View Single Post
  #4  
Old Yesterday, 04:58 AM
bcbgcbrcb bcbgcbrcb is online now
Phil Garry
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 7,103
Default

Sorry, missed that, Ryan. But, my comparison was to the W601 Tigers premium, notice that I said 1905 as my year of issue. I know, very confusing and most likely the ONLY ACC designation where the same identifier was used for two totally different issues. Much of the same logic applies to the '06 postcard, however. I see from your previous post that most everyone agrees that the Ruth should be worth more than the Cobb but that the Cobb is quite undervalued. More than a year later, don't think the view on the W601 Cobb has changed at all, nor has the perceived value since I don't know of any actual public sales. Doesn't really make sense to me, my best guess is maybe 1% of collectors can afford the Ruth postcard today and maybe 25% can afford the W601 Cobb. You would think with a much larger audience, that would be the one escalating in value more rapidly, but it seems to be the opposite. Thus, once again, it has become that the REALLY BIG cards can no longer be acquirable by anyone except the extremely wealthy, which might make up 1% of the collectors out there. If I saved up for the rest of my life, I likely couldn't afford to buy the Ruth postcard. That's why I try to advocate for things that are still affordable for a larger percentage of collectors but it seems with each passing month/year, more and more of the REALLY BIG cards are falling by the wayside for the vast majority of us. We all want the best and not have to settle for only what we can afford. Only 5-10 years ago, it wasn't this way. Why does it seem that those with big money to spend were controlling themselves back then and avoiding crazy escalations in prices while today, it has become the Wild, Wild West with unlimited spending. Seems to take away some of the allure of the hobby to me. Of course, that is coming from the perspective of someone who falls into the latter category.

Last edited by bcbgcbrcb; Yesterday at 05:06 AM.
Reply With Quote