Ruth sporting news psa 4 rookie in REA

[Jdoggs]

At $132k in REA with a day to go, SMR is $85k. Ruth rookie is going up!

[ullmandds]

yup! ruth items dominate the top priced lots. i can't believe there are those who'd pay more for a psa 10 henderson rookie...than a ruth bat...ot a myriad of other incredible items.

[oldjudge]

And that is a really ugly blank back 4

[pherbener]

I agree Pete! Seems crazy to me. I guess it's all about the PSA registry to some people.

[itjclarke]

The same Ruth sold for about $46K in Goodwin back in 2014, then flipped for $53K a year later. Nice ROI for that 2015 buyer, if he's the consignor in REA.

[Baseball Rarities]

A really nice 4 would bring $200K.

[nolemmings]

Actually that same card sold last Spring in REA for $156K.

[nolemmings]

A really nice 4 would bring $200K.

True. Two have fetched over $200K since 2016.

Oops, my bad. Those were not blank backs (TSN and Standard Biscuit).

[Jdoggs]

Yes a Ruth sporting news psa 4 rookie sold for $216k in 2016.

[Shoeless Moe]

Actually that same card sold last Spring in REA for $156K, which is about where it is now after the juice.

same item in auction houses next auction to me is a flag that their may have been a non-paying high bidder.

[1952boyntoncollector]

same item in auction houses next auction to me is a flag that their may have been a non-paying high bidder.

Anyone ever get sued for not paying on a 100k item...if not..then the integrity of any 'sale' of a 100k item to me is highly questionable.

[glynparson]

I am willing to bet there are more non paying bidders on $100 items, at all the houses and auction venues, than on 100k items. Do you question the validity of all those sales as well? Of course some are bogus but I would never question Brian and Michael's morals and ethics (the owner and a key member of REA)as it seems you are implying. If worried it was a non paying bidder why not call and ask. REA is as trustworthy if not more so than any other auction house (honestly probably tie with a few other houses including Scott's, Ryan's, Al's )

[Republicaninmass]

Anyone ever get sued for not paying on a 100k item...if not..then the integrity of any 'sale' of a 100k item to me is highly questionable.


I haven't, but I'd doubt you'd ever be able to bid again in the auction house. I know people have registered on the last day with other houses in a friends name and have shilled up their own stuff, only to get caught later on and be refused future congnments.

Recently I was visiting another auction house when they were vetting a buyer and just made a few calls to the other big houses and found their applicant had an outstanding invoice. IMO it probably happens, but far far less frequently than on eBay where not just your identity is hidden, they don't do any type of spot checks.

[Vintageclout]

A really nice 4 would bring $200K.

A PSA 4 sold in Heritage for $288K earlier this year, and this same 4 (w/the blue stained back) previously sold in REA for $156K in May 2016. No secrets on this card’s steady climb.

[MattyC]

Actually looks like they’re going down price-wise if the latest REA example doesn’t see more action. Moreso if it didn’t actually sell last time at REA.

[nolemmings]

Actually looks like they’re going down price-wise if the latest REA example doesn’t see more action. Moreso if it didn’t actually sell last time at REA.

Yes and no. IMO, a blank back will and should always fetch less money than a card with an advertising reverse, at least in similar grades, as blanks are far more plentiful. The two Ruths that went for over $200K since 2016 both had ad backs.

[GaryPassamonte]

How is it a PSA 4 with back damage?

[MattyC]

Yes and no. IMO, a blank back will and should always fetch less money than a card with an advertising reverse, at least in similar grades, as blanks are far more plentiful. The two Ruths that went for over $200K since 2016 both had ad backs.

I agree with this.

So the final hammer price on the 4 was less than the last time it sold at REA, and well below the 200k-level that others (with different backs) commanded earlier. Seems like a softening.

[pcoz]

This card sold stupid cheap, and I do think it's a 200k card that someone got a steal on. I had previously owned this and the image, color and corners are really sharp, although a little off center. The back never bothered me, as i'm more of an image guy. I think a lot of the high end Ruth stuff was soft last night with the exception of the Collins-McCarthy, which wasn't very attractive to say the least. Maybe too many good things in one auction.

[pcoz]

How is it a PSA 4 with back damage?

Gary, the front on the PSA 4 looks just like some of the Ruth 6's and 7's being off centered. It may have been a 6 if not for the stain imo.

[Jdoggs]

This card sold stupid cheap, and I do think it's a 200k card that someone got a steal on. I had previously owned this and the image, color and corners are really sharp, although a little off center. The back never bothered me, as i'm more of an image guy. I think a lot of the high end Ruth stuff was soft last night with the exception of the Collins-McCarthy, which wasn't very attractive to say the least. Maybe too many good things in one auction.

I agree with you.
Ruth PSA 7 sporting news blank back rookie sold for $600k. SMR is $565k.
Ruth sporting news rookie cards on the aggregate are trending upward.
And they are more stable than post war rookies such as Koufax, Clemente, Ryan, Rose, etc.

[MattyC]

I agree with you.
Ruth PSA 7 sporting news blank back rookie sold for $600k. SMR is $565k.
Ruth sporting news rookie cards on the aggregate are trending upward.
And they are more stable than post war rookies such as Koufax, Clemente, Ryan, Rose, etc.

SMR is notoriously low across the board, so compared to that everything is going up in price, lol.

[rats60]

I agree with you.
Ruth PSA 7 sporting news blank back rookie sold for $600k. SMR is $565k.
Ruth sporting news rookie cards on the aggregate are trending upward.
And they are more stable than post war rookies such as Koufax, Clemente, Ryan, Rose, etc.

A PSA 7 sold last year for 717k by Heritage Auctions.

[Baseball Rarities]

A PSA 7 sold last year for 717k by Heritage Auctions.

I believe that Heritage sold another PSA 7 in the $550K range earlier this year.

[rats60]

I believe that Heritage sold another PSA 7 in the $550K range earlier this year.

Although that one had much worse centering than the 600k and 717k Ruths.

[pokerplyr80]

I've seen 2s go in the 100k range. Seems low compared to recent results. I wouldn't put much stock into the SMR price of any card, and especially not one at this level.

[nolemmings]

I note that the Standard Biscuit PSA 4 that sold in a Heritage auction 8 months ago is back up for auction with them again today.
https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball-cards/singles-pre-1930-/1916-d350-standard-biscuit-babe-ruth-151-rookie-psa-vg-ex-4/a/7200-80358.s?ic3=ViewItem-Auction-Open-ThisAuction-120115

Opinions as to why it would turnover so quickly?

[ullmandds]

personally I don't think recent prices for ruth rookies are soft...and flipping of such cards will not help their values!

[Vintageclout]

This card sold stupid cheap, and I do think it's a 200k card that someone got a steal on. I had previously owned this and the image, color and corners are really sharp, although a little off center. The back never bothered me, as i'm more of an image guy. I think a lot of the high end Ruth stuff was soft last night with the exception of the Collins-McCarthy, which wasn't very attractive to say the least. Maybe too many good things in one auction.

Don’t tell that to the buyer that took me out on the Ruth HR Chocolate postcard for $15,600! Sorry Pete but most of the Ruth cards went strong including the exhibits and the PSA 5 Honey Boy fetching $24,000. Let’s face it, that PSA 4 Ruth Rookie is overgraded by TWO full grades and should either be a 2 or 4-ST. It also has been in auction at least 5 times! People are now buying the card more than the grade, and the 4 Rookie is 80/20 centered at best with unsightly blue staining on the back. Ruth rookies and all rare items (especially Red Sox related artifacts) are as strong as ever. The 3 Rookie card 7’s have now sold for $717K; $556K and $600K since 2016, justifying why $600K is not a soft sale by any means.

[Jdoggs]

SMR is notoriously low across the board, so compared to that everything is going up in price, lol.

Actually you are wrong.

51 mantle bowman psa 7 sold for $20k on eBay auction recently.
Smr is $35k for psa 7 51 bowman.

Smr is not notoriously low across the board there are many more examples of this.

[JasonD08]

As previous owner it has went up 10 times since I sold it. It actually was holdered with wrong date years ago. Amazing what a call to Joe and a $100 bill will do. I was too shocked at the straight 4 grade.

[Bradyhill]

Truth be told that Standard Biscuit 4 is my Card and I needed to sell it back quickly because I wanted to win the REA 7.... which I did :-)

It’s a solid 4 in my opinion though.

[Vintageclout]

Truth be told that Standard Biscuit 4 is my Card and I needed to sell it back quickly because I wanted to win the REA 7.... which I did :-)

It’s a solid 4 in my opinion though.

Hi Brady it’s Joe T! I just wanted to extend my congrats on winning the PSA 7 Ruth Rookie in REA. It’s a tremendous card, and you won it on the slightly lower end of the spectrum.

[pcoz]

Brady congrats on a great card! Joe, some Ruth items did go strong, but I thought the Ruth team PC 4 and Stag Sweater Photo went a little light, and Brady's 7 should've/could've been a 750k+ card or higher, as it was a good bit nicer than the Heritage 7 from the last sale. 600k isn't cheap though! PSA has graded a few 6's & 7's as off-center as that 4, with the front of the 4 being equally as nice(image, color, corners). I think it could've been a 6mk or a 4 due to the stain imo, but I'm not a grader. I still think that was a really low price for that card regardless.

[MattyC]

Actually you are wrong.

51 mantle bowman psa 7 sold for $20k on eBay auction recently.
Smr is $35k for psa 7 51 bowman.

Smr is not notoriously low across the board there are many more examples of this.

Actually, if you are looking at smr for anything beyond the articles, you’re doing yourself a disservice. In general, it is low— and behind the times. But you make your own valuations and I’ll make mine.

[Jdoggs]

SMR is notoriously low across the board, so compared to that everything is going up in price, lol.

Just wanted to point out you stated compared to SMR "everything" is going up in price and you stated SMR is notoriously low across the board. Not "everything" is selling for more than SMR and I gave you the 51 mantle PSA 7 recent sale on ebay example which was $15k less than current SMR for 51 mantle PSA 7. Other recent sales of other major cards have sold for less than SMR too but you can find those examples with your own research.

[oldjudge]

Brady-For a blank back card the 7 is a beauty. Personally, I don’t like blank backs but to each his own. The Standard Biscuit 4 is extremely nice. The centering annoys me a little, but otherwise it has the characteristics of a higher graded card. I would think that it will do very well. With all due respect to my friend Pete, I still do not like the blank back 4 from REA. That back really is a tough obstacle to overcome.

[pcoz]

Jay, the back and card might not be for everyone, point well taken. The Standard Biscuit 4 is much nicer than the REA 4 on the whole. Brady good luck with the sale. The stain on a blank back didn't bother me much. It was less obtrusive or bothersome than if it had creases or paper loss. So, I was happy to own it, but I can see it not being for everyone.

[T205 GB]

SMR is notoriously low across the board, so compared to that everything is going up in price, lol.


Or outrageously high!

[Bored5000]

Actually, if you are looking at smr for anything beyond the articles, you’re doing yourself a disservice. In general, it is low— and behind the times. But you make your own valuations and I’ll make mine.

Some SMR prices are relatively accurate and up to date. I think the worst SMR joke prices are for Cracker Jack baseball cards. The Cracker Jacks aren't even some obscure, thinly traded sets.

It is silly when SMR lists 1915 Cracker Jack prices of $800 in PSA 1 for Cobb, $250 for Wagner, $225 for Matty, $225 for WaJo, $90 for Alexander :eek: and either $30 or $35 for minor Hall of Famers.

[griffon512]

some previous posters have alluded to this, but i think the debate boils down to the REA PSA 4 Ruth having poor eye appeal relative to comps in the view of most auction bidders. don't get me wrong, it's a tremendous card and i would love to go back in time with the foresight to buy it 5 years ago...but the greatest foresight would have been to go back in time and buy only high eye appeal rookie or early year cards of iconic players.

absent any major flaws, the biggest drivers of attractiveness of a card are centering and image quality. both have gotten progressively more important recently, where the premiums on high eye appeal and discounts on low eye appeal are more pronounced. we see examples of this all over the place in recent auctions of high end cards. e.g., look at the premiums t206 cobbs are getting with strong centering and registration. same goes for ruth goudeys, and countless other high end cards. on the flip side, a poorly centered mantle psa 6 rookie went for ~$9,900 in lelands (https://lelands.com/bids/bidplace?itemid=84399), probably $5k less than what a well centered example would have gotten. obviously the higher dollar value the card is, the bigger the $ impact is going to be for high eye appeal vs. low eye appeal.

unlike some post-war iconic players, i don't see any consistent signs of a slowdown in prices in mid-range and high-end ruth cards that have high eye appeal currently. it's the opposite. in addition i think this higher premium/discount on eye appeal will continue, because it's become accepted practice by collectors and investors to not let vcp or smr dictate prices when eye appeal in both directions deviates greatly from the norm. high eye appeal is a way that the hobby has created greater scarcity value in the same way a third party grade has in the past, and i think that trend is here to stay!

[Vintageclout]

some previous posters have alluded to this, but i think the debate boils down to the REA PSA 4 Ruth having poor eye appeal relative to comps in the view of most auction bidders. don't get me wrong, it's a tremendous card and i would love to go back in time with the foresight to buy it 5 years ago...but the greatest foresight would have been to go back in time and buy only high eye appeal rookie or early year cards of iconic players.

absent any major flaws, the biggest drivers of attractiveness of a card are centering and image quality. both have gotten progressively more important recently, where the premiums on high eye appeal and discounts on low eye appeal are more pronounced. we see examples of this all over the place in recent auctions of high end cards. e.g., look at the premiums t206 cobbs are getting with strong centering and registration. same goes for ruth goudeys, and countless other high end cards. on the flip side, a poorly centered mantle psa 6 rookie went for ~$9,900 in lelands (https://lelands.com/bids/bidplace?itemid=84399), probably $5k less than what a well centered example would have gotten. obviously the higher dollar value the card is, the bigger the $ impact is going to be for high eye appeal vs. low eye appeal.

unlike some post-war iconic players, i don't see any consistent signs of a slowdown in prices in mid-range and high-end ruth cards that have high eye appeal currently. it's the opposite. in addition i think this higher premium/discount on eye appeal will continue, because it's become accepted practice by collectors and investors to not let vcp or smr dictate prices when eye appeal in both directions deviates greatly from the norm. high eye appeal is a way that the hobby has created greater scarcity value in the same way a third party grade has in the past, and i think that trend is here to stay!

+1 - I couldn't agree more Jim. I've always stated that for iconic cards, exceptional centering can drive a premium 25% - 50%+ (especially for the Ruth Rookie and '51 Bowman/'52 Topps Mantles). While many technical attributes impact a card's value such as creasing, corners, color, surface issues, etc., it certainly seems the most significant positive pricing driver is a card portraying close to 50/50 centering.

Joe T.

[MattyC]

Well said, Joe and James.

[mechanicalman]

high eye appeal is a way that the hobby has created greater scarcity value in the same way a third party grade has in the past, and i think that trend is here to stay!

I think this is a very astute point.

Generally speaking, the hobby ascribes great value to scarity. We love to spend money on cards with low pops. But what if you could quantify the % of perfectly centered/registered examples of a particular issue? My gut says that the pop of these cards, at any grade, would be incredibly low. I’ve probably seen 90% of the publicly traded Red Cobb portraits sold in the last five years, and I’ve seen more cards with a Ty Cobb back than I have seen perfectly centered/registered versions (with any back). Clearly, this is both subjective and anecdotal, but my sense is that cards that were perfectly printed and cut at the factory make up a smaller population than we give them credit for, and that should keep premiums healthy.

[MattyC]

I think this is a very astute point.

what if you could quantify the % of perfectly centered/registered examples of a particular issue?

Well said. I try to do just that with the cards I collect. Very early on it struck me that while I could pick from many 1952 Topps Mickey Mantles, I could not find any that were dead centered. To date I have only come across a literal handful that I'd call dead centered to the eye, across all grades. Of course many other classic cards have similar situations, and their focused/centered specimens are always hotly contested when they surface.

[Vintageclout]

Well said. I try to do just that with the cards I collect. Very early on it struck me that while I could pick from many 1952 Topps Mickey Mantles, I could not find any that were dead centered. To date I have only come across a literal handful that I'd call dead centered to the eye, across all grades. Of course many other classic cards have similar situations, and their focused/centered specimens are always hotly contested when they surface.

I remember when you grabbed that Mantle Matt, and to this day, I’ve never seen one with better centering. It’s perfect! Same issue with the Ruth Rookie. Try finding one that has nearly perfect centering....virtually impossible. Even the REA one that just sold somewhat favored the upper edge. When you find these cards with 45/55 to 50:50 centering all around, expect to pay stratospheric pricing.

[oldjudge]

Ruth can come with good centering.

[Vintageclout]

Ruth can come with good centering.

Stop bragging Jay....LOL! FYI, I also own a very nice centered 3.5. Tough to find. All kidding aside, your card is awesome Jay.

[Jdoggs]

unlike some post-war iconic players, i don't see any consistent signs of a slowdown in prices in mid-range and high-end ruth cards that have high eye appeal currently. it's the opposite. in addition i think this higher premium/discount on eye appeal will continue, because it's become accepted practice by collectors and investors to not let vcp or smr dictate prices when eye appeal in both directions deviates greatly from the norm. high eye appeal is a way that the hobby has created greater scarcity value in the same way a third party grade has in the past, and i think that trend is here to stay!

I concur!

[Leon]

Ruth can come with good centering.

Nice card, Jay!!

[ValKehl]

Sam, you said, "Generally speaking, the hobby ascribes great value to scarity." IMHO, this is true ONLY for scarce cards in the popularly-collected sets.

[Sean]

Sam, you said, "Generally speaking, the hobby ascribes great value to scarity." IMHO, this is true ONLY for scarce cards in the popularly-collected sets.

+1