1915 Red Sox PC with Ruth vs 1906 W601 Tigers PC with Cobb
 

The 1915 Red Sox PC is widely regarded as Ruth's first image on a "card" as a professional ball player. Similarly, the 1906 W601 Tigers PC is regarded as Cobb's first image on a "card" as a professional ball player.

The 1915 Red Sox PC has a combined graded population of 14+ (PSA 11 and SGC 3+ (SGC is unclear). The 1906 W601 Tigers PC is has a combined graded population of 10 (PSA 4 and SGC 6). Thus, the W601 is rarer, although both are super tough.

Yet, despite the similarities, the value of the 1915 Ruth/Red Sox PC is 10x+/- that of the W601 Cobb PC.

For example, a PSA A, 1915 Red Sox PC recently sold for $114k, while a PSA W601 Tigers PC recently sold for $11.1k. A PSA 6 1915 Red Sox PC recently sold for $564k, while there is an SGC 4,5 currently on the BST with a $50k asking price.

Why do you think that 1915 Red Sox PC with Ruth is valued at 10X(ish) that of the rarer 1906 W601 Tigers PC with Cobb? I understand that Ruth beats Cobb, but 10x?!?!

There might be an extra premium due to it being a Red Sox card, given that there are so few Red Sox cards of Ruth out there. If he had stayed with them for longer (say through the early 1920s), maybe it would be a lower multiplier? Also - Cobb has a lot more early year postcards than Ruth.

Still, it just seems like way too big of a discrepancy. I get Ruth being more collectible, but not at a 10x rate.

The Cobb image on the PC is a little weird too. I know it's Cobb, but it doesn't really look like him and doesn't scream Ty Cobb when you see him down there. Whereas Ruth is unquestionably Ruth.

He was 19 in that image.

Think part of it is the other options available. Lots of Cobb postcards from a year later (that most people consider his rookie card) to choose from whereas if you want a Ruth rookie you have the postcard or m101-4/5 to choose from.

The Ruth shows more of him and it is a real-photo postcard, both of which probably helps the value.

That said, I am surprised that the Cobb doesn't sell for more than it does.

The early Ruth explosion of the past 6-8 years has certainly helped too, these postcards used to be much more closer in value.

Not a ton of cards produced from 1915-1919 with Ruth on the Red Sox.
The 1915 Ruth is sandwiched between 2 extremely valuable Ruth cards. The 1914 Baltimore Ruth sells for millions and the 1916 Ruth's also sell for big money these days. When looking at it that way maybe the 1915 Ruth is undervalued.
IMO the main reason the 1906 Sporting Life Team Cobb isn't selling for more is because it doesn't get enough attention. I rarely hear people talking about it and I don't think a lot collectors/investors know about it. I also think it gets overshadowed by the larger numbers of 1907-1909 Cobbs.
IMO the 1906 Cobb mentioned is extremely undervalued. Good chance this does take off once it gets more public spotlight, attention, and appreciation.

I think this is in large part a reason for the price disparity but the W601 also just goes not have the eye appeal of the Red Sox postcard. IMO, they are on opposite ends of the spectrum. When you factor in scarcity of the W601 however the price gap does not seem justified.

I do not think that the Sporting Life Postcards were issued until 1907. It was customary for the Sporting Life to picture the previous year's team on their issues. They did the same with their oversized supplements as well. Here is an advertisement for their postcard set. It is from their May 18, 1907 newspaper and is the first mention of their postcard set that I can find. The wording "just issued" certainly indicates that the set was released right around the date of their publication.

Anyone know where that particular portrait photo of Cobb comes from? He was on the team in 1905 too and Horner was taking photos in 1905. I wonder if that cabinet exists or if there was a chance Cobb appeared on an obscure team postcard while on the 1905 team.

[QUOTE=tkd;
IMO the main reason the 1906 Sporting Life Team Cobb isn't selling for more is because it doesn't get enough attention. I rarely hear people talking about it and I don't think a lot collectors/investors know about it. I also think it gets overshadowed by the larger numbers of 1907-1909 Cobbs.
IMO the 1906 Cobb mentioned is extremely undervalued. Good chance this does take off once it gets more public spotlight, attention, and appreciation.[/QUOTE]

Many times collectors don’t discuss or share thoughts about these kind of cards is they want to buy them all, when they come to market. My believe is it’s a 1905 (possibly 1906) image.

I posted elsewhere, that I’d like to see the pop report on every team from this Sporting Life series of postcards. Detroit has to be the rarest.

PCs aren't my thing, but FWIW, I think the Ruth PC has way more eye appeal.

No doubt. the only thing "card" about them is their name!

Wow, great research!

Well, if you like that, then this one i just picked up for $3500 in Heritage is supreme! 1905, same kind of image. :-)

I think the W601’s have never really taken off to higher prices, both the larger prints and the postcards of the same images. But could still happen. Happy to collect them regardless.

Agreed. But I think there is a reason people are sure its 1906. And I see that Jeff just answered that.

Paul, that 1905 is awesome. Seems like an absolute steal at $3500. I think you could easily justify another 0, maybe two (00)

Multiple players featured on the W601 dated 1906 were not on the Tigers in 1907: Chris Lindsay, Red Donahue at least.

Could it not be the 06 team but the postcards were actually produced in Spring 1907?

I can't recall if there's a known postally used one from 1906 or not, Kevin Struss?

Here is the corresponding W601 Supplement along with its cover which was issued at the same time as the postcard. The Detroit image is identical to the postcard. The cover clearly states "1907" and that it includes "Teams of 1906".

This 1907 Portfolio was offered at the beginning of the 1907 baseball season.

Looking at VCP, I found a Washington W601 with an April 1907 date stamp, which is before the date of the article (and two with later 1907 date stamps), but no 1906 date stamps. And, it certainly looks like it could be a 1906 image/team issued in 1907. Still, its his second earliest image (after the 1905-06 Paul posted) on a pro team, and maybe the earliest of all "card" issuances; all traditional 1907 items are post cards as well. But, perhaps that is the reason for the 10x difference.

Do we know that the 1915 Red Sox PC was issued in 1915? I cant find any with a date stamp.

If the W601 PC was offered in May of 1907, I believe that's still months before any of the other Cobb "rookie" PCs were made: Seamless Steel Tubes, Dietsche, FP Burke Team PC, Heimer Team PC, RPPC Team PC, HM Taylor, Wolverine, Large Form Mailing Team PC, etc. all had October postmarks at the earliest. Kevin can correct me if I'm wrong.

Here's my W601 Tigers composite.


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...7bb9082a_o.jpg

The earliest postmark that I have seen for a SL postcard is April 12, 1907.

To answer Ryan's question, the earliest postmark that I have seen for the Boston Red Sox postcard is October 11, 1915.

For sure, definitely still his earliest card, just thought the ad linking it to 1907 was very interesting as I had always assumed 1906.

The earliest Ruth “card” in an MLB uniform is this one from Spring Training in Hot Springs, AK from 1915:

https://memorylaneinc.com/lot1-2-win24/Lot1a.jpg

Used to be mine.

Wowzers

I agree with Jeff. Besides the SL team postcard, the earliest postmark that I have ever seen on a "card" picturing Ty Cobb is from October, 1907. Here are a few more specific notes that I have regarding some of Ty Cobb's earliest "cards."

Please let me know if anyone has images of any earlier postmarks.

Sporting Life Team Postcard - I have images of 12 postcards from this set with 1907 postmarks. The earliest is April 12, 1907

Detroit Seamless Postcard - of the eight Cobbs that I am awae of, seven are postmarked - four on October 4, 1907, one on October 5 and one on October 7

Wolverine Postcard - the earliest postmark from this set that I can find is October 9, 1907.

AC Dietsche Postcard - the earliest postmark from this set that I can find is October 9, 1907. For some reason, only a small percentage of postcards from this set are found cancelled. Jim Chapman has done some great research on this issue and I think that he found an October 1, 1907 newspaper ad that announced the upcoming set.

HM Taylor Postcard - the earliest postmark from this set that I can find is October 7, 1907.

W600 Sporting Life Postcard - first offered to the public in the October 19, 1907 issue of the Sporting Life.

Wonder if/how they were able to distinguish from 1916 Spring Training.

I believe I've seen a September 1907 postmark on the more common 1907 Tigers real photo team postcard.

I think the ad from May 1907 isn’t dispositive as an initial date due to the existence of postmarked W601s from earlier that year. Who knows how many months earlier those cards appeared before advertisements popped up for them? This was over a hundred years ago when efficiency wasn’t the same as it is now.

I own that now. Love it!

Jeff, the flip says 1906, so it’s 1906!!

Regardless, totally underpriced and under appreciated

W601's
 

I have a few W601's and agree they are vastly undervalued. The Cobb is an excellent example of this. The other is the Philadelphia Athletics with Rookie Joe Jackson.
W601's were issued first as singles then at the end of the year in booklet form that contained all the teams. Of interest to a few here was the discovery that player variations exist on some W601's. I know of a Highlander variation with both the Early single version and The postcard differing from the team composite in the end of year portfolio. So at least some of the teams were
updated during the season. Given how scarce they are research is difficult.

Yes and as Lipset said years ago when he sold his off that they could be found two ways which were with and without the punch holes in them.

Nice research, Kevin..

]QUOTE=Baseball Rarities;2461645]I agree with Jeff. Besides the SL team postcard, the earliest postmark that I have ever seen on a "card" picturing Ty Cobb is from October, 1907. Here are a few more specific notes that I have regarding some of Ty Cobb's earliest "cards."

Please let me know if anyone has images of any earlier postmarks.

Sporting Life Team Postcard - I have images of 12 postcards from this set with 1907 postmarks. The earliest is April 12, 1907

Detroit Seamless Postcard - of the eight Cobbs that I am awae of, seven are postmarked - four on October 4, 1907, one on October 5 and one on October 7

Wolverine Postcard - the earliest postmark from this set that I can find is October 9, 1907.

AC Dietsche Postcard - the earliest postmark from this set that I can find is October 9, 1907. For some reason, only a small percentage of postcards from this set are found cancelled. Jim Chapman has done some great research on this issue and I think that he found an October 1, 1907 newspaper ad that announced the upcoming set.

HM Taylor Postcard - the earliest postmark from this set that I can find is October 7, 1907.

W600 Sporting Life Postcard - first offered to the public in the October 19, 1907 issue of the Sporting Life.[/QUOTE]

Pop is 2 if I’m not mistaken. I have also seen a “hands on hips” and “Ruth on Bench” c. 1915 RPPC. Cool stuff.

Great conversation and some really good learnings on history of some cards.

Cannot go wrong with either one but I like the team photo postcard with Ruth(and I am biased)

In general, people prefer team shots to composites. Also, it's Ruth--everyone will look bad relative to him. Finally, Ruth cards with Boston are very scarce; obviously not so for Cobb with Detroit.