Ruth card . . . very interesting!

[Archive]

Posted By: base2base

Thoughts on this card would be helpful(price)

http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=31719&item=5173696433&rd=1

Thanks
Brad

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Could go for $50

Could go for $5,000

Some people hate things that are not "real" cards...

Some people love to own one-of-a-kind things like this.

[Archive]

Posted By: jamie

last time it was listed it failed to meet its reserve price and bidding topped out somewhere near the starting price. it's a neat item but 1) its a glove tag, not a card and 2) the back is terrible

given the high starting price and the fact that it's been listed before, i doubt it'll sell this time either

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

It's a cool item but it's a tag. I really really don't want to get into the whold "what's a card" thing. But this is most definitely a tag, imo.....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

And Hal's Wagner is just a cigar box liner I'll give ya $50 for it :-p

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: prewarsports

So what would this be worth without the back damage? Is it the condition that makes 899.99 too high, or the card itself being a glove tag which makes the price too high?

Just curious.

Rhys

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

The card isn't going to grade better than a 2 and for that price, you could almost pick up a comperable condition Goudey. And which would you rahter spend your money on?

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

As a type collector if it were a card I would love to have it. Since we don't know of anymore it might be Ruth was the only player used. If that's the case then it's not even a set (imo). I have a Goudey Ruth but if this were a real card from a set I would take it over a Goudey. Everyone has their own ideas on this. BTW, I don't think condition is holding the value down as almost all of the back can be read. I can't make that leap of faith to it beig a card though....maybe if other players were found.....but still it's a tag....sort of a never ending circle here...regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Greenspan

Irrational exuberance I tell ya!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: wesley

Didn't sell the last time it was listed.

How can anyone tell the tag is from the 1920s?

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I agree with Leon, that it's not a trading card-- though resembles one. The Standard Catalog does, or did, list some product tags like this (1982 Spot Built George Brett tag).

It would be interesting to see if SGC, GAI or PSA would grade this item. I bet one of them would.

[Archive]

Posted By: mcavoy

It's a tag because the card reverse states its a tag, right?

I like it, but I did not bid.

I contacted the seller about the dating; they said it was found with strip cards and t-cards, so "experts" thought mid-to-late 1920s. They did not know the context of the evident back damage. I am more interested in the booklet "Homeruns," mentioned on the card reverse. Anyone know anything about that item?

Thanks, Mike