1933 Goudey Variation / Error?

[Archive]

Posted By: Harry

Hello Experts,

I have just reviewed a collection of 1933 Goudey's and one of the cards, the front is Ruth #144 with an upside down wrong back of #159 Oswald Bluege. Can anyone shed some light on this? Any info would be appreciated!

Harry

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

It sounds like an error when printing, where they put the sheet through the printer the wrong way. I'm not an expert on Goudeys, but you see these wrong backs or upside down backs in 1950s and later Topps cards.

Errors are generally put into two main categories: design errors/variations and printing errors/variations. The design is where there is mispelled name or change in pose that came from the design of the card. The printing errors/variations include miscut cards, wrong backs and ink problems. All other things equivelant (rarity, etc), the design error will usually be more expensive. However, some printing errors, such as T206 ghost prints, can have a premium over the regular card.

I don't know how the Ruth card will be valued, but as it is Ruth, there may be a premium. A Cal Ripken or Stan Musial or Michael Jordan specialist may and often does pay extra for errors and oddities, because he may be going for the compete collection. Whereas the normal collector may not find it particularly worthwhile. For printing boo boos, the key often is what the specialist will pay for it, rather than what the average collector will pay-- because those can be different numbers.

[Archive]

Posted By: Harry

David,

I appreciate the information! In the collection I reviewed, they are calling this card their "Billion Dollar Card". : ) But being a Ruth like you said, their will hopefully be some interest out there. Again, thanks for information. I will post some scans of the card in the next day or two.

Harry

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

would sgc/gai/psa slab this as an error? wrong back?

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I don't know, but I would think that a grading company would label it as a wrong back.

A key for the valuation for the Ruth is the population of 1933 Goudey wrong backs or wrong backs in general for cards from that error. The prevelance is something I don't know. I know you can find 1962 wrong backs or upside down backs, but don't know about Goudeys. If wrong backs are rare for Goudeys, I would think a collector would have a heavy premium for it.

One thing about printing errors is that collectors tend to either find them really cool or they don't like them at all. I had a 1962 Topps wrong back. Some collectors were willing to pay extra for it, because it was an error and errors are cool. Others thought it should be worth less than normal, just like a miscut card is worth less.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Here is the front and back of the card. Please note that the back is actually upside down:





The card is obviously not in great condition but I expect to be sending it into PSA just to get the authenticated label and a "1". I don't think it would fail to meet PSA's requirements to be slabed but have no idea what kind of notation on the label it would have.

Harry

[Archive]

Posted By: Glenn

As a rule, rarity should be a reasonably good predictor of value. I always figured miscut cards were worth less than properly cut cards because uncut sheets exist and one can produce his or her own miscut cards by hand (and would do so if miscut cards commanded a premium; that is, more of them would enter the population as soon as they became more valuable -- which is exactly what keeps them from becoming more valuable). Wrong backs, however, are rare and will remain so no matter how much people are willing to pay for them; therefore they ought to command a premium.

[Archive]

Posted By: Harry

Thank you for the information!

I have been looking around and have not found a single other example of a wrong back for the 1933 set. The person that owns the card is looking to sell but I have no idea what the value could be. I was guestimating $400 - $800 mainly because of the condition of the card and specialty collectors like their cards in nice shape (assumption!). Without finding any other Goudey's with a wrong back, I'm starting to think it might be able to go for more than that.

If anyone knows of any other 1933 Goudeys with a wrong back, please let me know! Any other guesses for the value side of it would be appreciated. Thanks!

Harry

[Archive]

Posted By: Glenn

Certainly more than $400. I'd say $800-$1000.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

Be aware that PSA won't grade that card, billion dollar baby as it may well be, if they deem it trimmed. Particularly, if they deem it "around the world" trimmed.

[Archive]

Posted By: Harry

The card is a victim of a horrible scan, not a trim job. I have reviewed the card myself and can attest to that. The card is gradable but I'm not sure how PSA would label the card.

Harry

[BBB]

The precise opposite card is here:http://imageevent.com/kingyao/goudey...0tb9n6.eagle_s


i wonder if anything interesting can be taken away from the idea that there's an perfect opposite out there.