Value/Pricing Disparity: Issues like Goudey and Kashin

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I have pondered this lately and looked at some old threads. Are the reasons for the pricing/value disparities between the two types of issues such as the size of the cards and perhaps how they were distributed?? I understand it more with premium issues. It really jumps out at me when looking at Ruth items, for example. Even lower grade '33 Goudey Ruths across most of his four cards from that set command somewhere around $3,000 at least. The Kashin is much, much less. I have really come to appreciate the photography of issues like the Kashins and see real value there. I am in NO WAY diminishing the massive following of sets like '33 Goudey. Generations of collectors can't be wrong. I just wonder if I am missing something about the lack of following/value of b&w/sepia issues like the Kashins? Thanks guys.

[nolemmings]

I'm not sure the size has much to do with it, but the manner and extent of distribution certainly does. At least one-fourth of the Kashin set could be acquired in a single purchase, so the challenge of the chase and any notion of surprise was lacking to the kids of the day. Similarly, because you got 25 or more Kashins at a time, there was no real fun in trading, as your neighbor had the same group or if not, you could just go get that group. Finally, the pricing may have impacted collectibility also, as it was easier to scrounge up a few pennies to get at least something with Goudey, plus you got gum too.

Other reasons: Kashin availability was likely far less than Goudey, and production numbers were smaller, so the number of collectors exposed to them was less. Next, it might be that the color lithographs were more attractive to the youngsters than the B&W photos, although I am not sold on that personally--but then, that's probably owing to my preference for the actual photos. The Kashin stock was far less sturdy, meaning the cards were more apt to get torn and maybe less friendly for flipping. And I guess maybe the size might have mattered somewhat, since it would have been a little more cumbersome to tote a bunch of them around (unless you kept them in the box). Last but not least, the Kashin photos themselves could be a little muddy looking sometimes, and were not as crisp as Exhibits or R315s, for example, if one were inclined to go for the photos over the lithos.

Personally I like the Kashins, but I can see why others would prefer the colorful Goudey's.

[slantycouch]

Great points, Todd. I tend to think that the beauty of the full color Goudeys has a lot to do with it. The Kashin's, for me, have a little too much touch of grey.

See what I did there, Todd? :D

[conor912]

Todd brings up a good point about exposure. The more people that are exposed to something, the more demand there will be (in theory anyway). I would venture to wildly speculate that for every 100 kids in the 1930's that recognized a Goudey, maybe 1 recognized a Kashin.

The color is also an important point. I have tried and tried again to get into these issues but then I acquire some and they do nothing for me. I've never considered the photography on any of those 1920's B&W sets to be all that great, Kashins being no exception.

[nolemmings]

See what I did there, Todd? :D

Well played, sir. Those of us who caught that reference are grateful.

A couple of other points probably should be considered. First is the card backs. Kashins are blank-backed, whereas Goudey's had informative stuff for kids to read. Not much of anything had been devoted to card backs other than advertising for more than a decade, so I would bet the kids found the Goudey card backs a refreshing change.

Second, remember that Goudey and Kashin were in no way competitors, as they were sold a few years apart. Although it would be the same generation of youths able to acquire either, a few years difference in the card collecting world can be huge--look at what happened in both the early and late 1980's, for example. Kashin was issued right before the Wall Street Crash of 1929 and at the start of the Great Depression. I imagine everyone's view of the world was pretty nerve-wracking then, and that baseball cards were of particular low priority at a time when people were uncertain as to what would be the new normal (sound familiar?).

[Throttlesteer]

I'm more confused over the disparity between Goudey and WWG prices. I realize the set size and distribution of quality across the grades is different. But, there aren't a lot of WWG examples out there.

[conor912]

I'm more confused over the disparity between Goudey and WWG prices. I realize the set size and distribution of quality across the grades is different. But, there aren't a lot of WWG examples out there.

Because no one wants French on their baseball cards.

[thatkidfromjerrymaguire]

For me, it’s all about my preconceived notion of what a ‘baseball card’ truly is and that really comes down to distribution method.

It’s silly, but I prize Goudey cards because they are ‘bubble gum’ cards. Plain and simple. Kashins, premium “photos”, even exhibits don’t exude American charm to me as much as a bubble gum card. And if I’m going to pay a few thousand dollars for a card of Babe Ruth, it has to fit my mental image of what a classic piece of Americana truly is. And to me, that’s a bubble gum card.

Don’t know if I’m in the majority or minority with that view point...but I’ll bet I’m not the only collector who feels that way.

[MikeGarcia]

http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/2042957/view/1933GEHRIG_NEW.JPGBecause no one wants French on their baseball cards.



..Anytime I can save $400 on a card I'll gladly learn to speak thirty-six words in French. The back really classes up the card......

..

[Huysmans]

Because no one wants French on their baseball cards.

Yeah, that's why you can get cards like the '36 WWG DiMaggio dirt cheap :D

[Tom S.]

Because no one wants French on their baseball cards.

Not all WWG cards have French on the back... ;)

https://www.collectorfocus.com/images/show/tom26964/white-sox-pre-war-type-set/61850/1933-v353-world-wide-gum-english-back

[conor912]

The back really classes up the card......

Haha. Indeed.

Not all WWG cards have French on the back... ;)

I just learned about those recently. Any idea if those demand a premium over the French ones?

[Tom S.]

I'm not sure if the English only backs carry a premium over the bilingual backs - even though the English only ones are supposedly scarcer.

Maybe someone who actively collects this set will be able to answer this.