Nearly 2 million 1933 Goudey Babe Ruth cards?
 

Enjoyed the feedback I got for a recent post on the relative scarcity of the Goudey cards by sheet. I wasn't expecting to make progress beyond that point, but an unexpected bit of luck helped me turn those estimates into absolute numbers for each of the cards in the set.

Please take the work with a grain of salt as it is obviously impossible to be definitive or precise in this sort of work. Still, perhaps you'll find at least parts of the method useful in coming up with your own better estimates.

https://jasoncards.wordpress.com/201...-make-in-1933/

SPOILER ALERT: If you don't feel like clicking through, it's about 400K for most cards in the set. Of course, four Ruths including a DP jack his numbers up considerably.

Interesting read.

Thanks for posting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

attention getting thread title, but i'm not sure what your point is. if goudey made 100 million '33 ruth cards, what difference would it make to most collectors if only, say, 10 survived?

sgc and psa have encapsulated around 5k, but there is some duplication from crossing holders. it would be interesting to see an analysis looking at the number of raw versus encapsulated cards as an estimate of the total surviving population, but why is the manufacturing run relevant other than as a trivial historical anecdote?

Super interesting!! Thanks for posting.

If someone is purely interested in how many cards are around today, then my work provides zero useful information. However, I do believe many collectors are interested in how many cards were made. Certainly I am.

Not to get too theoretical, but we can view present-day rarity as a combination of two factors:

1. Original production
2. Survival rate

While the first might well fluctuate greatly between one vintage set and another, it's possible the second is more stable for similar sets/cards from the same era (e.g., 1933 and 1934 Goudey, or 1933 Goudey and 1933 Goudey Sport Kings or the two Mel Ott cards in 1934 Goudey).

What this means is that if someone is able to make a good estimate of the actual numbers for a particular vintage card today (and we DO sometimes see these), a patient and creative person could extrapolate from such data and original production numbers to arrive at a reasonably sound estimate for the surviving numbers of some other card of interest.

It's an inexact science to be sure, but I do believe many collectors find the information interesting, whether or not they find it useful. Sorry it didn't meet your expectations.

wouldn't a much more accurate estimate of surviving population from mainstream sets come from looking at the encapsulated totals and making reasonable estimates on cross-over population and raw population from surveys?

there's a huge amount of variance in the presumptions you are making about the size of the original manufacturing run. to start, we don't know whether the revenue figures you cited are based on sell in or sell through from the retail stores. we don't know if they are based on wholesale or retail prices. we don't know how much excess inventory was manufactured, etc.

regardless, i now understand the point of your post is not to insinuate there are tons of goudey ruths lying around undiscovered but to give an extremely rough estimate of what might have been manufactured based on extrapolating one line from a historical document.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

I find it interesting to think about the small percentage of cards that survive, how many kids might have collected them in the 30’s, and whether more may be discovered. Even great research won’t provide clear answers, but it’s more food for thought.

I imagine most people regard all our discussions about old ballplayers and the cards children once collected as trivial anecdotes.

Thanks for the info Jason.

In the end it's all speculation.

Interesting read. Thank you.

From the article you said...
The only thing is while we know people collected in the 30's. But were they concerned about condition like now or hanging on to the cards or thinking they had a real monetary value to them? Anecdotal, but even in the late 70's, my circle of friends never thought about money value of cards, only it took so many commons to trade for a star. And how many were thrown out in 1933 vs. 1990?

Again, nice read.

And whenever I see an old photo of a dugout with a bat rack or a bunch of players in their old wool uniforms or sweaters, I wonder about those bats and unis, and how many survived, and what became of them (kindling for someone's stove, rags for catching oil drips or wiping up spills, or straight to the dump). Every piece of equipment, and every card that was printed, has a journey. And because of the casualty rate, our demand for those items today outstrips the supply.

Nice article Jason. To find the truth, we must first find the bedrock.

https://blog.historyit.com/wp-conten...PD-768x610.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/kASM0jZ.jpg

It's funny to think back about just how much ended up in the trash or otherwise lost. From a modern mindset, it's tempting to say, "Man, didn't they know that stuff was gold?" But at the same time if nobody threw it away, put it in their pockets, pinned it to their walls, etc., the value today would be far different.

Regarding the comment that "it's all speculative," YES!, that governs all of this. I enjoy the speculation, and I wouldn't want anyone to confuse the speculation with fact. When I write this stuff up I do my best to include my source data and call out the assumptions I tack on. Even then I worry some of my work could strike readers as "fake news," which it may well be sometimes.

Final point I'll respond to a bit more is the primacy of numbers today vs numbers in 1933. As a (pseudo)historian of the set, I'm actually more interested in the latter than the former, but it makes sense to me that the former would hold the greatest interest for today's buyers/sellers.

Some of you may have seen Anson Whaley's post on prewarcards.com on the disparate pop reports for the two Gehrig cards in the set. I am not ready (and probably never will be) to speculate on the actual numbers (or even proportions) of surviving Goudey cards. However, I believe Anson's article points collectors to what is probably the best bargain in the set from a rarity perspective. Prices are comparable for the pair but I believe the Sheet 6 Gehrig is at least 30% more scarce--not just back then but also now.

Jason

Excellent read and a fun dive.

In reference to Bigdaddy’s earlier post about old equipment being destroyed/lost to time.... a quick anecdote. My maternal grandfather knocked around in baseball as a catcher/infielder for a few years back in this era. He went to spring training with the Phillies under manager Jimmy Wilson and played in various exhibition games and the like. He was close friends with Johnny Moore (who was an excellent big leaguer) as they were both from the same town in Connecticut.

My grandpa is long since gone, but I asked him as a teenager if he ever saved or even thought of saving anything from his playing days. He laughed and said something like, “Why would I have saved any of that old crap?” He explained to his youthful grandson that guys just left their gloves on the field and often shared equipment. Nobody gave a single thought about any of it. It was a disposable tool of the trade. I’m sure for rank and file players and bums like my grandpa who were just looking to catch on, this was a representative mindset.

What I would give to have an old Phillies uni from my grandpa!