Ruth - Gehrig 1930s cards

[ecRich]

Both Ruth and Gehrig had many endorsement opportunities that paid better than baseball card companies did, Usually a company like Goudey would pay the team to use a photo of a player. Then a printing firm who had artists would create the card image from the photo for Goudey. The players would receive little except a bunch of cards they could give to fans and friends. Gehrig got a bigger endorsement fee from Goudey in 1934 with Lou Gehrig says and two cards. But he could do better doing less in other areas. Walsh managed both Ruth and Gehrig at the time and demanded more for the use of their images than card companies could afford.

[Ricky]

Interesting, thanks. Had not considered that their fee demand might have been beyond what card companies could or would pay. I know that they were on Exhibits and other premiums...

[conor912]

Given Ruth was in ‘33G and not ‘34, but then back for ‘35, the “spite for Gehrig” theory would explain that perfectly.

That brings a bigger question of why Goudey went with Gehrig in ‘34 instead of “Ruth says”. They thought enough of Ruth to put him on 4 cards the previous year and I would think he would have jumped at the chance had he been offered it...

[Ricky]

Originally Posted by conor912

Given Ruth was in ‘33G and not ‘34, but then back for ‘35, the “spite for Gehrig” theory would explain that perfectly.

That brings a bigger question of why Goudey went with Gehrig in ‘34 instead of “Ruth says”. They thought enough of Ruth to put him on 4 cards the previous year and I would think he would have jumped at the chance had he been offered it...

And then Gehrig, after a successful 1934 series, disappears in 1935 and thereafter in Goudey, even though Ruth is retired. But I think, what surprises me most, is Gehrig’s absence in the large 1939 Play Ball set and especially after his emotional retirement, in the 1940 Play Ball set, given the inclusion of several retired players in that set.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Ricky

And then Gehrig, after a successful 1934 series, disappears in 1935 and thereafter in Goudey, even though Ruth is retired. But I think, what surprises me most, is Gehrig’s absence in the large 1939 Play Ball set and especially after his emotional retirement, in the 1940 Play Ball set, given the inclusion of several retired players in that set.

Odd indeed. The spite theory only explains so much. It’s not like being in a baseball card set with someone is the same as sitting next to them at Thanksgiving.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by ecRich

Both Ruth and Gehrig had many endorsement opportunities that paid better than baseball card companies did, Usually a company like Goudey would pay the team to use a photo of a player. Then a printing firm who had artists would create the card image from the photo for Goudey. The players would receive little except a bunch of cards they could give to fans and friends. Gehrig got a bigger endorsement fee from Goudey in 1934 with Lou Gehrig says and two cards. But he could do better doing less in other areas. Walsh managed both Ruth and Gehrig at the time and demanded more for the use of their images than card companies could afford.

I'm fascinated by how many card images came out of a single photo. If you look at a set like 1929 Kashin you see the same artist rendered poses in 33 Goudey.

And poor Frankie Frisch, he will always be fielding that grounder between 2nd and 3rd...

[steve B]

Originally Posted by ecRich

Both Ruth and Gehrig had many endorsement opportunities that paid better than baseball card companies did, Usually a company like Goudey would pay the team to use a photo of a player. Then a printing firm who had artists would create the card image from the photo for Goudey. The players would receive little except a bunch of cards they could give to fans and friends. Gehrig got a bigger endorsement fee from Goudey in 1934 with Lou Gehrig says and two cards. But he could do better doing less in other areas. Walsh managed both Ruth and Gehrig at the time and demanded more for the use of their images than card companies could afford.

I was thinking along those lines, the companies could afford one or the other, but not both.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by steve B

I was thinking along those lines, the companies could afford one or the other, but not both.

Could be this or could be one of the other things mentioned. Interesting thoughts on the subject.

Every thread..
...this did a boomerang from my fist collection to the BST and back to me. I like miscuts...