds is and always has been a public jerk.

Sign of the times
 

Posted By: <b>dstudeba</b><p>Did people like Eddie Murray? I thought he was known as pretty surly, yet his 500 HR ball went for what $500,000?

Sign of the times
 

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>When the ball first sold on Overstock.com (?!?) I thought the price was so high I wondered if the winning bid was legetimate. I think the most recent price was more realistic.<br /><br />I've always find it interesting that humans place such great signficance on things that are divisable by 10 or 100.

Sign of the times
 

Posted By: <b>Richard</b><p>And if you are the owner of the last home run ball that Bonds hit last season, aren't you praying really hard right now that Bonds just calls it quits...

Sign of the times
 

Posted By: <b>David H</b><p>That home run ball is worth no more than the cost of a brand new ball from Dick's Sporting Goods, ala $3.

Sign of the times
 

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>A new ball is worth around $7-$10 depending on where you buy it. Of course, since the Bonds one is stained and used, there is some depreciation <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Sign of the times
 

Posted By: <b>Richard</b><p>but, it would be safe to assume that the ball was not marked with the appropriate MLB holograms and DNA ink, so I may end up buying, without my knowledge, that $3 ball from Dick's Sporting Goods anyways.<br /><br />I better get it PSA/DNA approved first.

Sign of the times
 

Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>I wonder what #699 and 701 would fetch?

Sign of the times
 

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>When a player is going for a significant hit or home run mark, MLB uses special forensically marked balls whenever that player is at bat. Even if you accidentally dropped your prize possesion in a giant tub of identical baseballs and no longer knew which was the Bonds home run ball, MLB could tell you.