Does anyone actually have any interest in something like this?
 

Utterly insane. Why not cut up into pieces a signed copy of the Declaration of Independence?

http://www.hugginsandscott.com/cgi-b...l?itemid=19691

I don't get it...it isn't even a signature made by Cobb. It is a piece of a Ty Cobb brand bat...right? ....that he may or may not have played with....depending on how well Donruss did their research.

That being said, it does look super cool. Though I can't compare it to the Declaration of Independence because I'm sure there are hundreds, if not thousands, of game-used Cobb bats.

Cobb Bat Card
 

Yes, I believe there is great interest in the collecting world for a card like this. There is only one,and that is VERY attractive to the modern card collector. I would be very surprised if this card does not fetch at least 5K. Another thing is, what would an actual game used Cobb bat sell for? Probably alot more than what this card will sell for but the owner of the card gets the best part. Many see this type of collectible as heresy but that's the way it is these days. If you don't want to see items like this cut up and put on cards, buy them up and stop it from happening (I realize that's probably unreasonable but it's the only option). Today's card companies HAVE to do this sort of thing to make their product more appealing than the other guy's, that's business in card world these days. I don't like it any more than the next vintage collector, it's just my perspective and playing devil's advocate.

If it is an actual Ty Cobb game used bat,I don't understand the logic of ruining it to make a card?:confused:

I used to occasionally buy a box of new cards just for fun but stopped doing so when the idiot manufacturers started destroying true artifacts to create these ridiculous "relics". It is an obscenity.

Also,if it's a 1/1,where did the rest of the bat go,into the trash?:rolleyes:

And why isn't this encapsulated? Is it because it would grade a PSA 7 or 8 at best, and make it look bad? Somebody got PSA to encapsulate their Babe Ruth pants from this card series, and it came back a 7. Why not just have it encapsulated as authentic to protect the damn thing????

The concept of destroying a valuable artifact to make money is deplorable. Period.

It is hardly unique to this thing of ours. In the Middle Ages there was a thriving market for saints' bones and other holy relics. The relic cards remind me of that.

Now, as far as the card itself goes, although I personally would not pay that to own it, the item is pretty nice looking.

Philosophically, I am less than convinced that the "badness" of making these cards is clear cut. The dichotomy is not between a museum having the piece on display for the public to enjoy and its destruction, it is between an individual owning it and having it in his or her office or home versus having it cut into a lot of little bits that a few dozen people can own. If it really was Cooperstown or the saw mill, I'd clearly recoil at the idea of the relic cards. But when it is really just one guy bogarting the whole bat versus having it cut up, frankly, I don't care if it gets cut up. I won't own it or enjoy it if someone else has it hanging over his bed, so why should I care if it gets cut up and parceled out to a bunch of people who will treasure the collective bits as part of their collections. To me, that's a lot more collective joy from the item than it would give if some dude had it in his private stash.

Because it's the only way the modern card companies can get adults to spend their paychecks to play the pack opening lottery.

Adam- artifacts like Ty Cobb bats are finite. There are only so many that have survived. Each time you destroy one that's one less that exists. If you love baseball memorabilia, and I know you do, that should trouble you.

After the Beatles stayed at the Plaza Hotel, their bedsheets were cut into little pieces and sold to the public. But a bedsheet is ostensibly worthless, and you can just buy another one. Ty Cobb bats can eventually run out, if you cut up enough of them.

Hope that whoever buys that atrocity does the decent thing and releases it back into the wild.

Even if they cut up the last bat and no whole bats were left, there still would be 10 or so "whole bats" listed on eBay starting with the line...."my collector grandfather just passed away...."

So what is the acceptable starting and stopping points for inserting bat pieces and jersey swatches into modern products? 1920s? 1930s? 1940s-1980s? What?

This is the only one with the signature on it.

There are 2003 Topps Tribute cards and 2009 Topps relic cards with a piece of a Cobb bat. (Looks like there are four different 2003 sets that include a sliver of the bat.)

Bill

Merely a contrivance to lure people into buying immediately worthless product.

JP- that's funny, because as I was typing I was thinking the same thing. As long as we have forgers, we can never run out of anything.

Look, we all collect some form of vintage baseball memorabilia, all of which was made well before any of us were born. The only reason it still exists is because the person who owned it before us respected it and took care of it. We are all really just taking care of our collections until they are sold to the next guy. So there's kind of an unwritten rule that it is our duty and obligation to preserve this stuff. Cutting up an artifact of any kind is a sign of total disrespect for the objects we collect.

Barry,
Very true but the card companies aren't in the business of respecting anything.

I also don't think it's the worst thing in the world to afford a modern collector with limited funds the opportunity to own a piece of pr-war Hall of Fame material. As much as vintage hobbyists like to slag on the modern market, these game-used pieces have created many collectors who have eventually ventured into the pre-war hobby.

Barry, I happen to disagree, although uneasily. I understand your point that once it is cut up it is gone, but to suggest as you do that anyone who takes a differing view of these cards doesn't love baseball memorabilia is a facile argument based on what I see as an overly-simplified and false premise. As I tried to point out, the issue is not a clear-cut dichotomy between preserving the item for the sake of posterity and historical research versus cutting it up, it is instead a choice between a rich guy owning a bat (which perhaps he might sell to another rich guy when he gets tired of it or dies) versus a lot of people owning a piece of that bat. I will never, ever own a Cobb bat unless I find it in a garage sale. I might own a piece of a Cobb bat in a card. If my choice is never owning something that is squirreled away in someone else's private collection versus owning a piece of that item presented in an aesthetically pleasing package that I would enjoy owning, which of those two choices does the most good for the most people is by no means clear to me.

I also would not dictate to the owners of these items what they can do with the things that they own. I know I'd not appreciate it if someone scolded me for putting a 1 of 1 card I own in the spokes of my bike. It's my card; it's their bat. If someone else doesn't like it, they should have outbid me when they had the chance.

Jeff- I know, it's corporate America.

And as far as accepting the argument that cutting up a Ty Cobb bat can somehow lead collectors of modern cards into vintage, I think it's a bit of a stretch. There are all these clever marketers out there who could find another way to entice them.

Thanks Dan & Bill for answering my questions.I have some of these types of cards,but they are all of modern players-Pujols all star game jersey patch,Piazza card w/bat & base relic,Randy Johnson game worn,etc.....I never put much thought into them,other than stick them away in a box with all of the other modern cards..........but when I hear of an actual Ty Cobb bat being butchered into little tiny slivers and inseted into todays cards,it seems WRONG.A Ty Cobb bat should have NEVER been destroyed like that.

Barry,

With all due respect, I follow both the pre-war and modern markets quite closely. I am certain my assertion is not "a stretch" at all. Several on this board are/were "shiny" collectors who developed an appreciation for vintage through modern game-used cards.

Sorry Adam, I can't put my arms around the idea that it is better for more people to own small pieces of a bat. Would it be okay to cut the Mona Lisa into a thousand little pieces so that a thousand rich collectors can lay claim to a piece of it? Okay, the Mona Lisa is unique, but I still hate the idea of destroying something so more people can own it. It doesn't work for me.

Adam, I like your analogy to the Biblical relics of the Middle Ages. And like those relics that were so sought-after centuries ago, these modern-day baseball relics will no doubt appeal to somebody. I still think they're junk, though, and I'd rather spend my money on something that's truly vintage and real, like a beat-up T206. Not some 21st century Frankencard ...

If it would tick off the French I might be able to get behind it.

Exhibitman,

Then I suggest, since you feel this way, that you immediately go out and buy a paper shredder and shred all of YOUR cards up and distribute the pieces to elementary school children because, God forbid, they are stashed away in YOUR house so that only YOU can look at YOUR cards.

David

orioles1954,

Maybe some of these collectors came to appreciate vintage cards because the vintage cards held or increased in value year after year, unlike MOST of the shiny cards that have been overproduced since 1989.

David

By the way, I am the guy who authored the description for the card Mr. Lichtman is mentioning. I think a FAR greater problem is the authenticity of these items. A game-used bat can yield up to 2,000 slivers, the majority of which are spread over several issues over many years. What kind of checks do the companies have to make sure these items don't get mixed up? Are the bats/jerseys authenticated by MEARS or PSA/DNA or someone else before being "packed out"? Upper Deck screwed up numerous instances of cut autographs, why not game-used inserts? Food for thought.

To everyone,

I tell you what, let's go get the Dead Sea Scrolls and take the pieces (or cut up the full scrolls) into tiny pieces so that a lot of different religious people can own them. No need for the high and mighty scientists, archaeologists, historians and scholars to keep them just for themsleves.

Or we can go blow up the Wailing Wall and distribute the small pieces so that Jews (and Christians) who can not afford to go to Israel wont have to worry about finding the money to make the trip. I mean, it is just a wall after all.....

David

Case in point: 2009 Topps Tribute had "game-used" bat pieces of Ruth, Gehrigs, Jackie Robinson and others. It was discovered they were actually pieces of seats or benches from various stadiums. They only fixed the problem when called out on it. Donruss had the best system of verifying game-used items by putting pictures of the items on their cards....then they went out of business.

James

orioles1954,

So a LOT OF GOOD it did them to spend the money on these artifacts, destroy them and then sell the slivers on cards to the collecting public....

David

The issue is mostly moot anyway. Far fewer of these bats are being cut up due to manufacturer attrition, and that most modern collectors are favoring multi-colored game-used patches.

P.S: I remember in the 1980s The Smithsonian Museum of American History were selling certified pieces from one of Amelia Earhart's airplanes in their gift shop. If you seriously have a beef with card companies doing this to pre-war baseball items, why not contact the licensing division of MLB?

Perspective, please!
 

Why can't people collect what they want without others judging what they believe to be the "right way" to collect? If someone wants to buy a Ty Cobb game used bat and enjoy it, ok. If someone wants to buy a card with a piece of game used Ty Cobb bat , ok. I think someone who collects cards that are missing 30-40% of the card is a bit strange, but have at it. I like graded cards, so shoot me. Should we build a time machine a go back and flog the kid who trimmed their Eddie Plank card, glued their Magie in an album or put their Wagner in the spokes of their bike? I know a guy who wallpapered his bathroom with cards and laughs every time he see the 52 Mantle, 53 Mays, 54 Banks etc. up on the wall. Let's lighten up here, it's only baseball cards! To compare the destruction of the Mona Lisa, Dead Sea Scrolls or Wailing Wall to the bat of a baseball player is absolutely ludicrous.

I think Lichtman really wants the card and is just trashing it in the hope of discouraging people from bidding on it -- a favorite tactic of his old friend Mr. Lewis. :D:D

I'm of mixed feelings on the modern game used cards. If it's a recent or current player I'm pretty much ok with it. The player can merely buy an extra, wear it for one inning, or if a bat use it for one at bat, and it's game used. No problem there.

But cutting up the older stuff just seems wrong, except in some special circumstances. I'll get to those later.

And I've been one of those people that could never afford much of anything game used. Much of the great stuff is still out of reach, but I can get the cheaper items. I used to look at the auctions and see articles or tv spots about some really great collections, and think ...Someday....

And I was able to pick up a few items by luck or knowledge or both.

Where will todays collectors get that sort of inspiration? What will they see as a goal to reach for? Will it be seen as worthwhile to learn about what a real piece of equipment should look like, or will that be seen as hopeless.
It works for cards too. It's very unlikely I'll ever own some of the really rare stuff, but I'm very glad there's people who can and do and notice the details about those cards.

The few times I'd think that cutting up something older would be if the item was really trashed to start with. Maybe a Cobb bat portion, like if he broke a bat and someone saved one of the pieces? Maybe not even then. Or maybe something like my Fenway seat. cut out very roughly in the early 70's remodel, it's got very uneven slats on one side. It really should be trimmed evenly, but then what to do with the roughly 6 and 8 inch pieces? Yeah, those could go into a card and I'd be ok with it.

Steve B

David, in your vitriol you are missing my point: The analogy to items in museums and to public historic sites is inapposite. We are not talking about cutting up a museum collection, we are talking about privately-owned items that are not part of a public trust. I agree that ruining a museum collection--something expressly set aside for the public's benefit and education--is a stupid idea. Had you read carefully you would have seen that in my initial post I had already dismissed that idea. However, the issue framed the way that you and many other posters here frame it is a red herring. My card collection is a more apt analogy--privately held and not used for the public's benefit. It would not be as much of an issue if I decided to make relic cards from my collection as it would if the same exact cards in the Burdick Collection were shredded by the Met and sold in the gift shop.

Better yet, how about strip cards? Many collectors who get uncut strips will cut them down to individual cards, especially if one or two of them are mutilated and the rest are nice. Is that a collecing "sin" akin to cutting up the Mona Lisa?

My point, once again since you either missed it or do not want to acknowledge it, is that we are dicussing privately holding an item for one person's good versus cutting it up and creating many items that many people might privately hold and enjoy, not cutting up a piece of the commonly-held cultural heritage and distributing it to private owners. The two are very different concepts and in my view merit different reactions. All of the whining about the desecration of baseball history is based on a premise about the use and disposition of items in question that is inaccurate.

At least it wasn't Roberto Clemente's plane.

This thread should be cut up and sent to the PSA board. :p

I think folks can collect what they want, but we on this vintage baseball card board have the right to bash them! ;)

Exhibitman,

Wasn't Burdick's cards once privately held? Weren't they in HIS home and enjoyed mostly only by HIM? What would have happened if he would have decided to throw his cards away or decided to cut them into small pieces and give them away or sell them? They would NOT have ever been donated to the museum for ALL to look at, study and enjoy.

The Ty Cobb bat could have been disposed of in a similiar manner; a wealthy guy buys it for his PERSONAL collection and displays it IN HIS HOME. Then, when he is older and finds out his children have NO INTEREST in baseball and that there ARE museums who would be HAPPY to have a bat like that to display, he COULD have donated it for the public trust.

But now, the bat is cut up into small pieces it can NEVER be put back together and displayed as a complete bat and thus EVERYONE who is interested in seeing such a thing and who can not afford it will NEVER get the chance to.

The SAME goes for YOUR collection. I don't know who you are, where you live or what is in your collection. I may never know any of it. Thus, I would have no clue what I missed out on if you decided to cut your collecton up into small pieces and sell it. However, as long as your collection is NOT cut up into small pieces there IS a chance that you would sell a piece or pieces of your collection and OTHERs could then have a chance to own and enjoy THAT piece. Also, there is a chance that YOUR COLLECTION is one day donated to a museum.

But THAT will NEVER happen if it is cut up into small pieces and dispersed.

David

James made a great point,something I also have wondered about-a good majority of the time,how do you really even know the difference between a game used jersey/bat/chunk of base/whatever as opposed to Joe Blow's shirt sleeve/stadium wooden plank seat/etc.,etc.??

Who is really going to know what it is (the relic)?

Something is to be said about that-and if there was a positive about this Ty Cobb relic bat card,at least it does have the Ty Cobb brand in the piece.

I am still against destroying a Ty Cobb bat for modern day card purposes,but to each his/her own.............

Exhibitman,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

David

I am just waiting
 

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

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

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

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

It's a Splendid Splinter.

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

Now why didn't I think of that?:(

I hate it!
 

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

Also
 

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