HA: Babe Ruth 1933 Goudey PSA/DNA
 

Can anyone explain to me why the yellow background is running nearly three times as high as the other two? Is it because the card is rarer? Is it because the signature is clearer? It is all of the above?

See them here:

http://sports.ha.com/c/search-result...oudey+ruth+dna

Thanks

You can eliminate #181 from the conversation since its bottom has been hacked off. Not sure why #53 is 3 times more than #144. The yellow normally sells for around twice as much, but that "multiplier" shouldn't seem to apply here... I'd think its premium would show up more as an adder. Sweet cards regardless

I'd rather have the yellow one 3x more then the batting pose, maybe some other guys feel the same way.

Personally, I love the batting pose but have a red background in my collection. Once I get my collection organized I might trade my red in for the batting one.

The batting pose is cool, I was thinkin' that out of these three signed cards, the yellow one looks, to me, by far the most pleasing to the eye. I bet the prices get closer by auction end though.

Gotta love Heritage's L-A-R-G-E scans!!

Would love for some of the regulars from the autograph side of the board to give their opinions.

Same reason why collectors like the Cobb green portrait, eye appeal

I have no idea about the scarcity or anything else, but if I could pick any of them, I'd want the yellow background because the signature stands out way more than on the other two, and just has much better eye appeal imo.

Agreed. It's much nicer.

so you're on vacation this week and looking to kill some time?

I wouldn't expect them to narrow, I'd say it's a combination of a couple factors. First, the auto on the yellow looks to be nicer than the others, has sharp contrast, and is in pen. The full batting pose is in pencil which will not hold the same kind of value. This other pose 181 has paper loss on the back and is trimmed which I would think hurt it's value. The cards are rather equal as far as rarity, but the big differences are the clarity, implement used, and damage to the item being signed. It looks like price is reflecting this too.

181 also has a completely hacked off bottom.. No idea how its even in the same price range as 144

As far as just signed is concerned the green is by far the rarest followed by the red. None that have the bottom hacked should go higher then a complete one.

Was hoping to get the trimmed one for half its price right now, I'm just shocked and sad how much it's going for...may have been my only shot to own a 'cheap' signed Ruth goudey

As an autograph guy, I would definitely pay the most for the yellow background card. It is the clearest signature, signed in a great spot, and overall displays the best of the three. Not sure if triple the other prices are warranted, however guessing that signed goudey Ruth cards don't come around all that often, a really nice one like the first will demand the most attention and because of that, the several serious bidders are having at it and ignoring the other two to a certain degree. Might have been a better move to only list one at auction at a time.

The yellow example is by far the best looking (boldest, cleanest, best placed sig) of these 3 signed cards. very visually appealing.


Just out of curiosity, how does the rarity of the Goudey Ruth's break down, when comparing one to the other (sans sigs)?

I am an autograph guy. I think everyone makes some good points, but I think some are overthinking it to a degree. I agree the overall eye appeal of the yellow card is superior, but I can't see eye appeal alone result in the 3x price difference between the yellow card and the others.

The 1933 Goudey set is collected by a large number of people. A group of those specialize in the signed set. I think the likelihood is that 2 or more people who are collecting the signed set are going head to head on this card. I've seen other signed Ruth's but not that one.

Just my 2c.
Mark

I know at least 4 other people who are most likely in a bidding war. There are plenty of signed Goudey Ruth's surprisingly

I'm not one of them. I'm happy with my one signed ruth. I'm currently at 180 different signed 33s but I will be surprised if I can secure anymore.

fwiw, and that's probably not much, I'm skeptical of all those Ruth sigs. The yellow one looks okay, more or less, but the other ones look funny to me. I'm not saying they're not real and maybe those are styles I'm not familiar with but I wouldn't feel comfortable with them.

I really don't like the R in the middle one and the far right one, the B and TH is funny to me.

Hauls of Shame has joined the fray on these cards:

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=19877#more-19877


Steve

BTW, REA also has a signed 1933 Goudey #144 Ruth, which is currently smoking HA's similar Ruth. Link. (None of these are my consignments.)

More great work from Pete Nash. I'm still waiting for Pete to put out his article on all the fake items he made and put in folks collections.

Peter if you're reading this when can we expect that article go up on the website? It would be a great read Pete. Only if you have the time you know between dragging dead collectors names thru the mud to draw attention away from your ongoing legal issues and such.

Keep us posted.

+1 - I Couldn't have said it better John!

Joe T.

Wow, up to $35k...

I don't know if its hallofshames article, crazy collectors with too much money, or both but my collection is $ kyrocketing! Only took 25 years :)

So according to Nash, all four '33 Goudey Ruths offered are "poorly executed forgeries", worse than Coaches Corner? Really? Does anyone believe this guy? I really don't know anything about autographs, but I do know that I'll never collect them.

I worry about the combination of conspiracy theorists plus third party authenticators with piss poor reputations plus the ever growing forgeries out there will one day make all autographs worthless. Its gotten completly out of hand and only getting worse. If that happened I'd of course be disappointed but I'd still be glad I bought and/or got all mine signed. It does bring up the question though of sell now?

This autograph scene appears to be quite the mess?!?!?! The only autographs I have are ones I got myself as a kid/adult or that were given to me back in the day from reliable sources. I almost feel that authenticating them(not that I want to) would bring their authenticity into question more so than not?!?!

I have about 30 signed 33s that are slabbed but I hate them cause they look so much better in a book.I've had to pbotocopy them to put in my book so there isn't an empty space

It seems like a serious accusation that REA and Heritage are selling "poorly executed forgeries", worse than Coaches Corner.

Dammit I must be getting senile in my old age (ill be 38 this year). Ok lets pretend I hadn't said anything yet. Ok here goes:
DID SOMEONE SAY SIGNED 1933 GOUDEYS?!?!?! :)

Attachment 97891

Attachment 97892

Attachment 97893

Attachment 97894

Attachment 97895

That dead collector deserves to have his name drug through the mud.

Peter is the Jose Canseco of baseball memorabilia. He was "deeply involved" in the beginning, has a lot of critics, and there is a lot of truth in what he now says.

Great collection, Sean!

Thanks gary! I'm a bit of an attention whore regarding my one unique thing I own :D

Peter is a man who has been accused of being a crook and a scam artist. He has a slew of legal problems to boot. He’s no white knight or shining star to change the hobby for the better. If Peter wants to clean up the hobby that’s great here’s an idea. How about pointing out all the bad items he’s allegedly responsible for and making those who have bought bad items connected to Nash whole by coming clean.

Nah it’s easier to sit in cyberspace hide from your legal problems. Drag hobby icons who are dead and can’t defend themselves thru the mud. All while putting up smoke screens to draw attention away from the 800lb gorilla in the room which is your own very public fraudulent activities all while taking the fifth along the way.

Taking advice from Peter on fraud is like Jerry Sandusky managing the “Megan’s Law” lists for the authorities. :rolleyes:

Tell us how you really feel John. :) Dave

+1.. Those full binder pages look amazing!

Thanks! Yeah they sure beat clunky old slabs for sure.

So do you agree with Nash that all four signed '33 Goudey Ruths offered in HA and REA are "poorly executed forgeries"?