Posted By:
davidcyclebackGood provenance will never lower the value.
My opinion is that most card collectors will pay more for a card with good ownership, even if just a little bit more. If two cards are practically identical, most collectors will chose the one that once belonged to Rob Lifson over the one that had unknown past owner. Even if the collectors think provenance is no big deal, I don't see how they would chose the unknown past owner card at the same price. Unless you flipped a coin to decide, that you chose the Lifson card says you value it at least a little bit more.
Obviously in other areas of memorabilia, provenance takes on greater significance. That a Willie Mays game used glove was owned by the 1950s Giants bat boy or a retired Giants executive is significant. I owned an actress' jewelry that was owned by the chairman of her studio and producr of two of her movies. That the jewelry came with a letter from the producer both helped establish authenticity and gave a boost in value, as the producer himself was famous. I wouldn't have purchased the jewelry if its provenance was unknown past owner ... Of course, with a Hall of Famer's game used glove or actress' jewelry, provenance is much to most of its financial value. That glove won't be worth $15,000 for much longer when its discovered that it wasn't owned by Willie Mays.
It should also be noted that, if you consider current owner/seller as provenance, almost every board member will pay significantly more or less based on provenance. If you pay extra for a rare raw card because it's being sold by Lew Lipset, you are paying more because of the provenance (Lipset as owner/seller). If you have a bookmark of favorite eBay sellers and an unwritten list of eBay sellers to avoid, this demonstrates how much you value provenance as a buyer of baseball cards.