Hey, pennant guys

[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

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by rlevy

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

Rick, I thought it was about as good as you’d want a 73 year old pennant to look. I obviously don’t need 4 of the same pennant, the middle two were simply very good deals. The plan was to eventually use them for trade, but I haven’t been able to get to many shows the past few years and the ones I did attend have had slim pickings ...

[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....

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by Domer05

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

Ah yes I remember this now. Also very rare. Thanks Domer!

[thetahat]

Starting to dive a little into football, if only for the ones that look cool. Had a chance to grab two of the best looking, IMO. I just love the cloth when it isn’t faded. This seems to be a non-Trench version of the goldpanner, I have another like it and also one that is much more colorful. But the giveaway is the stitching on the back is not Trench but resembles ASCO or Keezer (though I don’t think it is them, either.)