Hey, pennant guys

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by rlevy

After seeing Greg buy his 4th 1955 NL Champs pennant, after earlier saying he was going to hold off and wait for a World and NL Champions version, another word than "snobs" may come to mind.

LOL oh c’mon now this was a condition upgrade, my others are nice but this last one is POP 1. Or close. I’m gonna move the others soon, and most of those that I’m not displaying.

[bocca001]

Well, Greg's post about the Dodgers pennant almost brought a tear to my eye. Just like waiting for the mail is now bringing tears to my eyes.

Here are a few recent pickups to show. Thanks to Erik for the Giants pennant. I think that the white spine/graphics version is much more difficult to find that the Orange version.

The 49ers pennant is one of those "modern" (almost 40 years old, Yikes) super-rare pennants. There is a version without the N for NFC at the end that is uncommon, but findable. This one is much more difficult. But then, as these things go, two showed up in one week. Fballguy snagged the first for a great price and made it available to me (now stuck in the mail). I managed to win this second one, and it is funky. The back is entirely white. All of the graphics are painted onto the front.

[rlevy]

Originally Posted by thetahat

LOL oh c’mon now this was a condition upgrade, my others are nice but this last one is POP 1. Or close. I’m gonna move the others soon, and most of those that I’m not displaying.

Hey Greg, no explanation is necessary, you can certainly buy whatever you want. Personally, I wouldn’t spend over $800 to upgrade a pennant if I already have a nice one. To me, I appreciate the history the pennant represents as well as the artistry involved in making it, so a pennant that shows gentle love is fine for me, I don’t need a mint version.

As an example, the 1947 pennant pictured below was listed on ebay with a $325 BIN (a good price IMO), but before I could hit the button, someone bought it. To me, a Jackie Robinson collector and Dodger fan, finding a dated 1947 pennant from his rookie year is at the top of my list, so I was pretty disappointed it vanished so quickly. About a week later, it reappeared on ebay from the same seller. I contacted her, and was told the buyer returned it, just saying “he didn’t like it”. She said the pennant had belonged to her grandmother, who was a huge Jackie Robinson and Brooklyn Dodger fan, and it was always displayed with pride in her home. I bought it immediately, and couldn’t be happier, as I believe these are rather scarce in any condition. If a mint version appears, I won’t be a bidder. But I understand that there are lots of different factors that drive collectors. And for me, it’s probably a little different than most of you on who are pennant collectors on this forum because I am a Dodger/Koufax/Robinson collector who occasionally buys a pennant related to them.
1947.jpg

[ooo-ribay]

Beauty, Rick!

[murphusa]

cool find yesterday

[ooo-ribay]

[perezfan]

That Bum in a cloud above the Coliseum is one of the truly great post-war Pennants on so many levels. Probably the Dodgers first-ever pennant after leaving Brooklyn. Two Beauties!

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by perezfan

That Bum in a cloud above the Coliseum is one of the truly great post-war Pennants on so many levels. Probably the Dodgers first-ever pennant after leaving Brooklyn. Two Beauties!

I agree with Mark, that Trench CEO might not have cared much about quality (per Kyle’s interview) but he had some creative designers. Beautiful pennant!

[thetahat]

I wonder though, is the Bum dreaming about future Dodger Stadium? The little baseball trademark seems more early 60s to me. I would think the other Bum in Coliseum pennant might predate it, or coincide ... or who cares it’s awesome no matter what!

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by rlevy

Hey Greg, no explanation is necessary, you can certainly buy whatever you want. Personally, I wouldn’t spend over $800 to upgrade a pennant if I already have a nice one. To me, I appreciate the history the pennant represents as well as the artistry involved in making it, so a pennant that shows gentle love is fine for me, I don’t need a mint version.

As an example, the 1947 pennant pictured below was listed on ebay with a $325 BIN (a good price IMO), but before I could hit the button, someone bought it. To me, a Jackie Robinson collector and Dodger fan, finding a dated 1947 pennant from his rookie year is at the top of my list, so I was pretty disappointed it vanished so quickly. About a week later, it reappeared on ebay from the same seller. I contacted her, and was told the buyer returned it, just saying “he didn’t like it”. She said the pennant had belonged to her grandmother, who was a huge Jackie Robinson and Brooklyn Dodger fan, and it was always displayed with pride in her home. I bought it immediately, and couldn’t be happier, as I believe these are rather scarce in any condition. If a mint version appears, I won’t be a bidder. But I understand that there are lots of different factors that drive collectors. And for me, it’s probably a little different than most of you on who are pennant collectors on this forum because I am a Dodger/Koufax/Robinson collector who occasionally buys a pennant related to them.
Attachment 423236

Well yeah of course I don’t have to explain, your mention of the bid/price was a tad unnecessary but you were correct about the first part. We all have our own reasons for collecting - for me it’s an appreciation of the aesthetics. I like how the old pennants look and even how they feel. While I coach baseball (college) and used to follow it religiously as a kid, I don’t even watch the WS now. That being said your 1947 pennant is very cool, very rare, and is in great shape, congrats on a nice pickup.

[rlevy]

Maybe others can chime in on why they collect pennants, might be interesting to see how many collect strictly for the aesthetics, or because of the events the pennant is tied to. It could well be some combination of the 2, or other reasons as well. Rarity could be another factor. For me, it is 65% weighted by the events tied to the pennant versus 35% the pennant's aesthetics. That's probably why I am drawn more to dated pennants.

[perezfan]

For me it's 80% aesthetics / 20% what the pennant commemorates.

The best scenario is a pennant that combines the two, like this 1914 World Tour Pennant...

[rlevy]

Mark, that is absolutely beautiful. And for a very cool event.

[bocca001]

Nice pennant, Mark.

For me, it is a combination of both. I moved from cards to pennants (some photos, broadsides) because I like to easily view/display what I buy. Dated pennants are nice, but there are so few for my primary teams (Santa Clara, San Jose, Giants, 49ers).

Because I was bred as a card collector, I still think about condition, but I am more flexible with pennants than I am with cards. I wish I knew more about the backstory of the pennants I own, but it seems that very few come with such info.

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by perezfan

For me it's 80% aesthetics / 20% what the pennant commemorates.

The best scenario is a pennant that combines the two, like this 1914 World Tour Pennant...

Beautiful ... my favorites of yours (among so many great ones) are the leather Tigers and the Clark Griffith Nationals pennant.

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by rlevy

Maybe others can chime in on why they collect pennants, might be interesting to see how many collect strictly for the aesthetics, or because of the events the pennant is tied to. It could well be some combination of the 2, or other reasons as well. Rarity could be another factor. For me, it is 65% weighted by the events tied to the pennant versus 35% the pennant's aesthetics. That's probably why I am drawn more to dated pennants.

Giants, Giants, Giants.....and Giants, Giants, Giants!

[MK]

Originally Posted by rlevy

Maybe others can chime in on why they collect pennants, might be interesting to see how many collect strictly for the aesthetics, or because of the events the pennant is tied to. It could well be some combination of the 2, or other reasons as well. Rarity could be another factor. For me, it is 65% weighted by the events tied to the pennant versus 35% the pennant's aesthetics. That's probably why I am drawn more to dated pennants.

I like to think I’m preserving history by collecting what I do. These souvenirs were once a large part of the sport but the things sold now are just junk. I often look at things I have like this 1929 pennant and wonder if it was purchased at Wrigley Field during the World Series. I also wonder about the road it took to end up on my wall.

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by rlevy

Hey Greg, no explanation is necessary, you can certainly buy whatever you want. Personally, I wouldn’t spend over $800 to upgrade a pennant if I already have a nice one. To me, I appreciate the history the pennant represents as well as the artistry involved in making it, so a pennant that shows gentle love is fine for me, I don’t need a mint version.

As an example, the 1947 pennant pictured below was listed on ebay with a $325 BIN (a good price IMO), but before I could hit the button, someone bought it. To me, a Jackie Robinson collector and Dodger fan, finding a dated 1947 pennant from his rookie year is at the top of my list, so I was pretty disappointed it vanished so quickly. About a week later, it reappeared on ebay from the same seller. I contacted her, and was told the buyer returned it, just saying “he didn’t like it”. She said the pennant had belonged to her grandmother, who was a huge Jackie Robinson and Brooklyn Dodger fan, and it was always displayed with pride in her home. I bought it immediately, and couldn’t be happier, as I believe these are rather scarce in any condition. If a mint version appears, I won’t be a bidder. But I understand that there are lots of different factors that drive collectors. And for me, it’s probably a little different than most of you on who are pennant collectors on this forum because I am a Dodger/Koufax/Robinson collector who occasionally buys a pennant related to them.
Attachment 423236

Could not agree more. In this era of counterfeits and reproduction, I wouldn't really want something that didn't show it's age. And for the record, for me, the condition of the Dodgers pennant can't be improved upon. It's as "Mint" as I'd ever want it.

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

Could not agree more. In this era of counterfeits and reproduction, I wouldn't really want something that didn't show it's age. And for the record, for me, the condition of the Dodgers pennant can't be improved upon. It's as "Mint" as I'd ever want it.

For the record, the ‘55 is not mint, just very close. My guess is that we are all “expert” enough to spot a fake/repro from a mile away and if not, the second we touch it. ... my concern about flawless pennants is that it might reflect a “find” of a whole batch which affects its value. As much as I go for eye appeal, I want to be able to get my money back at some point.

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by thetahat

For the record, the ‘55 is not mint, just very close. My guess is that we are all “expert” enough to spot a fake/repro from a mile away and if not, the second we touch it. ... my concern about flawless pennants is that it might reflect a “find” of a whole batch which affects its value. As much as I go for eye appeal, I want to be able to get my money back at some point.

I was actually referring to Rick's '47 Dodgers. Can't believe anyone would return that due to condition. It looks exactly like I'd want a 70+ year pennant to look. Obviously, your 55 is beautiful too.

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

I was actually referring to Rick's '47 Dodgers. Can't believe anyone would return that due to condition. It looks exactly like I'd want a 70+ year pennant to look. Obviously, your 55 is beautiful too.

Oh yes, I know.... if one looks only for mint condition baseball pennants he will have a tiny collection.

Now the original buyer didn’t return it because of condition. I know because it was me! I goofed actually. I assumed it was a 3/4 size pennant (26”) the length was actually given in the description but I missed it. It’s a great pennant but not really in my collecting wheelhouse. She accepted returns for any reason as policy, I mailed it back in a sleeve. It is very cool and I don’t know of another 1947 dated Dodgers pennant.

[thetahat]

Key point: it was a BIN, wasn’t up long, there was no downside to the seller. Had it been an auction, I wouldn’t have returned it.

[rlevy]

Originally Posted by thetahat

Oh yes, I know.... if one looks only for mint condition baseball pennants he will have a tiny collection.

Now the original buyer didn’t return it because of condition. I know because it was me! I goofed actually. I assumed it was a 3/4 size pennant (26”) the length was actually given in the description but I missed it. It’s a great pennant but not really in my collecting wheelhouse. She accepted returns for any reason as policy, I mailed it back in a sleeve. It is very cool and I don’t know of another 1947 dated Dodgers pennant.

That makes sense Greg. Well, I for one am happy to have one you threw back as it fits in well with the Jackie Robinson stuff I collect. And as you know, it isn't perfect as it does have some wear and is a little dirty. For the record, the seller didn't seem upset at all with the pennant being returned. And if you want to throw back the '55, PLMK

[Domer05]

Originally Posted by thetahat

It is very cool and I don’t know of another 1947 dated Dodgers pennant.

Greg, there is this other Brooklyn pennant from '47....

[Duluth Eskimo]

Nice 1947 Dodgers pennant Rick. I have the matching Yankees. I am with you. I don’t mind smaller condition issues if the display is still good. That mainly goes for my Yankees collection. For resale, condition is king. One thing I don’t really like is bad fading. I can deal with some minor tears or holes, but bad fading get me.

[thetahat]

This is nice ... and strange, currently on eBay. It has the Keezer stamp on the back ... The thick tassels and stitching are indicative of Keezer - it’s definitely legit IMO - but the design is very much Trench. Keezer art is very distinct and nothing like this.

[Domer05]

Originally Posted by thetahat

This is nice ... and strange, currently on eBay. It has the Keezer stamp on the back ... The thick tassels and stitching are indicative of Keezer - it’s definitely legit IMO - but the design is very much Trench. Keezer art is very distinct and nothing like this.

Yeah, this is an odd Bruins pennant, isn't it? I completely agree, Greg. It is legit ... sorta.

In my research of both Keezer and Trench, I noted that, toward the later 1960s, Keezer began copying Trench's artwork. This is especially reflected in Keezer pennants for local New England teams. They did the same with a handful of ca. 1967 Red Sox pennants from that era: one that featured the same distinctive "Boston" cursive; and another featuring a photo window--all stolen from Trench.

Additionally, as concerns these limited acts of plagiarism, you will note that the graphics are polychromatic. This was the first time in Keezer's history to my knowledge that they ever got this fancy.

It's lack of originality notwithstanding, I love this Bruins pennant!