Early Ruth Cards

[wolfdogg]

Originally Posted by Leon

Not really an early Ruth but one I have wanted to replace since I bought one from a Gar Miller mimeograph sheet. It came in with an unexpected wrinkle through his face and I eventually sold it.....These have also gone up quite a bit....

Leon,
Was this Ruth a crossover from SGC? I had a SGC50 at one time and this one looks like it.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by wolfdogg

Leon,
Was this Ruth a crossover from SGC? I had a SGC50 at one time and this one looks like it.

I won it last night in the Mile High auction. I don't know anything about it except the centering for this card reminds me of '52 Mantles. Try to find one, in any grade, centered nicely. I personally like this pose the best of the 4 in the set.

[bcbgcbrcb]

It appears that REA was not convinced of the exact year that the Ruth RPPC's were produced:

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/.../2011/472.html

[LincolnVT]

My postcard graded by SGC as a 1.5 reads 1915. One of six graded examples I believe.

Ethan

[calvindog]

[Stonepony]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Jeff, thanks for showing that panel again. Awsome!

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

It appears that REA was not convinced of the exact year that the Ruth RPPC's were produced:

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/.../2011/472.html

Correct Phil. These Ruth RPPC postcards could be any year between 1915 and 1917.

Joe T.

[Forever Young]

All of this early Ruth card talk is making me want to get back in cards(limiting to Ruth). I will certainly be making a run at the next 1915 postcard or 1916 rookie that comes up for auction. Fun thread.

[LincolnVT]

My understanding is that both SGC and PSA are now grading the "American League Champions" real photo team postcard as 1915 as opposed to c. 1915.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by LincolnVT

My understanding is that both SGC and PSA are now grading the "American League Champions" real photo team postcard as 1915 as opposed to c. 1915.

That doesn't make them 1915. From everything I have seen there is no way to pinpoint the year so, to me, any person or company labeling them as 1915 is labeling them incorrectly. It happens all of the time. Buy the card not the flip....

edited to add, if a postcard is used then I go by the postmark for dating (usually).......so if it has a 1915 postmark, good enough for me!!

Harringtons

[ls7plus]

Nobody else here has a '23 Lections Ruth (a card which also symbolizes the year the House that Ruth built came into being, and the Yankees very first World Championship), or '31-32 Exhibit Babe (described as the rarest Exhibit Ruth in the Standard Catalog) from the movie stars set??? I can see I'm going to have to get a good scanner--will do so as soon as possible!

Thanks for sharing some wonderful cards, guys--IMHO, look for the Babe to keep going up in $$$. They're going into private collections for the most part, not to speculators or dealers, and many will disappear for years or even decades, which vastly and consistently reduces the available supply. It is the available supply at any given moment, rather than the total in existence, which looms largest among scarce to rare cards in the demand over supply equation, insofar as value is concerned.

May your collecting shine brightly in your lives,

Larry

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

Nobody else here has a '23 Lections Ruth (a card which also symbolizes the year the House that Ruth built came into being, and the Yankees very first World Championship), or '31-32 Exhibit Babe (described as the rarest Exhibit Ruth in the Standard Catalog) from the movie stars set??? I can see I'm going to have to get a good scanner--will do so as soon as possible!

Thanks for sharing some wonderful cards, guys--IMHO, look for the Babe to keep going up in $$$. They're going into private collections for the most part, not to speculators or dealers, and many will disappear for years or even decades, which vastly and consistently reduces the available supply. It is the available supply at any given moment, rather than the total in existence, which looms largest among scarce to rare cards in the demand over supply equation, insofar as value is concerned.

May your collecting shine brightly in your lives,

Larry

Spot on. Ruths, high-end Mantles, CJs of Cobb, Shoeless, Matty horizontal, it seems all the blue-chip stuff with eye appeal is vanishing into collections. And guys with the bankroll to acquire these items will, more often than not, have lengthy horizons when it comes to ever selling. There's pop reports and then there's effective available supply. When I get my hands on a real beauty, for example, the odds of it hitting market in decades, if ever, are infinitesimal.

[yanksfan09]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

Nobody else here has a '23 Lections Ruth (a card which also symbolizes the year the House that Ruth built came into being, and the Yankees very first World Championship), or '31-32 Exhibit Babe (described as the rarest Exhibit Ruth in the Standard Catalog) from the movie stars set??? I can see I'm going to have to get a good scanner--will do so as soon as possible!

Thanks for sharing some wonderful cards, guys--IMHO, look for the Babe to keep going up in $$$. They're going into private collections for the most part, not to speculators or dealers, and many will disappear for years or even decades, which vastly and consistently reduces the available supply. It is the available supply at any given moment, rather than the total in existence, which looms largest among scarce to rare cards in the demand over supply equation, insofar as value is concerned.

May your collecting shine brightly in your lives,

Larry

Here's one. Not really an early Ruth but my rarest for sure:

[Vintagecatcher]

Although I believe the Frederick Fotos were most likely issued over a number of years, I would consider this an early Ruth card. (Not my card.)


Patrick

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by yanksfan09

Here's one. Not really an early Ruth but my rarest for sure:

Thanks, Erick and Scot--was beginning to feel lonely re the '31-32 Exhibit. Mine is an Ex. I love portraits, and think, as I'm sure you both do, this is a great one. It's one of the prizes of my collection!

And anytime you want to rid yourself of that '23-24 Exhibit, Scott, I'd be more than willing to at least see if I could handle the freight bill! I drool every time you post it!

Collectingly yours,

Larry

[JK]

edit