Provenance for "Game Used" balls, quite speculative at best?

[drcy]

One thing is that with the antique baseball and football 'trophy' balls (the painted up kind) were almost always game used balls. And besides, they have value whether or not the were actually game used. Much to most of their value is in their being quasi-trophies or presentation items. Even if a 1905 Yale Versus Harvard trophy ball turned out not to have been game used, it will still have significant value.

It comes down to what you pay and what you bought it as. If you buy a 'game used' team signed ball at the only the team signed value level and as a team signed ball, the game use or lack thereof is a relatively minor issue. It's only a signiricant issue if you double or triple what you pay due to the speculated game use. Or say you buy a modern baseball jersey and you don't know if it was game used or merely team issued. No big concern if you pay at the team issued pricing level. Obviously a pressing issue if you bought it at the game used pricing level.

It also depends how much you pay for speculation. There's a difference between adding a 10% premium to what you pay for an otherwise standard Houston Astros team signed ball because the unprovable story is it was used in a MLB game versus adding a 400% premium for the story.

[Wildfireschulte]

FYI - the Mears auction ending tonight has dozens of "game used balls". They seem believable as they are pretty affordable. If a collector was going fabricate a story, I wouldn't think it would be "foul ball by Garry Maddox".

I am neither a conseignor or owner of Mears - but I found you can get great deals on a wide variety of memorabilia in Troy's auctions - almost like a flea market - this month is especially loaded.