Does anyone actually have any interest in something like this?

[ctownboy]

Exhibitman,

In the world of automobile collecting there is a saying that goes, "a car is only original once". That is why original, numbes matching cars sell for more than unoriginal cars.

As far as strip cards and the Mona Lisa go, I say yes. The values might be different but the concept is the same; cutting them up NOW just for monetary gain is wrong.

Back in the 1920's, strip cards weren't worth anything and kids back then cut them up as they were supposed to be cut up. Ninety years later when few, if any, original strips are left and people want to know WHO made these cards and how they were distributed, it would be NICE to have an ORIGINAL strip of cards to look at and study.

Look at how much time and effort Tedzan has put into studying T 206 cards and how they were made, when they were made and how they were distributed. Just think how much easier it would be to research these cards if somebody in the tobacco company would have saved information pertaining to these cards or somebody at American Litho Company would have saved an uncut sheet or two. Just think if that info or those sheets would have been saved by a collector and then donated to a museum?

So yes, again, I think cutting up strip cards NOW for monetary gain is equal to cutting up the Mona Lisa--original information is permanantly lost that future humans might like to know, learn about and study.

We don't know as much about the Maya or Aztec civilizations NOW because the priests accompanying the Spanish sailors ordered their books to be burned. Also, the Spanish sailors took the gold and silver artifacts so that they could be melted down and used for other things. Look at all that was lost because of that and all the question we NOW have?

Just because destroying something NOW seems like a good idea (especially for monetary gain) in the future it might not be looked upon as a good idea.

Also, destroying items in one area could lead down a slippery slope where items are destroyed in other areas JUST BECAUSE a precedent has been established.

David

[Leon]

I am just waiting for the ole "my sliver is better than your sliver" argument, about now!!

[quinnsryche]

Comparing the collective loss of an entire civilization to cutting up 1 baseball bat is hardly worth the time in arguing about it. That comparison is wholly ridiculous. If as previously stated one can cull approx. 2000 useable pieces from 1 bat, then we are talking about ONE BAT being destroyed for the enjoyment of 2000 people as opposed to ONE BAT being stored away for the enjoyment of one person. Let's be completely honest here, unless EXTREMELY wealthy, no one is going to donate a Ty Cobb bat anywhere! The said children of the owner will sell that bat in a hot minute, pocket the cash and the bat will then be sequestered away for another 50 years until the offspring of another millionaire decides to dump it again. My suggestion to all who are indignant over this issue is to stay away from the modern card market because as Dr. Zaius told Taylor "Don't look for it because you may not like what you find!"

[barrysloate]

I can't speak for everyone, but I wasn't trying to suggest that destroying a Ty Cobb bat was a sign of the Apocalypse. And I respect Adam's distinction between privately and publicly held relics. But I do think it is a cheesy marketing ploy, and it's disheartening to think that 2000 collectors would actually enjoy owning a splinter from the bat.

The next time they dismantle a vintage Mercedes SL350 with the gull wings, I got first dibs on the lug nuts. I know the enjoyment I will get owning that.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It's a Splendid Splinter.

[JP]

I was trying to one-up that...but I got stuck on "Chip off the old block" and then realized if it was a Ruth bat that "Babe in the Wood(s)" worked better....I got nothin'....too tired.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It's a Splendid Splinter.

Now why didn't I think of that?

[glynparson]

Just add it to the list of questionable decesions made by the modern card investors.

[glynparson]

I would rather have all the bats kept whole and in private collections where I never see any of them. Then getting to see a little piece of wood. To me that's all it is once it has been cut up. It is no longer a bat or broken bat it is know just a splinter of wood. I don't think this practice should be illegal but that doesn't mean I have to think it is the right thing to do.

[Rich Klein]

With a small (I'll call them a focus group) group of SABR people at the 1st Deadball conference in 2002. Almost to a person, and understand they were not collectors, but had a fascination with the history of baseball, they were not against this process, providing two caveats

1) As long as not the ONLY or the LAST known example. For example (and my math may be a little bit off here), A Babe Ruth bat because it was so large, might produce 1,500 bat pieces that can fit on cards. Babe Ruth bats are reasonably available and cutting one up for this purpose is not going to affect the values very much of a full bat. In addition, you might be able to get younger collectors more interested in the greats of the past.

A case such as the Georges Vezina goalie pads being cut up (when they were the only ones known) was a good publicity move for ITG but a terrible blow to history.


2) If said bat or jersey was historically significant. For example, a bat the Babe used on an August day which broke without any homers coming off that bat, etc is frankly not as historically signiificant as the one he hit #60 in 1927 with. Historically significant artifacts should not be tampered with.

Regards
Rich