|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Babe Ruth General Gum Sign/Display - Black Light PIX added FINALLY
This ended Sunday on Ebay:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/36338437797...p2047675.l2557 Any thoughts on it's authenticity? Last edited by Shoeless Moe; 05-20-2021 at 03:28 PM. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Eric Perry Currently collecting: T206 (132/524) 1956 Topps Baseball (193/342) "You can observe a lot by just watching." - Yogi Berra |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I'll play. No good.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
never heard of babe ruth gum...no good imo.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
It's not Babe Ruth Gum, it's you get a Free pix of Ruth through the General Gum Co in Chicago which there was:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/14358102630...p2047675.l2557 |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
I say real judging by the back as I can't honestly see anyone doing that back there to sell a fake? But then again, because this is just a guess, I really have no idea if someone would?
__________________
52 Topps cards. https://www.flickr.com/photos/144160280@N05/ http://www.net54baseball.com/album.php?albumid=922 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
That level of paper fading/weathering on the back would be hard to replicate. It appears to have been in a stack of paper stuff or a window for a very long time. I believe it to be a authentic.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Any thoughts...oh boy. Curious if there are any known examples of these out there? I'm not familiar with this item as a preface. At first glance it seems suspicious, until you dig deeper. This might be something really interesting. The cardstock seems legit. The staining is believable. The printing seems like good quality. The tabs on the bottom indicate that this would have been designed as a point of sale box/tin topper. That's only the beginning though.
I have a rather strong theory that the "Large 8x10 Picture" being referenced to is what the hobby generally refers to as R310 1934 Butterfinger Premiums(up until now?). The item in question would be the equivalent to the Gehrig ad seen below for the Butterfinger product. The address on the advertisement traces back to the Curtiss Candy Company. The Curtiss Candy Company happened to be the producer of Butterfingers and several lines of gum, along with many other candy products. The physical address connection between the Curtiss Candy Company and General Gum, Inc. at 337 E. Illinois Street is found here: https://www.madeinchicagomuseum.com/...tiss-candy-co/ "By 1928, Baby Ruth was the top selling candy bar in the country, and many other candies and gums in the Curtiss arsenal carried the same Baby Ruth brand name for optimal exposure. In total, the Curtiss Candy Co. now employed more than 3,000 Chicagoans along with various national salesmen and distributors. Brand new offices were purchased in Lakeview at Broadway and Diversey, and the production efforts expanded to three major factories. With the Briar Place plant pushed to its max, two additional facilities were up and running in Streeterville, at 311 and 337 E. Illinois Street, just north of the Chicago River and the Ogden Slip, and east of the Tribune Tower. In short order, large Baby Ruth and Butterfinger signs were attached to these buildings, remaining familiar sights downtown up into the 1960s." With quick research I can't find a direct link between the Curtiss Candy Company and General Gum, Inc., but there is evidence that the Curtiss Candy Company essentially operated other companies as seen with Kidd Products Corporation in the FTC complaint that is attached below. The same addresses and 8x10 pictures in 1934 sure seems like more than just a coincidence, but there's more. If you've read this far, this is where things get a little interesting... The item in question references a Babe Ruth premium through the mail. An upgraded Butterfinger Ruth premium, beyond the normal Ruth photo, doesn't exist to my knowledge. Correct? Check out some of the clues on the General Gum, Inc. ad. First you have two holes that look like staple marks. Next, you have dark staining on the reverse right hand side that looks like it could be staining from a sheet of paper. Notice that the stain tilts down slightly from left to right, then go look at the front. Something, like a sheet of paper was wrapped around that end and stapled to cover over the mail in premium portion. You can see the same downward slant continuing and notice the vertical stains in the vicinity of the staple holes. The vertical stains are from the end of the paper that was wrapped around the edge. But why? Well there simply was never an R310 Butterfinger/General Gum mail in premium produced, so they covered it up. I think the evidence is rather overwhelming that this is a legit box/tin topper advertising R310 Butterfinger/General Gum Premiums. It's pretty challenging for me to believe otherwise. Hopefully this wasn't all common knowledge Perhaps a true Ebay gem!? |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
That's interesting. Nice research...coincidentally I very recently picked up this R310 from Steve (thanks Steve)..These are so fragile....shown a few times but still...
__________________
Leon Luckey |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Amazing you have some many things that are unique and historical and can always pull it up fast to add to related items/links
__________________
Thanks all Jeff Kuhr https://www.flickr.com/photos/144250058@N05/ Looking for 1920 Heading Home Ruth Cards 1917-20 Felix Mendelssohn Babe Ruth 1921 Frederick Foto Ruth Joe Jackson Cards 1916 Advertising Backs 1910 Old Mills Joe Jackson 1914 Boston Garter Joe Jackson 1915 Cracker Jack Joe Jackson 1911 Pinkerton Joe Jackson Shoeless Joe Jackson Autograph |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
I'm sticking with "created and artificially aged fantasy piece intended to defraud." Just looks too much like so many of the other bogus items like this we've seen over the years. I don't care what lengths they went to to make it look old, it just doesn't look old like real stuff looks old, very few of these pieces do for the simple reason that it's hard to replicate accurately what it takes a lot of time to do to things. If you've seen a lot of old paper, you know this is not what real aging and natural deterioration from various causes looks like. Is there a chance I'm wrong? Always, but I've give that about 10% in this case. Also, from major companies like these, no way this should be the only one known.
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Hank, check out the backs of these items:
https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=81565 https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=68679 https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=68683 https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=66478 They look fairly similar to the Ruth piece. And in some of the descriptions REA states "it's the first we've even seen of this piece" or "this is the only one we've seen". Not saying the Ruth piece is real, but it is possible. I'm still researching as well. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Last edited by Hankphenom; 05-10-2021 at 04:07 PM. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Haha! Thanks......I'll take 20%.......I'm only at 50% myself....and about 45% of that is due to Trey's input.
It's in the mail on it's way to me. Luckily, or unluckily, I have purchased some fakes over the years, so I can usually spot them in hand, but also found some gems, so I'm hoping its easy to tell one way or the other, right away. If it's borderline then I'm in trouble and may need to find someone here on the board in Illinois or Wisconsin I can run it past. Last edited by Shoeless Moe; 05-10-2021 at 04:16 PM. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
FYI, I found this with a google search.
https://fineartamerica.com/featured/...tion-road.html
__________________
successful deals with hcv123, rholmes, robw1959, Yankees1964, theuclakid, Brian Van Horn, h2oya311, thecapeleague, Gkoz316, chesbro41, edjs, wazoo, becollie, t206kid, vintageismygame, Neal, bradmar48, iconsportscards, wrapperguy, agrebene, T3fan, T3s, ccre, Leon, wolf441, cammb, tonyo, markf31,gonzo,scmavl & others currently working on: E101 (33/50) T3 set (104/104), complete! T205 set (108/221) '33 Goudey collecting W600s, Walter Johnson |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Pete, not saying you are right or wrong, but what do you know about this Site?
Are they all fakes, fantasy pieces? Are these Real or Fantasy: https://fineartamerica.com/featured/...tion-road.html https://fineartamerica.com/featured/...tion-road.html Last edited by Shoeless Moe; 05-10-2021 at 05:36 PM. |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
i may be wrong?
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
https://fineartamerica.com/featured/...tion-road.html I wouldn't mind some bathroom wallpaper of this one, if they sold it. If anything I think it at least shows the Ruth sign is NOT a "Fantasy" piece......doesn't mean it isn't a "Reproduction", but looks to be a legit Ad from back in the 1930's. So very cool he who found this. |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Real ones. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I admit when I first saw it, I thought no way. The staining looks odd and we've seen this story before. We've all seen the fake Tuxedo's, etc. I'm just not sure I'm ready to say that just because something has strange staining, it means it's not genuine. Also, I'm not ready to admit that something that was intended to be in a landfill after a few months would be a common item. I just can't imagine items like this would be available by the hundreds today. We're not talking about a 1933 Goudey Ruth here. These were not something that a young kid collected and cherished, then passed down for generations. We are talking about something that a store owner would have absolutely no use for and would throw it in the trash when it was time. I'll even dare to say that there are probably many store advertisements from various companies that have completely vanished. I wouldn't find that too odd. We're looking at a few, not so terrific, pictures from 2010. I still think it could go either way, but I'm not sure I can call it fake because it's stained and rare. |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
Voting FAKE!
For those of us that have been around for years, there has been many bogus fantasy pieces created to deceive that have had the faded background.
If a piece is authentic there should be sometime of period advertising which describes it. Voting a big FAT no! Patrick |
#26
|
||||
|
||||
I love the research and feedback that is happening on this one.
I see Trey's argument for this being related to the Butterfinger premiums, but I am still left with a several questions. 1 - I find it a bit odd that they wouldn't reprint the piece with a design change instead of stapling a piece of paper over the top - that paper could be removed and then you have an ad out there for something you won't deliver and people will get mad. 2 - If this was put out there with the bottom left covered up, I am not sure how this promotion works because all that is left showing is an 8x10 of your favorite baseball player and 2 sticks of gum for 1 penny. No mailing instructions, no wrappers, etc. The Ruth premium would have cost 50 wrappers and 5 cents in stamps, and yet according to this, the 8 x 10 premiums almost would have had to have been given away at the point of sale to anyone who bought two sticks of gum for a penny? Doesn't that seem a bit out of line in terms of a promotion? Especially when Butterfinger gave 1 premium away for a 5 cent candy bar. On the other hand, maybe it explains the low quality of the Butterfinger premiums? The 48 Leaf premiums seem like they are on similar paper, but you had to buy an entire box of 1948 Leaf to get one of those (I think). 3 - Has anyone ever heard of a brand name called Baseball Gum? I am hoping this is real, just enjoying the puzzle.
__________________
Collection: https://www.flickr.com/photos/132359235@N05/sets/ Ebay listings: https://www.ebay.com/sch/harrydoyle/...p2047675.l2562 Last edited by Jobu; 05-10-2021 at 09:27 PM. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=66478 TBD Last edited by Shoeless Moe; 05-10-2021 at 08:34 PM. |
#28
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
.
__________________
Leon Luckey |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/36337844078...IAAOSwHYdgi4xQ https://www.ebay.com/itm/36339195939...wAAOSw~55gmfv~ |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Last edited by Hankphenom; 05-11-2021 at 11:48 AM. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
I was first loser on the sign and think it's good. If you feel differently once you have it in hand I will be suprised.
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"The losers now will be later to win," Dylan wrote, and I think you're going to be very happy that you weren't involved in this thing.
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#34
|
||||
|
||||
Once it is in-hand, blacklighting it will be the biggest "tell".
Pretty simple... If it does not fluoresce, I believe it is indeed authentic. |
#35
|
||||
|
||||
In my experience, this is by no means a definitive test. there are numerous modern cards and reprints that dont fluoresce.if it does fluoresce, it is modern. If it doesn’t, it could be anything. Not all modern paper stock uses optical brighteners.
__________________
successful deals with hcv123, rholmes, robw1959, Yankees1964, theuclakid, Brian Van Horn, h2oya311, thecapeleague, Gkoz316, chesbro41, edjs, wazoo, becollie, t206kid, vintageismygame, Neal, bradmar48, iconsportscards, wrapperguy, agrebene, T3fan, T3s, ccre, Leon, wolf441, cammb, tonyo, markf31,gonzo,scmavl & others currently working on: E101 (33/50) T3 set (104/104), complete! T205 set (108/221) '33 Goudey collecting W600s, Walter Johnson Last edited by chadeast; 05-12-2021 at 01:14 PM. |
#36
|
||||
|
||||
I am leaning towards it being authentic anyway. The black light test would be just another "positive". If this was a repro or fantasy piece, we would likely have seen more of them littering the internet.
Most repros do not have machine-cut "tabs" like that either. They would not go to that level of expense to create a fantasy piece such as this. The cost of doing so would far exceed the price realized. |
#37
|
||||
|
||||
well
For what it's worth - I was focused on the tabs as well....... Would be an unusual amount of effort for likely few hundred dollar sale. When I was a more serious collector - I had subscriptions to 3/4 repro/fantasy catalogs just to keep "current".
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Hung Jury?
So it arrived today. I "think" it is real, but would really like to run it by someone with more experience.
Also, my black light is not working, so need to find someone with a black light, although as previously mentioned that doesn't solidify that it is authentic just because it doesn't glow, that would however confirm if it was a Repro if it did. I really prefer someone who knows these type items and could confirm. So anyone here in the Chicago Suburbs or Southeastern Wisconsin. I can run it over if you are not too far away. Last edited by Shoeless Moe; 05-14-2021 at 11:20 AM. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Paul sure would be great if this piece turns out like that D and M Jackson point of sale item a few years back, awesome pick up there Sir.
__________________
H Murphy Collection https://www.flickr.com/photos/154296763@N05/ |
#40
|
||||
|
||||
It would be great if this checks out! Do you have a loupe? Or a good scanner? If you have a scanner, you might scan a small section at really high DPI and post that for people to take a look at.
__________________
Collection: https://www.flickr.com/photos/132359235@N05/sets/ Ebay listings: https://www.ebay.com/sch/harrydoyle/...p2047675.l2562 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I have a magnifying glass, but is that strong enough, prob not. What am I looking for, dots, blurriness? Last edited by Shoeless Moe; 05-14-2021 at 12:48 PM. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Good luck, Paul. I hope it's good.
|
#43
|
||||
|
||||
I think the saddest thing about this thread is that the OP's black light doesn't work. I could never get even a moment's sleep if I didn't look up to my wall and see these guys greeting me each night...
glowninthedarkposters.jpg
__________________
All the cool kids love my YouTube Channel:
Elm's Adventures in Cardboard Land https://www.youtube.com/@TheJollyElm Looking to trade? Here's my bucket: https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706 “I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.” Casey Stengel Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980s. Overpaying yesterday is simply underpaying tomorrow. |
#44
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
successful deals with hcv123, rholmes, robw1959, Yankees1964, theuclakid, Brian Van Horn, h2oya311, thecapeleague, Gkoz316, chesbro41, edjs, wazoo, becollie, t206kid, vintageismygame, Neal, bradmar48, iconsportscards, wrapperguy, agrebene, T3fan, T3s, ccre, Leon, wolf441, cammb, tonyo, markf31,gonzo,scmavl & others currently working on: E101 (33/50) T3 set (104/104), complete! T205 set (108/221) '33 Goudey collecting W600s, Walter Johnson |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Haha it is sad my black light has died, had it since the 70's and worked last time I plugged it in 5 years ago.
Might be time to invest in a new one. Thank you he who provided the specifics on which one to get. Chad - would this one work: https://www.ebay.com/itm/14362174060...0AAOSwmCZe1b80 Surely, (don't call me Shirley), there has to be someone on NET54 in the Chicagoland area with some knowledge. Bueller? Bueller? Last edited by Shoeless Moe; 05-14-2021 at 03:09 PM. |
#46
|
||||
|
||||
I think David Cycleback is at Northwestern University and is an expert - also a board member. You might shoot him a pm.
As for looking at the printing, you are looking for halftone, see pg 80-84 of David's book: https://cycleback.files.wordpress.co..._an_intr-1.pdf
__________________
Collection: https://www.flickr.com/photos/132359235@N05/sets/ Ebay listings: https://www.ebay.com/sch/harrydoyle/...p2047675.l2562 |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
I felt strongly the back was authentic looking. Hard to tell about the front from the picture. I don't see many people being able to fake that light fading on cardboard. That happens naturally and it looked like the real thing to me compared to many paper items in my collection. I do hope it's real as it is a very cool piece.
|
#48
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Just saw this and I come out on the 100% fake side. If this was a cell phone case or a throw pillow I might say 99%. I saw some of these items at Michael's or Hobby Lobby and recognized the image right away.
I would be looking for a refund. J |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
As for a Curtis Candy sign 0% chance of that Ruth hated them. Ruth never saw a dime from them. Curtis candy claimed to have named it after President Clevland's Daughter Ruth. But won a copyright dispute against a Bar named after Babe Ruth.
J |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Babe ruth Quaker Oats sign opinions | MGHPro | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 4 | 08-16-2019 07:38 PM |
Babe Ruth Display and Cards | bobfreedman | Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T | 0 | 04-10-2018 06:49 PM |
FT: Babe Ruth '33 Goudey Metal Sign | scmavl | Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T | 2 | 01-24-2012 12:20 PM |
12 inch Babe Ruth die cut counter sign | combatsports4life | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 05-24-2011 06:46 AM |
4 ft Babe Ruth Fro Joy Stand-up Sign $49,999.99 | CarltonHendricks | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 5 | 06-25-2009 03:51 PM |