Importance of Provenance

[joshuanip]

I'm curious what the board thinks of the importance of provenance in cards?

In art, itself the difference between a Jackson Pollock in the tens of millions or a maybe Jackson Pollock and the tens of hundreds. But in art, pieces are generally 1 of 1's and not publicly distributed like how the history of cards were.

Does it matter (other than cool factor) if a card has been held in a grandad's attic for 100 years or if it was from an unknown history, since most cards are "authenticated" these days.

If provenance is important for certain cases, than curious what kind of premium is warranted? If you look at the black swamp for example, that is great provenance, but no one seems to care because of the supply side issue of the find.

Absolute waste of time post but just a different angle in our hobby I was curious about.

(P.S. Memorabilia completely different case, because of the personal nature of an auto and forgeries in the industry, but does it hold weight in cards?)

[icollectDCsports]

This issue comes up in the recent discussion about doctored cards. Worth a read.

http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=250171

[Leon]

I think provenance on cards is great when it can be had. I know where these cards shown came from... I am as positive as can be they weren't ever tampered with. There are lots of cards with good provenance in the hobby and I will pay a little more for a card with a steadfast history. (Shown before but relevant.)

[CobbSpikedMe]

I like provenance on a flip for the "cool factor" as you say. I love my Lionel Carter and Frank Nagy cards and probably paid a slight premium for them. I would think other cards would also bring a premium in some case, like the Skydash find of Tin Tops years ago here on the boards. I could be wrong though.

[drcy]

Ideally, provenance gives you the history all the way to the origin or early owner, but, for altered cards, even just going back a step or two can reveal issues. If you find an earlier auction showing that a card has been altered, that is an example of provenance and why it is important. Game used collectors often find where a bat or jersey has been altered since it's last sale (number on a bat change, fake use added, etc) -- which is an example of provenance. The linked column at the bottom gives examples where past sales have shown problems with items.

Of course, provenance isn't foolproof and doesn't prove everything. Of course, there isn't documentation and pictures for all cards. Of course, some cards are obtained from a garage sale or found in an attic. Even if someone has a receipt from 30 years ago, there probably isn't a picture. But it still an important consideration and piece in the puzzle. If a card doctor is offering a Gem Mint graded card, he won't be able to show where he got the card-- because he didn't obtain it in that state. If someone is about to drop $50,000 on a Gem Mint card and doesn't even ask where the card came from, I would say that person is pretty stupid.

In fact, I bet in the future, cards with decent provenance-- as opposed to high grade cards that appear out of nowhere-- will receive a premium in value. Many card collects ignore or dismiss provenance for cards, but if it is revealed that there has been mass doctoring of cards, they likely will change their tune.

With famous old masters artworks, provenance helps prove authenticity and identity, along with giving evidence of its age. Here it's not a matter of condition, but identity and age.

The Importance of Provenance in Collecting

[oldjudge]

To go to the other end of the spectrum, it means zero to me. Whether the card was previously owned by Mickey Mantle or Shlomo Mantle, the butcher, means little to me. I just care about the card.

[rainier2004]

So I don't collect high grade anything, I wouldn't know a psa 8 if it bit me where the Sun don't shine. I collect rarities, items that have less than 20 known examples from the pre-ww1 era.

I do my own check, I check with others and if everything pans out I am good. I honestly couldn't care less about provenance in any way, shape or form...it just doesn't matter to me as long as it passes my personal checks. Its just cards...

[drcy]

As a photograph guy, an example of provenance being helpful is when you have a photo with a famous image but without any photographers stamp on it. In cases, the provenance, or sales history, shows or gives evidence that it is by the famous photographer. For example, provenance can show it came from the archives of the magazine he worked for or even his estate. In one case, I had unstamped photographs by a famous photographer where the photos came from his landlord who sold his effects when the photographer left the country without paying his due rent. I later talked to the photographer and he acknowledged that the photos had been his. He didn't ask for the photos back, but did ask me to scan them for him.

But, obviously. this is a case where provenance is important to identification and authenticity, not condition grade or historical prestige (other than as it relates to authentication).

My philosophy on cards is if it's only worth something if it's graded 9 or 10, it's probably not much of a card.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

To go to the other end of the spectrum, it means zero to me. Whether the card was previously owned by Mickey Mantle or Shlomo Mantle, the butcher, means little to me. I just care about the card.

Ditto to this.

[swarmee]

I paid $50 for a $2 card last week because it had Jeff Burdick's back stamp. Wanted one of those anyways, but this one was in the set I collect mainly (T51 colleges). First one I've seen with his stamp in the four years I've been collecting, so I thought it was worth it.
There are people that will pay extra for F. Scott Fitzgerald's stamped cards as well.

[drcy]

I cataloged a bunch of CDVs that belonged to Charles Dickens. I don't know about you guys, but I thought that pretty cool, even though I didn't like having to read his 900 page novels in English class.

[Gary Dunaier]

Originally Posted by drcy

I cataloged a bunch of CDVs that belonged to Charles Dickens.

Are you sure they didn't actually belong to Charles Dikkens the well-known Dutch author?

[Bestdj777]

Originally Posted by swarmee

I paid $50 for a $2 card last week because it had Jeff Burdick's back stamp. Wanted one of those anyways, but this one was in the set I collect mainly (T51 colleges). First one I've seen with his stamp in the four years I've been collecting, so I thought it was worth it.
There are people that will pay extra for F. Scott Fitzgerald's stamped cards as well.

These are to two situations where provenance has mattered to me--my Burdick and Fitzgerald* cards. But, I didn't pick those up because I wanted the card but rather because I wanted something tied to the prior owner. Just like, at some point, I'll pick up a Lionel Carter card to have that in my collection.

If I was looking to purchase a Mickey Mantle card, short of having been owned by Mantle himself, I wouldn't care whether it was an original owner card, part of some find, etc.

[packs]

I just can't think of a reason why provenance would be important for something issued in the tens of thousands or perhaps even millions.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by packs

I just can't think of a reason why provenance would be important for something issued in the tens of thousands or perhaps even millions.

Not everything was issued in huge quantities like that.

I can think of a couple instances where it could matter.

In the case of a card that's "new" or very nearly unknown. Like if someone turned up a T206 with a Hustler back. The provenance would matter since the card was listed probably by error years ago as a known back, but it's generally believed that they never existed.
Wouldn't you want to know as much as possible about where it's supposedly been since 1910?
If it's from some random guy would you trust it as much as if it came from the family of an early collector who traded at least a list with Burdick and had letters from him mentioning the card?


Or, a more common card.
Lets say you can afford and really want a nice green Cobb T206. You find one, but it was previously owned by someone who was a known card doctor.
say it's pretty high grade, maybe a 6 or 7.
How much do you trust it knowing that it was owned by someone who altered cards regularly?

[packs]

Did we ever hear anything about the provenance behind the Blue Old Mill? If provenance didn't come up then I don't see how it would apply to a Hustler backed card.

[Griffins]

Originally Posted by Gary Dunaier

Are you sure they didn't actually belong to Charles Dikkens the well-known Dutch author?

Have to be careful, I heard about a guy that bought the wrong Jon Voights car. Turned out to belong to a dentist, not the actor.

[MVSNYC]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

To go to the other end of the spectrum, it means zero to me. Whether the card was previously owned by Mickey Mantle or Shlomo Mantle, the butcher, means little to me. I just care about the card.

This.

For Cards, it doesn’t matter to me...It matters in memorabilia, like with game used bats, for instance (where chain of ownership is sometimes vital in authenticating the piece).

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by swarmee

I paid $50 for a $2 card last week because it had Jeff Burdick's back stamp. Wanted one of those anyways, but this one was in the set I collect mainly (T51 colleges). First one I've seen with his stamp in the four years I've been collecting, so I thought it was worth it.
There are people that will pay extra for F. Scott Fitzgerald's stamped cards as well.

Me too. I paid a bit extra for a Burdick stamped card. IMO well worth it. I also paid up for a manufacturer file copy of a card. And there is a definite provenance factor for Topps Vault certified materials.

[nolemmings]

I don't think it's fair for me to render an opinion, since I've never been to Rhode Island.

[Michael B]

Originally Posted by drcy

I cataloged a bunch of CDVs that belonged to Charles Dickens. I don't know about you guys, but I thought that pretty cool, even though I didn't like having to read his 900 page novels in English class.

I am one-third of the way through 'David Copperfield' right now. I never read it before. Barnes and Nobles had this large group of classic books for $5.00 in store. I bought quite a few. I have read 'Great Expectations', 'A Tale of Two Cities', 'The Art of War', 'Siddartha', 'The Origin of Species' and 'The Count of Monte Cristo' so far this year. Next up is 'The Brothers Karamazov' or 'Bleak House' each 800 pages or so. The toughest read was 'The Origin of Species'.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Michael B

I am one-third of the way through 'David Copperfield' right now. I never read it before. Barnes and Nobles had this large group of classic books for $5.00 in store. I bought quite a few. I have read 'Great Expectations', 'A Tale of Two Cities', 'The Art of War', 'Siddartha', 'The Origin of Species' and 'The Count of Monte Cristo' so far this year. Next up is 'The Brothers Karamazov' or 'Bleak House' each 800 pages or so. The toughest read was 'The Origin of Species'.

The Brothers Karamazov is a great book. Dostoyevski was my favorite author, back when I used to read. The length never bothered me. Michener, on the other hand, ugh.

[GasHouseGang]

I wouldn't necessarily pay extra for a card with provenance, but I got these two for what you would normally pay for the card in this grade.

[brian1961]

Lots of answers with various lines of thought.

As someone who personally knew Mr. Lionel Carter, I would most assuredly pay more for a card from his personal collection. Not a lot more, but there were some of Mr. Carter's cards that were WOW. Three examples come to mind----an SGC 98 '34 Goudey Hank Greenberg, an SGC 96 '51 Bowman Mickey Mantle, and an SGC 84 '53 Glendale Franks Art Houtteman. Being from Mr. Carter's personal collection was truly icing on the cake. He was an absolute fanatic about condition during his years of collecting, when the far majority of his fellow collectors were simply content just having the card, regardless of its condition.

For the vast majority of cards, I am with the collector who insists he does not care in the least.

However, for the creme of the creme, provenance spells authenticity, genuineness, and allure to the point of DEEP, GOTTA HAVE IT DESIRABILITY. Now, let me say when I think of provenance, I refer to the entire history of the item---the promotion from whence it came, how challenging it was for kids to get a hold of one during the brief window of opportunity at the time, and if possible, who owned the piece along the way.

Taken collectively, you build either an appealing sea story, or a "SO WHAT!" A lot of people don't get into good sea stories, but then they might have an infantile attention span, and the understanding and appreciation for the finer things of a crum bum. That's perfectly fine; they have their own highly desirable cards and sets, and it means less competition for the few who recognize the merits and beauty of the profoundly rare.

To sweep all that precious information and background story aside as hogwash is pure idiocy. For some highly desirable cards and items that could command boo coo from an auction dogfight or private sale, provenance is essential if not downright mandatory.

Most of you probably are aware of how important provenance is to the fine art world, or collector car world, rare gems, or rare coins and stamps. Perhaps you think for our world of sports cards, it isn't worth the trouble. Again, for most trading cards, and cars, coins, stamps, and so on, they are merely E Pluribus Unum.

For the creme of the creme, I want and need the provenance. ---Brian Powell

[drcy]

I look at the topic of provenance and cards differently. I bet all here would be, at the least, hesitant to buy a mint card from a well-known card doctor, or that can be traced to a well-known card doctor. This is an example of assessing and purchasing cards using provenance, and has nothing to with a card having once been by Mickey Mantle or being traced to its original owner. When someone says the the provenance of cards makes no matter to them, I say "Sure it does."

When you get into more esoteric baseball memorabilia-- such as a early 1905 Yale team trophy ball or unique proof--, then where it came from, such as a well respected and honest seller who knows his stuff, obviously becomes more important, because you're dealing with identity and authenticity. And most people know that when you turn to resell it, that it was obtained from a respected dealer who knows his stuff is an important and sometimes even essential selling point.

[Snapolit1]

If I can buy the same card at 25% less, I'll happily pass on the "Lionel Carter" or anyone else for that matter owned this card. If you knew the guy, sure. A way to pay homage to a nice guy. But I could care less if the card was owned by Lionel Carter, Lionel Hampton or Lionel Schmutz.

[packs]

People keep bringing up art. If we're talking about the provenance behind pre-war cards like a T206, there were so many of them issued it doesn't matter who owned an individual copy. Provenance matters in art because there is only one and paintings are a medium that can be copied by any skilled painter. So proving you have the original is important. That's not the case with a baseball card. There are cards that there are only one known copy of, but without looking it up, can anyone name the person who owned the Allegheny set? It was part of the Copeland collection, but who owned it before Copeland? Copeland's name is the only one I ever see mentioned in write ups. Copeland was not the original owner though.

[drcy]

Artworks are often unique pieces, and traditionally provenance has been used to help establish the age. Even merely establishing that's it been around a long time is useful information. Seeing that a "Rembrandt" was exhibited or sold in 1890 doesn't prove it authentic or from Rembrandt's lifetime, but at least proves that it wasn't made yesterday.

So, yes, mass produced cards and an oil painting or sculpture are different in ways provenance-wise. You don't need provenance to authenticate a T206 or 1955 Topps. And a painting having been exhibited in a museum, owned by a famous collector or auctioned by Sotheby's will enhance its 'prestige.' Those things work both as authenticity evidence and prestige.

Some people do like famous ownership of cards-- find it neat that card belonged to Mickey Mantle or Sandy Koufax--, and that, of course, is fine. In fact, I bet everyone here would think it cool to have a T206 Cobb that actually belonged to Cobb. The $$ worth of that provenance will vary from collector to collector, but I wager that everyone here would find it neat.

[packs]

Provenance also protects what's authentic from what's not in the art world because there is only one painting. Other artwork not originally attributed to an artist can be attributed through provenance and other techniques as well. But those issues aren't issues commonly encountered in the pre-war card market.

[Leon]

When I was thinking of provenance I was thinking more the story behind where the card came from, not necessarily a famous person, only the history of the card. I almost always ask the backstory of any significant acquisition. I love the histories of cards and will pay more for new to the hobby stuff, sometimes.
And then there is idiotic lineage that dissuades me from bidding....

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1941-Play-B...wAAOSwDmBY4D-Z

.

[Stampsfan]

Originally Posted by Griffins

Have to be careful, I heard about a guy that bought the wrong Jon Voights car. Turned out to belong to a dentist, not the actor.

Best deadpan answer in a long time. Love the reference.

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

If I can buy the same card at 25% less, I'll happily pass on the "Lionel Carter" or anyone else for that matter owned this card. If you knew the guy, sure. A way to pay homage to a nice guy. But I could care less if the card was owned by Lionel Carter, Lionel Hampton or Lionel Schmutz.

What about Lionel Richie? You wouldn't pay extra for a card that he used to own?

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I don't think it's fair for me to render an opinion, since I've never been to Rhode Island.

Todd-I enjoyed the line, even if no one else caught it.

[brian1961]

This morning I thought of a good example of provenance where it pertains to lineage that would have interested me. A high-grade 1952 Topps Mantle is as great as they come, but would be magnified to me if it came from the Mr. Mint find of 1985-86. That was one momentous event in hobby history. ---Brian Powell

[Snapolit1]

I have been in the hobby far shorter than most of you guys, but it seems to me that most of the momentous "finds" of the last few year have been hyped up to a degree that they never really could fulfill. Who cares where and how a card was found. Might be interesting but I don't see how it impacts what I want to pay for a card.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

I have been in the hobby far shorter than most of you guys, but it seems to me that most of the momentous "finds" of the last few year have been hyped up to a degree that they never really could fulfill. Who cares where and how a card was found. Might be interesting but I don't see how it impacts what I want to pay for a card.

So you don't want to know that a card is fresh to the hobby instead of "who knows whose hands" its been in for the last 100 yrs? I absolutely do if possible. If the card is brand new to the hobby it is much less likely to be screwed with, imo. Kind of like the pack of cards I showed above. No doubt they haven't been "worked on" like thousands and thousands of others, many of which are in slabs today (Harris Collection of tiny borders... LOL)....just my opinion and your mileage may vary.

.

[packs]

I read through the original auction description for the Blue Old Mill but I don't see any mentions of who owned the card or its history prior to arriving at the National.

http://nov12.hugginsandscott.com/cgi...l?itemid=51236

[steve B]

Originally Posted by packs

I read through the original auction description for the Blue Old Mill but I don't see any mentions of who owned the card or its history prior to arriving at the National.

http://nov12.hugginsandscott.com/cgi...l?itemid=51236

And there was a lot of controversy about it. Would there have been as much if that history was known? Maybe, maybe not.

If the Black Swamp find hadn't been publicized and the cards simply sold off a few at a time, would people believe they were unaltered? Probably not.

I do agree though that for most cards it doesn't matter much. And it may or may not matter much to someone if a card was in a particular collectors collection. To me it would matter a little. Eventually I'd like to pick up one from each hobby pioneer, but I'm not interested enough to pay a huge premium.
In my other hobby, there is a bit of a premium attached to something being from a famous collection, or for some of the major rarities, multiple famous collections.
That can also help identify things that might go unnoticed. I bought an item that was unusual, to the point where there was a list of similar items. To my surprise this one was sort of on the list. Sort of, because it was in a famous collection that was sold off in the 1930's and at the time it was an individual lot in the auction, but not pictured since pictures of it were illegal then. But it matches the description, and there has only been one sold anywhere.
So it's EX- Ackerman, unique, and nobody knows where it's been since the 1930's. I'd probably do pretty well if I sent it to auction, and a little research made the difference between me buying it of not. (Sadly, it's not in the Wagner or even 52 Mantle price range, and much less than even many postwar rookies even though it's unique. )

[Snapolit1]

Good point Leon . . . hadn't looked at it from that angle.

Originally Posted by Leon

So you don't want to know that a card is fresh to the hobby instead of "who knows whose hands" its been in for the last 100 yrs? I absolutely do if possible. If the card is brand new to the hobby it is much less likely to be screwed with, imo. Kind of like the pack of cards I showed above. No doubt they haven't been "worked on" like thousands and thousands of others, many of which are in slabs today (Harris Collection of tiny borders... LOL)....just my opinion and your mileage may vary.

.

[ullmandds]

like most opinions here...I do not put any significant premiumbased on provenance on "most" cards I buy. Do I think it's cool to own cards once collected by the founding fathers of the hobby...ABSOLUTELY! Have I paid a slight premium for such cards in the past...YUP!

But these days my focus is so small...I will buy anything I see on my wantlist regardless of provenance as long as it meets my standards...which arent very high!!!!!!

With autographs and memorabilia...and ART...totally different story!

[ALR-bishop]

Sometimes if you want an item bad enough you will buy it no matter whose name is on it

[Leon]

From what I recall one of the few things they did well.

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Sometimes if you want an item bad enough you will buy it no matter whose name is on it