1951 Toleteros Gibson on Leland's [Archive]

Archive

12-09-2005, 11:06 AM

Posted By: Hal Lewis<a href="http://www.lelands.com/bid.aspx?lot=357&auctionid=512" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.lelands.com/bid.aspx?lot=357&auctionid=512</a> The bidding is extremely low for this card right now. Anyone know why? I am posting this because I am currently the high bidder and therefore cannot be "screwing" anyone by bringing this to light. I will gladly take the card at my current bid level... but I expected for my bid to get blown away and it has not happened. Maybe I will get a steal... but I am just wanting to make sure that there is not something about this card that I don't know about: too short, etc. Or maybe the market has already been "saturdated" with the two other versions of this card that have sold recently??

Archive

12-09-2005, 11:30 AM

Posted By: Kyle BickingCheck out www.psacard.com for info on the "newly" discovered 1931 Josh Gibson postcard. It might hamper the sales of the Toleteros. My guess is last minute bids are to come. Great card in the highest graded condition by PSA. I wonder if it would crossover at all. ~Kyle~

Archive

12-09-2005, 11:32 AM

Posted By: Al CrisafulliHal, I would think that there's a very remote possibility that the market for the card is saturated with the recent sales, and also that there's a remote possibility that the discovery of the Gibson postcard that will be in the spring REA auction might have taken some of the luster away from this particular card. A much more likely scenario, however, would be that the big bidders are sitting tight, waiting to see how much they owe Mastro and Mile High before bidding high in another auction. With six days left in Leland's, I would guess the bidding will become more brisk next week. -Al

Archive

12-09-2005, 11:34 AM

Posted By: Julie Vognarpostcard, or Josh Gibson 1931.

Archive

12-09-2005, 11:35 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisI agree with both of those possibilities... yet I am just making sure that none of the folks on our board know about any "story" behind this card that I don't know about. With everything I read on here about certain cards that get graded SGC 40 and then come back "cleaner" a few months later and get graded a lot higher... I just wanted to be sure that nobody knew FOR SURE that this PARTICULAR card had ever been "rejected" by SGC or anything like that.

Archive

12-09-2005, 05:01 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisI am interested in opinions about whether a real POST CARD that was written on and mailed can be considered a "baseball card." 1922 Eastern Exhibits were sort of a hybrid between exhibit cards and post cards... but the Gibson is clearly a post card AND it has writing on both sides. Honest opinions are welcomed and encouraged. I am on the fence regarding the Gibson post card and truly want to hear your thoughts.

Archive

12-09-2005, 05:07 PM

Posted By: AnonymousI like how you worded your loaded question...having said that, I do not consider a Postcard, a baseball card. I collect Cobb and Crawford baseball cards, that does not include PCs. Brian E.

Archive

12-09-2005, 05:26 PM

Posted By: Peter_SpaethI think it would be impossible to come up with a consensus definition of a baseball card which one could then apply to the Gibson. It appears to be from a set, that was issued in at least some quantity, depicting the player, presumably for some commemorative purpose. So to that extent it sounds like a baseball card. And it isn't a coin, or a stamp, or someone's personal photograph, so it doesn't fit readily into categories one might exclude with a fair degree of confidence. On the other hand, something about it doesn't really feel like a baseball card. For what it's worth, maybe nothing to some folks on this board considering the source, PSA calls it a card in the article.

Archive

12-09-2005, 05:27 PM

Posted By: Al CrisafulliI'm hardly picky with it comes to the definition of a "baseball card". To me, if it works in my collection, it is part of my baseball card collection. I have coins, stamps, premiums, decals, blankets, felts, scratch-offs, photo inserts, box panels, playing cards, game cards, matchbook covers, and all sorts of other stuff in my collection. I consider them all to be "baseball cards". So, to me, a postcard qualifies. I can also just as easily see someone disagreeing, and being just as right. I guess it's up to how you choose to collect, just like anything else in this nutty hobby. -Al

Archive

12-09-2005, 05:28 PM

Posted By: WesleyYou are going to get a lot of varying opinions on this one. My answer is almost the directly the opposite of Brian's answer. Unlike modern baseball cards which are mostly found in wax or foil packs, prewar baseball cards were distributed in many different ways and one of those ways was as postcards. Postcards can certainly be considered baseball cards. I also collect Ty Cobb cards and I definitely think that Cobb RC are his postcard issues. If you don't consider postcards to be cards then the first Cobb card would be either the T206, E90-1, E92, E101 or E102. All of these, however, have issue dates at least two years after the Dietsche, Wolveries News, HM Taylor, and Novelty Cutlery postcards as they all have 1907 as the initial issue date. Likewise for Lou Gehrig, some consider his 1927 York Caramel Type 2 his rookie card. This is ignoring several exhibits that predate that card including the 1925 Exhibit with postcard back which I believe most of the hobby recognize as Gehrig's rookie card.

Archive

12-09-2005, 05:31 PM

Posted By: Jeff LichtmanHal, it looks like the price of the card has gone "up." I think it's still a "steal" at this price.

Archive

12-09-2005, 05:48 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisYou're right Jeff. I am no longer high bidder... but I agree that the price is still low enough for anyone to justify buying it as "trade bait" if they already have one. That was my plan originally, and I may get back on board if nobody has any "horror story" about the card once having been an SGC 20 with a big wrinkle that has disappered.

Archive

12-09-2005, 06:10 PM

Posted By: PaulI think there is no question that many postcards are baseball cards under most people's definition. Most people collect Exhibits and Novelty Cutlery postcards as cards. I think there is a lot more division about "real photo postcards." A real photo postcard is often nothing more than a photograph that was printed by the local film developer with a postcard back at the request of the guy who brought the film in. It's hard for me to distinguish this from a photograph that was printed with no back at all. There may be instances where a team or other distributor decided to make a set of baseball cards to sell (or to give away) and chose the "real photo postcard" format because it was cheap. But it's real hard to know if that's what occurred with the Josh Gibson. Based on the description of the Gibson, the seller certainly wants everyone to think this is the case. But I'm not sure how you could really know. The presence of someone's name on the postcard (supposedly the distributor) is a point in favor of the postcard being meant for public consumption, but I don't think it's definitive.

Archive

12-09-2005, 06:48 PM

Posted By: jay woltMaybe some of the search modes aren't working since Lelands spelled Josh Gibson's name wrong. "Lot 357 . 1950-51 Toleteros Jushua Gibson PSA 7 NM" Also, how rare is this card? It seems Lelands has the lions share and offers them more frequently then any other auction house...jay

Archive

12-09-2005, 06:55 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisJosh Evans from Lelands has moved down to the Caribbean permanently and is actively seeking out these cards from down there on a regular basis. Last I heard, he has pretty much tapped out the market. This explains why Lelands is always the company selling these. After the SGC 88 and this PSA 7... my understanding is that they have a couple left but their quality is nowhere near as good as the 88 and the 7.

Archive

12-09-2005, 07:02 PM

Posted By: Jeff LichtmanRe the postcard, there's no way this is a baseball card in the traditional sense. To me, at least, it's no more a card than if Gibson's picture appeared on a matchbook cover.

Archive

12-09-2005, 07:11 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisThe reason that I tend to agree with Jeff is that we still have Post Cards in 2005... but NOBODY would even DARE consider a 2005 Post Card showing Chipper Jones on the front to be a "real baseball card." If this Gibson item had been produced in 1881 when there really weren't very many real baseball cards and in the day when Cabinet sized photos were all we had... then I might (might) feel differently. True, the Negro Leagues never really produced many cards... but the Negro League players had appeared in "real" baseball cards in the 1920's in Cuba and the Dominican. Thus, it is hard to argue that this baseball team or league could not have made "real" baseball cards for distribution if they had wanted to. For all we know, these might have been "calling cards" that the photographer made PERSONALLY for Josh Gibson and ONLY for him. This would be supported by the fact that Gibson is the one who signed and sent this Post Card. We KNOW that Exhibit cards were sold in huge volumes to the public for "collecting" purposes... but we just don't know that about this item. It might almost be better if the item was not inscribed by Gibson but by some third party ... or if several more of these were known to exist to VERIFY that these were not just PERSONAL "business cards" made for Gibson by the team photographer.

Archive

12-09-2005, 07:44 PM

Posted By: Julie Vognar<img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/jphotos/1931gibson_150.jpg"> I don't really care what you call it; I'd take the postcard over the card any time.

Archive

12-09-2005, 08:03 PM

Posted By: warshawlawSomeone earlier touched on the issue: public issuance. To me, the hallmark of a "card" is whether it was issued for public consumption. A photo with a PC back that the local developer made specially for someone isn't a card because it was never meant to be distributed to the public. Don't get me wrong, they can be really nice and really collectible (I have a few myself) but they aren't what we normally think of as "baseball cards". If the 1930s Gibson was issued in connection with the team for promotional purposes, I'd say it is a "baseball card". BTW, aren't these Toleteros "cards" really stickers? The Gilliam I purchased has a gummed back. If so, why are they "cards"?

Archive

12-09-2005, 08:15 PM

Posted By: JudgeDred (Fred)One key here is that the PC is from Josh's playing days. Add to the fact that it's a great image and you've got a very desireable baseball collectible. Card or not, it's incredibly cool.

Archive

12-09-2005, 08:18 PM

Posted By: joe maplesHello there, I collect Detroit and Ty Cobb items, when you narrow your collecting to this catagory postcards do become baseball cards. As far as Chipper Jones on a postcard, that would be a baseball card, just like some of the later Detroit Postcards. I don't worry about rookie cards, I have all of Cobbs T206 cards, his 1907 Dietche cards and the Wolverine cards. They are all baseball card to me. I have some large 30 x 40 inch Detroit News Photos of Tigers from, these I don't consider cards. Joe

Archive

12-09-2005, 08:19 PM

Posted By: davidcyclebackMost real photo postcards were not issued/sold to the public. Many are simply family photos. Though there are cases of real photo postcards sold as commercial products, most notably 1930s Hollywood movie star postcards that were available in many stores. Even if you don't know exactly how and who issued it, a postcard that was machine printed is generally considered to be a commercial issue. This is because lithography, photoengraving and other were mass production processes for commercial projects, and wouldn't be used to make a family photo for the mantle. As far as the Gibson postcard goes, someone would have to convince me that it was or probably was a commercial product before I considered it a baseball card. I just read the PSA article. That this Gibson and other postcards originate from the personal collections of contemporary Negro League players would suggest they weren't commercial issues. If, instead, they were found in the scrapbooks of Joe Schmoe fans, then they'd appear more likely to be commercial issues.

Archive

12-10-2005, 04:09 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisThat's what I was trying to say. We know that other teammates of Gibson had these exact same postcards made of themselves... but ALL of them were found in their PERSONAL belongings... and only ONE has been found for each teammate. My guess is that photographers back then were just like photographers are still today... and that is that they always print up ONE example of something to give to you, and hope that you will ORDER a bunch more from them. The photographer may have made one postcard for each player, given it to them, and then said: "Call me if you want a bunch more of these to use for sending mail to your friends."

Archive

12-10-2005, 04:14 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisAlso, please NOTE that the only thing printed on the front of the Post Card says: Harrison Hot Springs '31 Ark Thus, the front is clearly a "promotional" piece for the PHOTOGRAPHY STUDIO and not for the player or the team. Surely if these had been produced for distribution for the TEAM... the team NAME would have been included, right? "Homestead Grays" is not on front or back anywhere. Nor is the player's name.

Archive

12-10-2005, 04:19 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisBut in an effort for full disclosure: It is a very cool and very rare item, and I will bid on it for sure.

Archive

12-10-2005, 07:49 AM

Posted By: James FeaginThat postcard is a beauty, and I would MUCH rather own that than an "all-time great" card/stamp.

Archive

12-10-2005, 11:13 AM

Posted By: Frank EvanovComing 5 years after Gibson's playing days ended, I personally have little interest in the Toleteros card. I see it more as a tribute card. Other collectors have told me the same. That, and the increasing supply, will bring the price down. Frank

Archive

12-10-2005, 11:35 AM

Posted By: davidcyclebackNowhere in the REA description does it refer to this item as baseball card or rookie card. It's a collectable double autographed postcard from Gibson's rookie year, but I would consider it dubious at best for someone to call it Gibson's rookie trading card or a trading card unless someone uncovers proof they were sold commercially to the public (As already noted, evidence indicates they weren't). Interestingly, I have yet to hear anyone clearly claim it's a rookie card or baseball card. In their half self promotional article ('Another first for PSA!'), PSA kinda sorta does, but really doesn't. Hal, it appears you're safe. It should be noted that in the early 1900s, the postcard photograph was a common form of family photograph. It wasn't because they were intented to be mailed (some were, to friends or family members), but that the postcard was a convenient size for such photos. If you look in your old family photos, you may find real photo postcards of ancestors that were never mailed and obviously weren't intended to be sold at Woolworth or Life magazine. I have a WWI real photo postcard of my grandfather in sailor suit. He had it shot and made at a small studio in France as a souvenier for himself and the family back home in Minneapolis ... Many times, the printed stampbox and address lines on back are just something that happens to be on the back, and the photo was never intended to be sold or even mailed. The postcard often went straight into the family album or on the livingroom desk. Many old high school baseball and football team photos were real photo postcards. Again, most of these were made as mementos for the players and their families, just as with your little league or cub scout team photos.

Archive

12-10-2005, 01:00 PM

Posted By: JudgeDred (Fred)Not trying to start anything here but I was hoping for clarification on the following: "It's a collectable double autographed postcard" Did someone actually authenticate the signatures as being Josh Gibsons? I rarely hear of Josh Gibson signatures for sale. I wonder how many are out there and WHO would be an expert on authenticating it. Again, I'm not trying to start a pissing match, just wondering....

Archive

12-10-2005, 01:08 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisYes, Fred... it is slabbed by PSA/DNA as being signed BY GIBSON.

Archive

12-10-2005, 01:12 PM

Posted By: DJJosh Gibson signatures are very rare and rarely come up for auction in authentic form. A signed team ball sold for $15K in 2003 in either Lelands or Mastro (can't remember) and a friend of mine paid $5K for a index sized cut last year. According to Spence, he knows of only one or two single signed baseballs, despite the fact that there are A LOT of forgeries in ss form and in cut form. This is not a Gibson card, but absolutely amazing never the less. DJ

Archive

12-10-2005, 07:04 PM

Posted By: Julie Vognarearliest playing days, signed by him personally...who would want a silly thing like that <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/jphotos/042702_2476_253_prv.gif"> !!!!!

Archive

12-10-2005, 07:13 PM

Posted By: Harry Wallace (HW)Yes, I would love to have it in my collection, but I certainly do not consider it a baseball card. There have been several team postcards from the 1930 era that feature Josh Gibson that have been sold in the past (Hunt's, I believe). They went for a lot of money, but no one ever called them cards or even a "team card." Just my 2 cents.

Archive

12-12-2005, 07:52 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisThe bidding on the Toleteros Gibson card is still only about 40% of what the card is worth... so it might be a chance for someone to get a "steal" if everyone else is out of money after all of these other auctions!!

Archive

12-12-2005, 09:48 AM

Posted By: identify7The item in question here is a postcard. By definition: it is a card. It depicts a baseball subject, therefore, it is a baseball card. No need to make this complicated. Now my baseball card collection does not include coins, stamps, decals, blankets, felts, scratch-offs, photo inserts, playing cards, game cards, nor matchbook covers; but it does include: premiums, box panels (and it could include postcards and maybe even game cards, or worse stuff). As far as "but NOBODY would even DARE consider a 2005 Post Card showing Chipper Jones on the front to be a "real baseball card." I DARE. And "If this Gibson item had been produced in 1881 when there really weren't very many real baseball cards and in the day when Cabinet sized photos were all we had... then I might (might) feel differently". IMHO each card stands on its own merits, independent of what else exists. Regarding: "As far as the Gibson postcard goes, someone would have to convince me that it was or probably was a commercial product before I considered it a baseball card". A postcard is a commercial product by design. CWYWC And we each can have our own definitions.

Archive

12-12-2005, 11:53 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisCWYWC. CWYWC! CWYWC!!!! Someone has been listening! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> I can die now, as my mission on earth is complete!!!

Archive

12-12-2005, 11:57 AM

Posted By: Jeff LichtmanIf you die, Hal, will you leave me your caps and smileys? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

12-12-2005, 12:04 PM

Posted By: davidcyclebackBy the definition of the single word 'card,' the following things are cards. business card Those annoying cards that fall out of magazines Christmas card Square piece of blank heavy paper that was left over when I cut something on my papercutter AOL junk mail ad card I received in my mail box credit card YMCA memebership card These are all cards and they can all be collected, but that doesn't make them all trading cards. Baseball card, as it is used in the baseball card hobby, is short for 'baseball trading card.' The Gibson postcard is a fine and dandy item and it is literally a card (post card, rectangular piece of heavy paper), but it isn't a baseball trading card.

Archive

12-12-2005, 12:06 PM

Posted By: Joe Jonesunless you trade them

Archive

12-12-2005, 12:12 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisGood one, Joe! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> OK... I think I understand it now. The Gibson postcard is a "BASEBALL card"... but it is not a "baseball CARD."

Archive

12-12-2005, 12:21 PM

Posted By: davidcyclebackIt's a common mistake to read a short term literally, in particular technical names. Many scientific names were consciously coined as nicknames for convenience's sake, and are wrong if read literally. If all labels were worded to be accurate and whole when read literally, the names would be as long as the definitions and it would take us hours to answer, "And how was your day, dear?" For example, how many of the expensive baseball cards in your collection have ever been traded, Hal? For those that have never been traded (perhaps including the T206 Wagner), does that mean they are not baseball cards ('baseball trading cards')?

Archive

12-12-2005, 12:22 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisI agree with you 100%. I just thought Joe's joke was funny. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> Then again... I guess I "traded" somebody a bunch of green papers for my Wagner card... so does that count?

Archive

12-12-2005, 12:34 PM

Posted By: davidcyclebackWhen you think about it, if taken literally, the word is 'trading' (present tense, not past or future tense) cards. Couldn't that be literally interpeted to mean that it is only a trading card during the act of trading, and not before and after? Then there was the time I ordered a Turkey Red Cabinet for my bedroom. Not only did it have no drawers for my socks and shirts, but the color wasn't even a close match to my turkey red walls.

Archive

12-12-2005, 01:36 PM

Posted By: Joe JonesSorry, I just had to say it. for fun!

Archive

12-12-2005, 02:08 PM

Posted By: GlennGiven that the word is a present participle in the active voice, the item wouldn't truly be a trading card unless the card itself was doing the trading; otherwise it could only hope to be a being-traded, having-been-traded or being-about-to-be traded card.

Archive

12-12-2005, 02:43 PM

Posted By: davidcyclebackand when you bathtub soak an album and they float to the top, they are treading cards.

Archive

12-13-2005, 04:25 AM

Posted By: identify7We have recently seen two similar cards trade at very different prices: the CA League OJ and the Mastronet Imperial cabinet. Both exhibit a high level of quaintness and historical interest and are from the same era. Independent of one's definition of what constitutes a baseball card, there are parallels between the differences here and that of the Gibson cards. The Gibson signatures though, may skew the auction results.

Archive

12-13-2005, 04:56 AM

Posted By: BlackSoxFan While I cannot disagree with the analysis of this piece as a card but not a baseball card, I will say that people SHOULD just accept the fact that Gibson does not have a rookie card. Just because I think they should, does not mean I expect that to happen. That being said, I believe the 'perceived' value is poorly arrived at by the collectors that are willing to pay more than $100-200 bucks for this card. I have so many problems with its' place in the set. I really cannot see how Gibson card really 'belongs' in the set. That is, it is part of the issue, but really should not be. I do not believe that a rookie card should ever be considered a rookie card if it is issued 'posthumous' or if it is produced along with Players/Teams/etc. that the player has no association with. In this isntance, you have both of those scenarios playing out. A double whammy if you will. The 'postcard' of Gibson has a much more 'authentic' place in the hobby (double entendre anyone?). It dates to and was produced during the mans career AND life. I would easily choose it over the Toleteros card. For that matter, if one is to say that one of these two items should be worth over 20k, the Postcard would be my pick. This is a very controversial topic and I am sure people are going to come back with all sorts of various 'retorts' and explanations to my point. I don't care to argue and will not get into a 'shouting match' over this, but I really think that the collectors who spend serious coin should spend some time and really think about why the card is as valuable in their own eyes as this item is. Alright, Let it FLY! Leon, Shammus, everyone else ... DUCK!!! Regards, Black Sox Fan <EDITED FOR TYPOS ... WILL FIX GRAMMAR> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a> <a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

Archive

12-13-2005, 05:37 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisI think the value of the 1950-51 Toleteros is "relative" to everything else. For instance, there are only a handful of these Gibson cards known to exist... and this is the ONLY known true set of cards in which Gibson was included. This obviously decreases the "supply" side of the equation significantly. At the same time, Josh Gibson is a LEGENDARY Hall of Famer... so this increases the "demand" side of the equation significantly. FOR EXAMPLE... let's look at the 1948-49 Leaf "Tribute" card of BABE RUTH. It was issued in a known set, it was issued AFTER his death, and Ruth is the "white" Josh Gibson. Great analogy to work with. The "highest graded" example of the 1948-49 Leaf Ruth card (PSA 9) lists in the PSA report as being worth about $35,000. NOW... since we know that the highest graded 1950-51 Toleteros Gibson (SGC 88) sold for $70,000 a few months ago... all we need to do is figure out why the Gibson "tribute" cards are worth about TWICE as much as these Ruth "tribute" cards. This is easy. The grading companies have seen about 650 of the Ruth cards... and only about 6 of the Gibson cards. So we are talking about a card that is very similar in nature to the 1948 Ruth card... yet is 100 TIMES more SCARCE. In reality, it is probably 1,000 times more scarce as a lot of Leaf Ruth's are still ungraded. Heck, look at the "tribute" card of Ruth that were printed even LATER and distributed in MUGH HIGHER quantities: <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/1962-Topps-BABE-RUTH-138-The-Famous-Slugger-PSA-9_W0QQitemZ8733508602QQcategoryZ55922QQrdZ1QQcmdZV iewItem" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://cgi.ebay.com/1962-Topps-BABE-RUTH-138-The-Famous-Slugger-PSA-9_W0QQitemZ8733508602QQcategoryZ55922QQrdZ1QQcmdZV iewItem</a> <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> NOW, having said all of this... what would the Gibson Toleteros card be worth if everything else was the same... except that it was issued in a 1945 set WHILE HE WAS STILL ACTIVE??? Answer: A LOT MORE! I agree 100%. If there were still only a handful known to exist... it would be somewhat akin to the 1914 Balitmore News card of Ruth (due to rarity). What would an SGC 88 version of the 1914 Baltimore News Ruth card fetch? $700,000? So, YES, the fact that this is a "tribute" card to Gibson is a "drawback" on the card... but that has ALREADY been factored into the price. Otherwise... if Gibson had still been playing in 1951... the card would be worth AT LEAST FIVE TIMES MORE than it is now!! So while the Toleteros Gibson is expensive... it is well worth it "relatively" speaking. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

12-13-2005, 06:28 AM

Posted By: Al CrisafulliI have no problem with the Toleteros Gibson and the prices it fetches. More and more people are choosing to collect cards of Hall of Famers only. There are some members of the Hall that simply do not have many cards - in-period or otherwise. A recent thread on this board about Ban Johnson comes to mind. How many different Ban Johnson cards are there? Two? And don't they go for ridiculous prices when they're on Ebay? In my mind, Ban Johnson is not a Hall of Famer that should command a premium price, but he does because of the relative scarcity of his cards. HOF collectors need one, and unless you'll accept a shiny card, there aren't too many options. The Gibson is very similar, IMO, in that if you want to own a Josh Gibson card, you don't have many choices. Gibson is one of those players where a variety of different types of collectors converge - HOF collectors, Negro League collectors, Cuban card collectors, slugger collectors - and with the scarcity of the Toleteros card, the price gets driven up pretty high. To me, the debate about whether it's a "rookie" card, or a "tribute" card, or even a "real" card simply doesn't enter into the equation. It sells for what it sells for because there are people who are willing to pay for it, and as long as there are more willing buyers than there are available cards, it will continue to fetch insane prices. -Al

Archive

12-13-2005, 06:50 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisHow can the prices be "insane" when you so logically and precisely explained why the Gibson prices are completely justified??!! If the free market dictates a price... then by definition it can't really be insane... unless the majority of card collectors who make up the "free market" are insane!! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> Although... if you read this board long enough... you might end up believing that EVERYONE is insane.

Archive

12-13-2005, 06:54 AM

Posted By: leonRumor has it that more of the Gibson cards are being found....which would hurt the prices a little bit....No matter what we say value ALWAYS is determined by supply vs demand.....

Archive

12-13-2005, 07:00 AM

Posted By: BlackSoxFanHal - You make some excellent points. They are certainly valid and well considered. Let me also state that I know my knowledge of any of these sets is FAR inferior to that of some who post on the board. I think the 1949 Leaf Ruth falls closely to the Gibby. However, there are some key differences. I will also add that I think the 35k is 'bogus' as well. Yes, I know an item is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. That doesn't mean it is a well arrived at decision. Nonetheless, let me explain my points as to the differences and rationale behind my point: 1. Time of Issue/Presence in The set: Ruth died that year. The card was clearly issued as a marketing tool/tribute to someone that transcended all aspects of the game and some aspects of society. Tribute cards have been produced by numerous companies any number of times, as such I don't feel that the "Ruth" card is misplaced in the set. I think THE Lajoie card is much more unusual as it was 'thrown' in after the set was issued. I do not believe that Gibson (although he has grown in lore) falls into this category. Back in the 1950's, (although someone alive then could certainly speak to this better than I) I do not think Gibson had much of a following to the 'general' card/baseball fan. He was certainly known in particular circles; but, as an extension of this fact, there are many collectors/fans/hobbyists who have never heard of Gibson today. I seriously doubt the same can be said for Ruth. Gibby died in '47. Toly's were certainly issued before '51 so why the wait? I think these points explain to some extent why Ruth was included in the Leaf set. Gibson has no place at all in the Toleteros set. From what I understand, he did not play in Cuba except for a winter ball league in 1938 (or close to that). I don't think noone else in the set was dead at the time of issue (Although I'm not sure about that). So why is Gibson in the set in the first place? If Topps had produced a 1978 Gibson card in its' regular set, do you think it would have the same value if it had the same fate as the T206 Wagner (especially if this Toleteros didn't exist)? 2. Place w/i the set/value to set: The 50-51's have no other premium cards in the set. You have some key cards which those pursuing the set will pay more for, and perhaps a great deal for, but the market for Cuban baseball cards does not touch on the market for 48-49 Leaf cards or 1933 Goudey's or any other issue that might have a 'major' tribute card in it. A collector is likely to have interest in a DiMaggio or Robinson '48-49 Leaf even if they don't collect the set. You might find a grade junky willing to drop some dough on one of the other guys in the Toleteros. The Leaf has its' own set of stars. The leaf also has a great deal of provenance and mystique w/i the hobby. Other great players exist in the Leaf set. It was the first issue for the company and contains "true" rookie cards of some great players. What can really be said about the Toleteros set? 3. Misconception of Rarity/Value I still have yet to understand why, for the most part, people seem to equate rarity to value. The two often operate independent of one and other. Let's say my parents had opened a print shop in 1953, caught wind of Henry Aaron, and produced a set of his Jacksonville Team. Now lets say they printed up 2 complete sets but for whatever reason they never 'went to market'.... I think you see where i'm going with this. Just b/c something is printed and there aren't a lot of them, does not mean it is valuable. Granted, I will cede the concept of 'eye-of-the-beholder', but I still just don't get why this particular card is so valuable. Regards, Black Sox Fan - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a> <a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

Archive

12-13-2005, 07:01 AM

Posted By: craigI'd be cautious before dropping big bucks on the the Toleteros Gibson. For the longest time I believe Ryan had the highest graded, an sgc 80. There were a couple of sgc 50s known. Now in the past few months Lelands turns up an sgc 88 and a psa 7. Wonder how many more high grade Toleteros are out there. I think this auction will be telling as I expect this psa 7 to sell for equal or less than the sgc 50 recently did.

Archive

12-13-2005, 07:09 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisCraig: Leland's has informed me that this PSA 7 was once slabbed in an SGC holder... so this could account for why it SEEMS like there are more of these out there than there really are. I asked Leland's to have SGC REMOVE the old card from their Pop report... but it has not yet been removed.

Archive

12-13-2005, 07:19 AM

Posted By: craigHey Hal, I agree pop reports are misleading particularly given crossovers and resubmissions. Please don't be offended I'm not taking a shot at your sgc 88 Gibson. I just agree with Leon that as the known examples increase in number I expect the price to be negatively impacted especially the mid to lower grade examples.

Archive

12-13-2005, 07:38 AM

Posted By: Al Crisafulli"Insane" meaning "really high", not "insane" meaning "ridiculous". Sorry for the slang. Then, you wrote: "unless the majority of card collectors who make up the "free market" are insane!!" Of course I can only speak for myself, but knowing a handful of people in the hobby, this might be a safe assumption to make as well. -Al

Archive

12-13-2005, 09:20 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisCraig: I wasn't offended at all. You are absolutely right in that more cards = more supply = lower prices. I was just pointing out what I had been told by Leland's in regards to why there is now a PSA 7 that "suddenly" appeared. Turns out, it has existed all along... but in a different holder.

Archive

12-13-2005, 09:49 AM

Posted By: will watsoni find it absolutely hilarious that Hal defended his Honus advertising card (or whatever it is) as being Wagner's only true rookie using the exact same logic he's now using to discredit the Gibson postcard

Archive

12-13-2005, 09:55 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisWrong, Will. I am of the belief that the Gibson postcard was made for Gibson PERSONALLY to use and hopefully to order MORE from the photographer. The only name to appear on the card is that of the photographer. The postcard is not an advertisement for anyone or anything except the photographer himself. The Reccius Wagner card was NOT made for Wagner by any stretch of the imagination. Nor does it in any way publicize the photography studio who took the picture. The card clearly advertises for a product, and is clearly meant to be kept by the consumer and used to promote the product. It was NOT meant to be given away or mailed away again by the consumer. Two totally different items.

Archive

12-13-2005, 11:44 AM

Posted By: davidcyclebackHal, I hear Cuba and Venezuela have government warehouses filled with Latin American baseball cards. From what I've heard, Castro and Hugo Chavez have given secret orders that if either is assasinated by the CIA, the US market will be immediately flooded with Toleteros and other Negro League cards. There's a similar rumor about warehouses of original Jean Shrimpton photos in London to be used in case Mr. Bean is assasinated, but the details are a bit more sketchy on this one.

Archive

12-13-2005, 12:04 PM

Posted By: will watsonHal, you have absolutely no proof of any of your claims. until there is solid evidence, nothing you're saying is anything more than speculation. and its speculation that always benefits your investment and collection. you've contradicted yourself on several occasions, including this one, the Just So Young, and Mordecai Brown Allegheny arguments in the past. your rookie card "rules" only apply to cards you don't own. funny.

Archive

12-13-2005, 12:23 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisI have no proof of any of my claims??? What the heck are you talking about??? LOOK at the Gibson postcard for yourself. Front and back. The ONLY thing printed anywhere is the name of the photographer. LOOK at the Reccius Wagner card. No photographer named, but the ADVERTISER is prominently named. Those are not "claims" -- they are facts.

Archive

12-16-2005, 04:13 AM

Posted By: Jeff LichtmanSo the Gibson PSA 7 sold for 23K last night -- has any card ever fallen in value as fast as this one? It would seem that whoever bought it didn't so much get a STEAL as the last ones who paid multiple big bucks for the cards were ROBBED.

Archive

12-16-2005, 04:57 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisThe PSA 7 (that was once in an SGC 84 slab) card sold for $27,000 total. The highest graded 1951 Gibson is not one but TWO grades higher (86, 88) than this one was... so the expected price for an 88 would be about $54,000. BUT... because the 88 card is the ONLY one of its kind known to exist in any grade higher than an 84... people pay a big premium for this fact. $70,000 compared to $54,000 is not that much of a premium to pay for the "best known" example of any card. Therefore, I don't know how you can make the conclusions you make... especially since I own the 88 and can tell you for a fact that I wouldn't sell it right now even if someone offered me more than I paid for it. On the other hand, I am not stupid... so I admit that the entrance into the market of an SGC 92 or 96 of this card might very well drive the value of mine down. Or, it might not, since people might just end up having to pay MORE than $70,000 to own such a card.... especially since I would be bidding on it. But the best news of all is that I am a collector and quite frankly don't care if one of my cards drops 15% in value or gains 15% in value. They aren't going anywhere forever, so what does it really matter to me?

Archive

12-16-2005, 07:44 AM

Posted By: Peter_SpaethI think until the dust settles on how many of these cards there actually are, or how many Leland's has uncovered (and others have heard the same rumor mentioned by Leon), it is very difficult to know where values will end up. EDITED TO ADD Is anyone publicly acknowledging that they purchased the PSA 7 by the way?

Archive

12-16-2005, 07:45 AM

Posted By: Joe P.As of this moment: It is now Official! Anyone into portfolios and stocks that have experienced a slightly softened market in their investments, will as of this moment officially be classified as COLLECTORS! --- <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

12-16-2005, 08:12 AM

Posted By: Bottom of the NinthAs long as one "entity" controls the market it is impossible to know what the true value is of the card. Let's not forget this thread <a href="http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/thread/1127851084/last-1128335780/The+Josh+Gibson+on+Ebay" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/thread/1127851084/last-1128335780/The+Josh+Gibson+on+Ebay</a> Without implicating anyone, it would appear that the final value of recent examples have not gone without some kind of manipulation. Who knows if the PSA 7 really sold at the final hammer price.

Archive

12-16-2005, 08:26 AM

Posted By: Josh EvansFirst I want to thank everyone who bid last night. The auction was great success and we look forward to the action tonight. If you want to know how many Josh Gibson’s there are why don’t you just ask me? Lelands had a total of five. There was one 8 ($70k), one 7 (sold last night) and the rest are lower grade (4 or less). The higher grades are really impossible because of the backs. There are about 5-10 in other hands (closer to the bottom number than the top I believe). Whether that is a lot of cards is a matter of opinion. It depends upon demand I suppose. In the end I believe people will realize how great this card is. The only known card of arguably the greatest to ever play the game is something special. Please don’t tell me about it being a tribute card because in my opinion that is a little silly (we’re not talking about a 1973 Topps Babe Ruth here). There are a lot of people that love this card. There are also a lot that don’t (which is great, making it controversial). Some may not like it because this is a new thing and they don’t understand it (fair). The Latin collectors (who understand it best of all) love it universally which is the best meter.

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:21 AM

Posted By: BlackSoxFanJosh - Not to pick a fight, but out of curiousity...what would you define this card as? Thank god we don't have to argue about whether or not it is a card. It was produced after his playing career and after he passed away. Not to mention, he seems arbitrarily placed in the set. Nobody has educated me as to the rationale behind his inclusion in the set. Once again, this is not to "spark" an argument from people that have nothing better to do. How could you not call this a Tribute card? Regards, Black Sox Fan - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a> <a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:23 AM

Posted By: Jeff LichtmanHal, you seem a bit defensive. Clearly you are from the school that if you own a stock, the price of which is cut in half, your net worth isn't reduced until you actually sell the stock. Also, there is at least one other assertion you made in your last post which I disagree with.

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:23 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisThis is clearly not a "Tribute" card. It is clearly an "Homage" or "Memorial" card!! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> (Hey, I can joke, since it's my "Medal of Honor" card)

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:28 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisJeff: I am from the school of thought that says: If you NEED the money, then you had better INVEST it wisely. But, if you have some extra money that you will NEVER need, then you can spend it however you want and not worry about it. You can collect acorns with it if you like. Believe me, baseball cards have NOTHING to do with my retirement, my nest egg, my portfolio, my life insurance, etc. Likewise, spending on baseball cards in no way affects my ability to tithe to my church or give to charities.

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:38 AM

Posted By: CatI am not sure you can make an argument of the long term value of the card dropping. Together with Hal's argument of the premium paid for the best known example is the known glut of high end cards appearing on the market at once. It appears that prices have been driven down... I would guess VERY temporarily and not specific to this card... but more specific to Lelands auction following so many other auctions. As a comparison to the stock market, one time, as a relative youngster, I asked my grandfather why our GE stock dropped significantly after a moderate "crash." Afterall, I told him, GE is a GOOD company. He mumbled to me: "when they raid the brothel, they take the Piano Player too." Edited to correct typos unless otherwise noted.

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:41 AM

Posted By: Peter_SpaethI thought this was a thread about the Gibson card, not personal wealth.

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:51 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisPeter: Please. My thread was not about "personal wealth" any more than was already common knowledge. I don't think anyone thinks that I am using counterfeit money to put together my collection. It was only (once again) to clarify that I am a "collector" and not an "investor"... regardless of what some people want to believe. This is a hobby for me and a LOT of other people. Nothing more. Unfortunately, it is the people who "need" card values to keep going up that seem to be the most bitter and resentful on this board.

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:52 AM

Posted By: Bottom of the NinthPeter, It is about the Gibson card. Hal has already told everyone numerous times that he never speaks about money issues. Stop reading into the thread. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:53 AM

Posted By: leonI'm gonna have to put all 3 of you into a time out corner <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:56 AM

Posted By: BlackSoxFanI've posted 3 times in the post, ALL ABOUT THE CARD...funny thing is... everyone seems to talk about everything else but the card. Regards, Black Sox Fan - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a> <a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:56 AM

Posted By: Jeff LichtmanHal, just curious: in your last post, why does the word "need" to be in quotations?

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:57 AM

Posted By: identify7Cards which are issued after a player's career has ended are all grouped together (well, in my mind, anyway). I do not differentiate between those issued 5, 10, 25 yrs., etc. after his career. Heck, they usually all portray a picture of an active player. The hobby though does differentiate these issuances, as evidenced by prices associated with numerous post career examples of Ruth, Jackson and others. This status makes as much sense to me as false rookie (FROOKIE) cards do. I wonder if this fascination has staying power.

Archive

12-16-2005, 10:59 AM

Posted By: Peter_SpaethHal whatever your intent, a statement to the effect that all the money I spend on cards is just play money is going to be construed as a statement about your personal financial situation, and surely you must see that. I for one am more interested in your opinions on the merits of the Gibson card.

Archive

12-16-2005, 11:02 AM

Posted By: BlackSoxFanTHANK YOU GIL ... Interesting thought. This card has for me is the same as the Playball Jackson card. Many collectors think of that card when they think of a jackson baseball card. It came out 20 years after he stopped playing. I would have no problem with the Gibson card running between 500-3000 for most examples (as the jackson does) and getting up into the 20k range for the highest known example. Regards, Black Sox Fan - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a> <a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

Archive

12-16-2005, 11:10 AM

Posted By: jay behrensOne of my favorite quotes about the stock market I believe came from Sam Walton when asked what it felt like to lose a $1 billion in one day. He told the reporter to ask him that question when he lit a billion dollars in cash on fire. Jay I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

Archive

12-16-2005, 11:33 AM

Posted By: identify7All the money I spend on cards is just play money. I do not see the above statement as testimony regarding my net worth, nor my disposable income. IMHO Hal is being criticized for being open regarding his collection, acquisitions, ponderances, policies, strategies, and more. And in my opinion, we are all lucky that so many of the members of this Board can afford so many different nice cards, and that they openly share them with us. Hal is not alone in this. There are numerous participants here who acquire more value in cards within a month than I obtain in a year. But that is ok too: because no one really cares whether I do not have much money, or whether I choose to spend it on other things. Unlax, enjoy, it is good. It is only cards.

Archive

12-16-2005, 11:55 AM

Posted By: warshawlawToo bad it was Jim Gilliam <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14> But seriously, I prefer the PC to the Toleteros for two reasons: (1) it was made, issued, whatever, during Gibson's career and (2) it is real photo. I just think it looks nicer. I also think Hal has a great card (sticker, whatever) in the Toleteros Gibson and if he is happy with it, WTF, leave him alone. Finally, it also seems to me that after 30 years of doing this, I have yet to regret buying a single vintage card; I have many, many regrets about the ones I've sold. Seeing that N150 Sullivan with all the miscutting and faded image fetch over $1,100 yesterday in Lelands made me sorry I traded off my SGC 50. Until I looked at my 1917 Zeenut Frank Chance again. Ah, the stuff dreams are made of...

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:02 PM

Posted By: Peter_SpaethTo me, the Toleteros has the look and feel of a baseball card while the postcard does not. I think it can be distinguished from the 48L Ruth and 40PB Jackson on the basis that they had many cards issued during their career but Gibson did not have any (unless you count the postcard). EDITED TO FIX TYPO

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:06 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisAnybody know how the Toleteros were issued? Were they in cigarette packs?? Certainly the presence of the Gibson card in the set could be explained by the company's desire to sell a LOT of cigarettes while people "chase" the legendary player's card.

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:10 PM

Posted By: ChadIt just is. (The Toleteros are cards, not stickers. You had to use glue to put them in an album, just like you would with '87 Topps.) The greatest catcher of all time, and very possibly the greatest player. He hit .370 with power after he had gained 70 pounds and was shooting heroin every night. And that Toleteros is all we've got. One of the top ten cards in the hobby, easily. IMHO of course. --Chad

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:17 PM

Posted By: BlackSoxFanI could not even begin to imagine calling this card one of the hobby's 10 most important cards issued. It's a Tribute card. As i said, I could issue a pretty nice set of Negro League baseball cards today with my printer and some spare time. Even if i did so with the intention of making them honest an representation of a "Baseball Card" it does not make them valuable. Even if I produced 10,000 10 card sets and managed to only produce 1 Gibson ... they still aren't valuable. Rarity does not equal value. I wouldn't pay more for the Toly than I would any other HOF card from the early 50's. Regards, Black Sox Fan - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a> <a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:22 PM

Posted By: Andy BaranMy understanding is that they were issued in small packs of cards. They were not issued with any tobacco or candy products. Also, they were issued in PUERTO RICO, not Cuba as mentioned in an earlier post. Also, they are cards, not stickers. There was an album issued with them, but you had to GLUE them into the album yourself. There was never any adhesive issued with the cards. There are lots of latin american cards incorrectly labelled as stickers in the price guides. For what it is worth, I believe that Gibson was issued for the sole reason that collectors in Puerto Rico wanted a card of him. Surely the producers of the set knew that it had been a number of years since he played on the island, and that he had passed away several years before the cards were issued. There are 2 earlier Toleteros sets, and neither of them have a Gibson card. I personally do not have interest in the Gibson card (at least not at today's prices) due to it's timing, but I completely understand why so many collectors want one, and why they are willing to pay high prices for them.

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:39 PM

Posted By: ChadI happen to consider it one of the top ten cards in the hobby. Yes, it was created after his playing days, but it was created because the people who saw him play for years wanted a card of him. The card was created and sold within Gibson's millieu and, if it came several years too late, it just makes the issue of the card more bittersweet, and, for me, interesting. Personally, I'm not all that interested in the Blacksox, but to each their own. --Chad

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:43 PM

Posted By: identify7Heroin every night is fine. Just don't take steroids.

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:44 PM

Posted By: Peter_SpaethDo people consider the 1969 Topps Mantle a "tribute" card? It was issued after his last season, and indeed notes his retirement.

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:50 PM

Posted By: BlackSoxFanChad - I'm not sure why you took a jab at the Black Sox and my personal collecting habbits, especially since I did not attack you or your habbits. One has nothing to do with the other. Why people try and pick fights is beyond me. Back on point ... How do you consider a card produced after a person dies to be in his 'milieu'? The guy was dead. I cannot imagine the card getting much more out of Gibson's element than that. I am curious to hear your response. I do have one request to make, if you cannot keep it in the spirit of the discussion, then feel free to keep your opinion to yourself. Regards, Black Sox Fan - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a> <a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:55 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisI have an interesting question: Instead of being produced in Puerto Rico... what if this card had been issued by LEAF in 1949* (along with the Paige card) and was exactly as scarce today as the Paige card is? *This would still be after Gibson's death in 1947. Worth less than the Toleteros card is now? Worth more than the Toleteros card is now? No difference to any of you?

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:58 PM

Posted By: MarkI think Jeff might have been comparing the sale price of the PSA 7 Gibson to that of the SGC 4 Gibson that ended on 10/2/05 on eBay (rather than to the SGC 8). I think even Hal would agree that $27k for the PSA 7 is unexpectly low considering that the SGC 4 sold for $25.6k.

Archive

12-16-2005, 12:59 PM

Posted By: ChadI think phrases such as "I can't imagine" come off as more condescending than you intend. If you don't appreciate the Gibson card as much as I, or others do, that's fine. There are a lot of cards people go gaga for here that I don't have any particular interest in, but I can usually see where they're coming from and would certainly never tell them I can't imagine the value they place on it. As for the Gibson: Look, we're not talking about a Fleer Greats of the Game refractor or a Helmar brewing card. It was a card released in a place Gibson had recently played to sate the demand of fans who had recently seen him play. For them, it was a living card. I'm not arguing that the card is not a trubute card, I'm arguing that it doesn't matter, that there even is a tribute card of him is, in fact, remarkable. He was that good. He was that much a giant to those who saw him play. To me, that's a freakin great card. --Chad

Archive

12-16-2005, 01:10 PM

Posted By: BlackSoxFanChad - As you clearly cannot stay on topic i have nothing left to say to you. I still can't imagine putting the gibson card in the top-10 and you love it. Great, done & let us move on. Hal - I think that's an interesting question. I'm not sure if you are comparing it to the Page card or not. Regardless, I put a great deal more value on the Page than I do the Toly. I can't imagine the "value" of a Josh Gibson card being much higher than this. All things considered, I would have to say that it would be relatively the same. I would even think it might go a tad bit higher as many people in the hobby have may have never heard of the card because of its' rare issue. Regards, Black Sox Fan - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a> <a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

Archive

12-16-2005, 01:12 PM

Posted By: Peter_SpaethI don't think there is any question that all else equal, it would be worth more as part of a mainstream issue.

Archive

12-16-2005, 01:22 PM

Posted By: ChadAre we not talking about the Josh Gibson Toleteros? In explaining why I value the card, I think I'm adding to the discussion of why the card goes for thousands and thousands of dollars despite the fact it's a tribute card. ALL cards ONLY have value for sentimental reasons and so I think my post is pretty much right on topic. But I guess I shouldn't post anymore since I now have been told not to. I'll go stand in the corner. And, yes, there's beer in the corner. And I value the beer a 3 dollars a pint even tho it's an Irish issued beer. --Chad

Archive

12-16-2005, 01:36 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisPeter: Maybe the 1949 Leaf set really ISN'T "skip numbered"?? Maybe we just haven't found all the Josh Gibson and Mickey Mantle cards yet!! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

12-16-2005, 01:40 PM

Posted By: andy beckeri think any collector can have his own top ten list without having to answer to others. we all have our own opinions.....why try to project your beliefs on someone else? as always, i think a beer is a good call. edited to respond to hal's last post. hal, you are a classic!

Archive

12-16-2005, 01:47 PM

Posted By: Jeff LichtmanMark, that's correct. And the dropoff in value of this card is astonishing in such a short period of time (2 months?).

Archive

12-16-2005, 03:39 PM

Posted By: Joe P.I hear through the grapevine that Ultra Upper/Lower Deck is putting out a set in 2006 with a touch of history. The set will be made up of the current players in baseball except for the first two. The set will be called, "Let's Play Two". Player #1 will be ANSON, followed by player #2 Josh Gibson. Anson #1 sp. (short print) Josh Gibson #2 sp - sp. (even shorter) --- just an inside tip. Be the first kids on the block to get them before they disappear. BTW: My favorite Toletero is that of Jose Enrique Montalvo - catcher. Back in the '40's and early '50's, I knew him and his family very well. One day in Central Park he said to me, "OK Joe, let's see what you've got?" Never got to San Juan to try out for the team - Korean War. I LUV this thread. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

12-16-2005, 05:31 PM

Posted By: CatThe argument for why you would want to own the Gibson Toleteros card is an extremely easy argument. IT IS THE ONLY CARD OF A TRULY GREAT BASEBALL PLAYER. This hobby to me is ultimately about baseball...not about special cardboard, errors in printing, etc. SURE, I like having rare back T206s, but only of HOF baseball players. I have no interest in collecting cards of poor or even marginal players (it's OK to me that other people do...I just have no interest in that). I want to have cards of great players. Some think Gibson was the greatest. I am not sure I agree, but I do agree that he was great. If you are going to collect cards of great players, then I somewhat see this card as a must...your personal finances permitting. Edited to correct typos unless otherwise noted.

Archive

03-25-2006, 04:06 PM

Posted By: Mark<a href="http://www.lelands.com/bid.aspx?lot=114&auctionid=603" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.lelands.com/bid.aspx?lot=114&auctionid=603</a>

Archive

03-25-2006, 04:21 PM

Posted By: Josh Evans For the record I found 4 or 5 in my initial trips to Puerto Rico last year Since then, nada This is the last one in the current Lelands auction Not to say I won’t find another tomorrow but this is the end of the original “find” Josh Evans

Archive

03-25-2006, 05:52 PM

Posted By: James FeaginFor those who have the funds and the desire to own this card, that's OK. However, I would never pay that much for an "all time great tribute" card. Josh Gibson may have been great, but we really will never know. As we will never really know how great players like Sadaharu Oh or Victor Starffin were. For those reasons, I wouldn't have so much enthusiasm in bidding on it. However, if that's your cup of tea, then go for it!

Archive

03-25-2006, 06:52 PM

Posted By: fkwIf you collect a card from every Hall of Famer, you need this card. Thats why its so pricy. HOF collectors need it. How many vintage Gibson cards are out there, and how many collectors are HOF collectors. Its all supply and demand. Look at the prices of other high demand Negro leaguers cards. And there are only a handful of each known. 1909 Cabanas Pete Hill 15,000+ 1910 Punch Mendez $15,000++ 1923 Billiken Pop Lloyd $13,000 1923 Billiken Oscar Charleston $15,000 1923 Billiken Torriente $6,000 1949 Tolleteros Hilton Smith $19,000 1949 Tolleteros Leon Day $12,000 1950 Tolleteros Josh Gibson $25,000+ etc.

Archive

03-25-2006, 06:54 PM

Posted By: identify7A postcard with a baseball theme becomes a baseball card at the point that the original purchaser makes their choice (rather than "Sunning in Miami, wish you were here)" based on the theme portrayed. As another example, in the early '50s topps produced non-sport cards depicting cars (Wheels), airplanes (Wings), trains (Rails) and sailing boats (Sails); but no warships. I cut out the side of a plastic, glue together warship model box cover which showed a warship, and the resultant cutout was about the size of the Topps cards. This cutout survived with some of the Topps, and other cards of my youth. The point being: the identification of a baseball (or other similar) card, as such, is made on a gut level by the original owner of the item. This identification, although irrefutable, can be difficult to ascertain. imho. To me, my cutout warship is a legitimate card, eventhough that was not its manufacturer's intent. I may have some difficulty selling it, but why would I want to do that anyway. Sorry for the rambling, all. I guess this doesn't really clear up Hal's inquiry.