![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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
__________________
Galleries and Articles about T206 Player Autographs www.SignedT206.com www.instagram.com/signedT206/ @SignedT206 Last edited by T206Collector; 04-29-2013 at 10:58 AM. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'd rather have the yellow one 3x more then the batting pose, maybe some other guys feel the same way.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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.
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Gotta love Heritage's L-A-R-G-E scans!!
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
HOFAutoRookies.com |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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.
__________________
N300: 11/48 T206: 175/524 E95: 24/25 E106: 4/48 E210-1: Completed December 2013 R319: 43/240 Last edited by AMBST95; 04-29-2013 at 12:35 PM. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
181 also has a completely hacked off bottom.. No idea how its even in the same price range as 144
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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.
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Agreed. It's much nicer.
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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?!?!?! ![]() 20130225_201244.jpg 20130225_201321.jpg 20130224_140003.jpg 20130224_135916.jpg 20130224_140035.jpg |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: 1928 Harrington's Babe Ruth and 1933 Goudey Ruth #149 | piecesofthegame | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 01-04-2013 05:50 AM |
1933 Goudey #53 Babe Ruth vs 1934 "Canadian Goudey" WWG #28 Babe Ruth | Yaz#8 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 18 | 02-21-2012 08:31 AM |
1933 Goudey Babe Ruth #181 SGC 50 | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 02-06-2008 05:51 PM |
WTB: 1933 Goudey Babe Ruth | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 07-29-2007 09:40 PM |
WTB: 1933 Goudey Babe Ruth | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 07-29-2007 09:39 PM |