1933 Butter Cream Ruth Question

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

Hello folks,

Does anyone have any information on this card? How many are out there? Were these intentionally shortprinted or hoarded? Does anyone have a scan? How much did the last one sell for? Additionally, I would rank in terms of 1933 issues that Butter Creams are scarcer than George C. Miller and almost on par with Uncle Jacks. Would that be a fair assessment?

James

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

It's exceedingly rare, only a couple are known.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

Nice timing on this post, as I just added four BCs from the Mastro auction to the couple I already had, with plans of trying to complete the set. I don't mind a challenge, but if the Ruth is that scarce ... I'd at least like to set a goal that's attainable.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Rob- if memory serves, I've only seen one for sale ever. Those are bad odds!

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

This is really annoying. I figured it would be a big-ticket item whenever I found one, but bad job by me for assuming I would find one.

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

So I assume these were intentionally shortprinted?

James

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

By the way, I've heard the Foxx is even more scarce than the Ruth ...

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

My little experience says Foxx is much easier than Ruth....not that any Buttercream is easy though....

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

That was an (apparently lame) attempt at humor with Barry, because he's got a Foxx in his current auction.

Edited to add that I must start making use of the smiley faces.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Rob is exactly correct- the Foxx is rarer!!

I think the cards were redeemed so the Ruth was deliberately short printed.

I got Rob's joke!

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

I enjoy playing to an audience of one.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I am a little slow today...yes, the Foxx in Barry's auction is much more rare....

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I'll be sending both of you guys your cuts in a brown paper bag

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

No apology necessary. I figured Barry would be the only one to get what I was driving at.

[Archive]

Posted By: Trevor Hocking

Butter Creams are very tough. I have been working on this set for sometime and they never come up for sale. I only need 7 more for completion including Ruth. I personally have only seen one Ruth ever and it was in a complete set. I know of two other complete sets minus the Ruth card. IMO they are much tougher than George C Millers but they are just not as attractive. One of the toughest sets I have ever worked on. Good luck and Barry can you email.

Trevor

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

Trevor,

I agree with your assessment about George C. Miller cards, however, I must respectfully disagree about presentation. These cards look absolutely STUNNING in SGC holders. The contrast between the holder and card is perfect. I own two Butter Cream cards, a SGC 60 Cochrane and an ungraded Hartnett. I would like to see so much as a scan of the Ruth. Is this card so tough that one could even call this set complete without him?

James

[Archive]

Posted By: Trevor Hocking

Hi James,

Yes most do call the set complete without the Ruth at least I will because if one comes up for sale I am sure the bidding will be heavy. I do think the set is cool looking in the SGC holders but that is the affect there holders have with so many issues. I have my set listed on the SGC registry and have not added to it for some time but thanks you to Brian Van Horn I have just added three more that I needed and will be sent them off to SGC. 7 more to go!!!!

Trevor

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

I was extremely happy to be the high bidder on the lot of five BCs in the recent Mastro auction because:

1.) the scarcity of the issue

2.) the cards were part of Lionel Carter's collection

3.) included in the group is a Cleveland Indian (my main collecting focus)

If I decide to pursue the set, maybe I'll just resign myself to the fact that I'll have to consider it complete at 29 cards instead of 30.

Trevor, any other oddities or fun facts you've come across while collecting the set?

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

Shameless plug time.....H&S will have SGC 50's of Klein and Lindstrom in our next October auction.

[Archive]

Posted By: Trevor Hocking

Nothing much except the backs have two different variations with the dates. By the way if you would like to sell or trade for the Uhle please let me know.

Trevor

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

Will do, Trevor.

Edited to add that since Uhle's an Indian, that card would be the one I'd keep even if I decided to not colllect the set. But who knows.

[Archive]

Posted By: Trevor Hocking

Figures, that was the only one I needed from that group and was bidding it up because of that card. It is not that tough as far as the set goes but every time ones has gone up it has been in a larger lot and I just couldn't bare paying up for one card. I know a few would have been upgrades and the price you paid was very fair IMO.

Trevor

[Archive]

Posted By: Glyn Parson

I honestly seem to see the Grove far more then any of the other butter creams. In fact i honestly think I ve seen as many Groves as other Butter Creams combined. Could just be a strange coincidence or could be that since I live near Philly (reading suburb actually) that you see him more. I do not know.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike

I have a Foxx, an SGC 50, and have had another. With the other back. But like a moron, I accidently sold it. Long story. Foxx's are much more common. As we all know, common and rare are relative terms. maybe I see more Foxx's because that is what I chase, but I have never seen a Ruth.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter ullman

i have seen one ruth...it's an unusual pose...I'd love to see another. I had no idea it was so rare...but I guess I should have figured as much.

pete in mn

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

Unusual pose?

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

I had the following story told to me tonight about a Butter Cream Ruth:

Shortly after it was discovered that there indeed was a Ruth card in the Butter Cream set (we're going back quite a few years here), one was offered in an auction. Barry Halper was interested in the card but told the person running the auction that he wasn't thrilled with the minimum bid. The Ruth card ended up not drawing a bid (!), and the next day Halper, who was high bidder on one other item in the auction, said he would purchase the Ruth for the minimum bid.

The other item that Halper won was rather bulky, so the Ruth was packed in a smaller box, which was placed in the larger box that contained the bulky item. I'll skip a few details that aren't that relevant to the story, but the end result was that Halper didn't realize the Butter Cream Ruth had been shipped with the other item, and that Ruth got thrown out with the larger box and packing materials.

So, an incredibly scarce card got even scarcer that day.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter ullman

what I mean by unusual is that due to the unusual size of butter creams and the tendency for the images to be cropped to fit the size. If I remember correctly, ruth is in a swinging pose and the detail of his face...specifically his eyes is very cool and kinda large as a % of the whole card...unlike a goudey per se where you see his whole swinging pose...and background...on the BC, ruth's image takes up more of the card and literally cannot be contained by the card...body parts are cut off!

pete in mn