Ruth in Love of the Game Auction

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

On the other hand, the Ruth rookies in HA did not have good eye appeal for the grade and suffered because of it.

Jay, $313k for that Gimbels Ruth was a great result/high price. I understand the rare back had something to do with it, but that card had some pretty significant flaws. I just think everything Ruth is valuable now.

More money than ever is in the hobby. Some of that money has gravitated to pre war and its blowing up the prices of certain players and sets. Ruth is THE player - no safer “investment” in sports. In fact, I think Ruth cards have a way to go - how can a 1916 Ruth rookie, any grade, sell for less than a 1986 Michael Jordan “rookie” any grade, when there are likely more Jordan 10s than all Ruth rookies, regardless of back?

Pete, I think all Ruths are now expensive and will only get more expensive

[Snowman]

The dips in the market are segmented. Mostly modern and especially with overprinted base cards. A lot of that money hasn't left the broader market though. It's been shifting into higher demand cards with lower populations. That's why we're seeing Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle cards continuing to rise despite other segments in the market declining. I think this trend will continue.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Snowman

The dips in the market are segmented. Mostly modern and especially with overprinted base cards. A lot of that money hasn't left the broader market though. It's been shifting into higher demand cards with lower populations. That's why we're seeing Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle cards continuing to rise despite other segments in the market declining. I think this trend will continue.

I don't follow Ruth but I'd say Mantles are down about 20% from their peak in April. And Mantles have held up pretty well, most 50s/60s cards are down more than that.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Jay, $313k for that Gimbels Ruth was a great result/high price. I understand the rare back had something to do with it, but that card had some pretty significant flaws. I just think everything Ruth is valuable now.

More money than ever is in the hobby. Some of that money has gravitated to pre war and its blowing up the prices of certain players and sets. Ruth is THE player - no safer “investment” in sports. In fact, I think Ruth cards have a way to go - how can a 1916 Ruth rookie, any grade, sell for less than a 1986 Michael Jordan “rookie” any grade, when there are likely more Jordan 10s than all Ruth rookies, regardless of back?

Pete, I think all Ruths are now expensive and will only get more expensive

Ryan—Look at the Gimbels 2 in HA versus the Herpolsheimer 2 in Clean Sweep. Compared to the Clean Sweep one the Gimbels was a poor result, especially considering the wider audience that HA has. Also, the stained overgraded 6 in HA didn’t open.