Spalding, Reach and other cut outs sold on our BST

[MW1]

Absolutely no. Cutouts should not be allowed to be sold either her or on eBay for two compelling reasons:

1. A "cut out" picture is an alteration of the original page it come from. Like an altered sports card, it should not be given a numerical grade, much less encapsulated at all (see below).

2. "Cut outs" are typically produced on thin paper and usually involve rudimentary printing methods. As such, they would be much easier to counterfeit or duplicate than actual sports cards. Allowing these types of items to be sold is like opening Pandora's box. If there's a legitimate demand for such things, collectors would be better off buying the publication and doing the cutting themselves. Sports cards that were produced to be collected and traded are an entirely different entity than paper cut-outs. It's like the difference between a studio portrait and a polaroid.

Edited to add:

I have one other thought on this subject. Many of the cut-outs, particularly those from Spalding and other similar baseball guides, are usually seen in graded holders of some kind. If cut-outs were a legitimate, stand-alone collectible, you would see similar quantities available for sale that were "raw" or ungraded. But you don't. That, to me, is clear evidence that there is an effort on the part of sellers to deceive and that cut-outs themselves, are a contrived collectible.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by MW1

Absolutely no. Cutouts should not be allowed to be sold either her or on eBay for two compelling reasons:

..... Sports cards that were produced to be collected and traded are an entirely different entity than paper cut-outs. It's like the difference between a studio portrait and a polaroid.

Really Mike? There can't be any "tweeners?"

[packs]

I don't think they should be sold here only because they could be misleading. Perhaps not to the initial buyer on the board, but I'm thinking of the next buyer.

eBay is a fine enough venue in my opinion. This board has more of a generally advanced collector community.

[MW1]

Originally Posted by Leon

Really Mike? There can't be any "tweeners?"

Leon,

Please see my additional comment above. Also, I don't view those items as "tweeners." Clearly, they were produced to be collected, clipped, or traded in some fashion. That's why many of them have labels like "baseball cards" or "sports stamps." A cut out picture of Babe Ruth or Joe Jackson from a 1916 Reach Baseball guide is something totally different.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by MW1

Leon,

Please see my additional comment above. Also, I don't view those items as "tweeners." Clearly, they were produced to be collected, clipped, or traded in some fashion. That's why many of them have labels like "baseball cards" or "sports stamps." A cut out picture of Babe Ruth or Joe Jackson from a 1916 Reach Baseball guide is something totally different.

Fair enough, I guess I missed the additional comment. That being said I have a cut out or two in my collection to go with cards or other pieces. They are true cut outs from mags and I like them.

I am mostly, strongly against cutting up "good" vintage anything. I know I have a smaller Pelicans team cut out with Jackson on it and it goes with a larger piece I have. I think I paid about $8 for it. I am happy with it.

The voting is about 2-1 in favor of (including not caring) letting them be sold on the BST with mandatory transparency and in the correct section. So far I haven't been convinced or have reasoning to go against that overwhelming majority.

To those that would say "well, if they are sold here, no worries but what about the next sale?" That is another fair question and my answer is I hope people are honest and transparent. And I don't think by "allowing" them to be sold on the BST we are necessarily asking for the pubs to be cut up. But by allowing their sale I know it is debatable.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by MW1

Absolutely no. Cutouts should not be allowed to be sold either her or on eBay for two compelling reasons:

1. A "cut out" picture is an alteration of the original page it come from. Like an altered sports card, it should not be given a numerical grade, much less encapsulated at all (see below).

2. "Cut outs" are typically produced on thin paper and usually involve rudimentary printing methods. As such, they would be much easier to counterfeit or duplicate than actual sports cards. Allowing these types of items to be sold is like opening Pandora's box. If there's a legitimate demand for such things, collectors would be better off buying the publication and doing the cutting themselves. Sports cards that were produced to be collected and traded are an entirely different entity than paper cut-outs. It's like the difference between a studio portrait and a polaroid.

Edited to add:

I have one other thought on this subject. Many of the cut-outs, particularly those from Spalding and other similar baseball guides, are usually seen in graded holders of some kind. If cut-outs were a legitimate, stand-alone collectible, you would see similar quantities available for sale that were "raw" or ungraded. But you don't. That, to me, is clear evidence that there is an effort on the part of sellers to deceive and that cut-outs themselves, are a contrived collectible.

Someone sells a cut out that is described as a cut out and I buy it as such, is contrived?

[MW1]

Originally Posted by Leon

Someone sells a cut out that is described as a cut out and I buy it as such, is contrived?

If it is graded like a baseball card with a "1 to 10" rating, then yes.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by MW1

If it is graded like a baseball card with a "1 to 10" rating, then yes.

Who brought up all of that? I was just talking about a cut out, not other aspects of the argument. (grading, ethics etc...)

I do see where you mention the grading ....but I wasn't referring to that. I probably didn't communicate that very well.

[MW1]

Originally Posted by Leon

Someone sells a cut out that is described as a cut out and I buy it as such, is contrived?

I would also add that perception is key here. Allowing the sale of cut-outs as a type of sports collectible opens the door to many items being termed legitimate, including pieces cut from pennants, logos cut from jerseys, etc.

If one third of a T202 or one half of a T201 isn't an authentic baseball card by itself, then how can a photo cut from a baseball guide be construed as a stand-alone collectible as legitimate as a baseball card?

I have no issue with ungraded pieces of paper exchanging hands for money, but when you see these same scraps, quite often with unrelated text on their reverses, selling for $50, $100, or even more in holders where a 1 to 10 grade is assigned, you're implicitly telling the customer that they are receiving a sports collectible/card meant to be marketed as such. And the fact that a disclaimer even has to be attached to such an item should tell us something about what is being sold.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by MW1

I would also add that perception is key here. Allowing the sale of cut-outs as a type of sports collectible opens the door to many items being termed legitimate, including pieces cut from pennants, logos cut from jerseys, etc.

If one third of a T202 or one half of a T201 isn't an authentic baseball card by itself, then how can a photo cut from a baseball guide be construed as a stand-alone collectible as legitimate as a baseball card?

I have no issue with ungraded pieces of paper exchanging hands for money, but when you see these same scraps, quite often with unrelated text on their reverses, selling $50, $100, or even more in holders where a 1 to 10 grade is assigned, you're implicitly telling the customer that they are receiving a sports collectible/card meant to be marketed as such. And the fact that a disclaimer even has to be attached to such an item should tell us something about what is being sold.

I am not really an "it opens the door" kind of guy on most things. I feel we should analyze things one at a time on their own merits.

We both agree on the grading of them. I have long argued against giving numeric grades to hand cut cards, especially with no caveat. I agree with you on that. However, as for the disclaimers they are there for a reason and can warn against danger. I like them on flips.

[drcy]

I'm generally not in favor of banning the sale of items (that's not an absolute rule, and I'm sure I could think of exceptions). I do think things must be accurately described so the buyer understands what is being purchased (I don't accept the usual eBay scammer's "Technically, I didn't lie. I never said it was a card" lines. You can lie via omission, such as omitting the fact that you yourself cut the picture out of a magazine). However, while I'm not for banning things and am not for telling people what they should or should not collect, I would support rules about in which categories they can be sold. As has already been mentioned, there can be the rule that they can't be sold in the card sections. If someone put an autographed baseball in the Post-War card section, Leon might move it to the autographs collection and there would be no complaints.

My problem is collectors often want to ban things based on sentiment or prevailing taste. That someone says Spalding Guide cutouts should be banned but not cutout Harper's Woodcuts is a demonstration of this. Their distinction between the two is sentimental. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with sentiment, and I perceive and value Harper's Woodcuts differently than Spalding Guide cutouts, but the topic here is about banning the sale of.

[Runscott]

....

[drcy]

I'll testify that Scott's a purist. He eats the entire bag of potato chips in one bite, because he thinks it would be unethical to remove one chip from the set. I keep telling him I think its okay to at least remove the chips from the bag first, but he says "No, I want to go to Heaven." All I know is I hope Heaven has an Internist.