Goldin 100 auction

[rlevy]

No question, restoration of the NY was the right decision. Without it, the jersey would have sold for much less.
As a side-note, five years ago, Mantle jerseys, all-original, sold in the $500k-600k range. Last year, a 1958 all original sold for over $4mm. Kind of crazy to think that the restoration of the NY, which would be undetectable by most, probably resulted in the jersey selling for a small fraction of the 1958 jersey. Both jerseys were used by Mantle during great years in his career.

We collectors are a strange lot.

Rick

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by rlevy

No question, restoration of the NY was the right decision. Without it, the jersey would have sold for much less.
As a side-note, five years ago, Mantle jerseys, all-original, sold in the $500k-600k range. Last year, a 1958 all original sold for over $4mm. Kind of crazy to think that the restoration of the NY, which would be undetectable by most, probably resulted in the jersey selling for a small fraction of the 1958 jersey. Both jerseys were used by Mantle during great years in his career.

We collectors are a strange lot.

Rick

I think (and I imagine you agree) that a lot was a wild upswing in the market that has now settled down. Obviously, factors like the stock market, interest rates etc will impact the high end of the market, but in my mind, we may have shifted back to a time where it makes sense to be buying.

Originally Posted by perezfan

Haha… was not meant to be taken literally. Of course there are 5,000 ‘52 Mantles for each G/U Jersey of his. Just illustrating that the replacement “NY” would significantly drag down the price realized.

I hear that

[ichieh]

How about the fact that the Mantle jersey was photo matched to 10 games,
which is unheard of for a vintage jersey from the 50’s. I am surprised it did not add too much value to the final price. I do think restoration was the right decision. It would be a very lengthy conversation to explain why a Mantle jersey has a minor league logo in the front of the jersey

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by ichieh

How about the fact that the Mantle jersey was photo matched to 10 games,
which is unheard of for a vintage jersey from the 50’s. I am surprised it did not add too much value to the final price. I do think restoration was the right decision. It would be a very lengthy conversation to explain why a Mantle jersey has a minor league logo in the front of the jersey

Is there a real value in photoshopping to many games vs 1 game? (Asking genuinely)

I don't know the market, so this is not an educated comment, but my assumption was that, given how few jerseys were used each year back then, that any jersey photomatched to one game, would have been used in dozens of games.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Topnotchsy

Is there a real value in photoshopping to many games vs 1 game? (Asking genuinely)

I don't know the market, so this is not an educated comment, but my assumption was that, given how few jerseys were used each year back then, that any jersey photomatched to one game, would have been used in dozens of games.

Suppose you and your father went to see some games at Yankee Stadium back in the day. You dig out the ticket stubs you've saved all these decades, and discover your idol, Mickey Mantle, was wearing that exact jersey when you and dad were at the game.

If you had the dough to be a serious bidder in the first place, wouldn't that match prompt you to boost your bid considerably?

[packs]

How often would Mantle have changed jerseys throughout a season? Is it safe to assume any Mantle gamer would have been worn for a stretch of games?

I know most of today's athletes have unlimited jerseys at their disposal but I also remember plenty of stories from old timers who had to purchase their own jersey.

[rlevy]

Originally Posted by Topnotchsy

Is there a real value in photoshopping to many games vs 1 game? (Asking genuinely)

I don't know the market, so this is not an educated comment, but my assumption was that, given how few jerseys were used each year back then, that any jersey photomatched to one game, would have been used in dozens of games.

Good question Jeff. It is generally believed that in the flannel period, players received 2 home and 2 road jerseys, although there have been instances of some players apparently receiving 3. So it is generally assumed that each jersey would have been worn roughly 30-50 games. Photo-matching of a jersey to any game is helpful to establish authenticity and adds to an expert's opinion letter. But photo-matching to a specific important game, like this Mantle jersey to his hitting for the cycle or hitting homeruns certainly adds to its value to collectors. I don't think it's the shear number of photo-matches that is important, but the specific games it is matched to that increases its desirability to collectors. And the more photo-matches, the greater the probability it can be linked to an important game of some type.

Yankee flannels are one of the easiest to photo-match because of the way the jersey was put together, causing the alignment of the pinstripes to be unique with every jersey. Other jerseys, like my Dodgers, are very difficult to photo-match since they all look the same, so matching them usually requires things like loose threads or some other damage.

Rick

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by rlevy

Good question Jeff. It is generally believed that in the flannel period, players received 2 home and 2 road jerseys, although there have been instances of some players apparently receiving 3. So it is generally assumed that each jersey would have been worn roughly 30-50 games. Photo-matching of a jersey to any game is helpful to establish authenticity and adds to an expert's opinion letter. But photo-matching to a specific important game, like this Mantle jersey to his hitting for the cycle or hitting homeruns certainly adds to its value to collectors. I don't think it's the shear number of photo-matches that is important, but the specific games it is matched to that increases its desirability to collectors. And the more photo-matches, the greater the probability it can be linked to an important game of some type.

Yankee flannels are one of the easiest to photo-match because of the way the jersey was put together, causing the alignment of the pinstripes to be unique with every jersey. Other jerseys, like my Dodgers, are very difficult to photo-match since they all look the same, so matching them usually requires things like loose threads or some other damage.

Rick

Well stated!

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by rlevy

Good question Jeff. It is generally believed that in the flannel period, players received 2 home and 2 road jerseys, although there have been instances of some players apparently receiving 3. So it is generally assumed that each jersey would have been worn roughly 30-50 games. Photo-matching of a jersey to any game is helpful to establish authenticity and adds to an expert's opinion letter. But photo-matching to a specific important game, like this Mantle jersey to his hitting for the cycle or hitting homeruns certainly adds to its value to collectors. I don't think it's the shear number of photo-matches that is important, but the specific games it is matched to that increases its desirability to collectors. And the more photo-matches, the greater the probability it can be linked to an important game of some type.

Yankee flannels are one of the easiest to photo-match because of the way the jersey was put together, causing the alignment of the pinstripes to be unique with every jersey. Other jerseys, like my Dodgers, are very difficult to photo-match since they all look the same, so matching them usually requires things like loose threads or some other damage.

Rick

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks!

Originally Posted by Mark17

Suppose you and your father went to see some games at Yankee Stadium back in the day. You dig out the ticket stubs you've saved all these decades, and discover your idol, Mickey Mantle, was wearing that exact jersey when you and dad were at the game.

If you had the dough to be a serious bidder in the first place, wouldn't that match prompt you to boost your bid considerably?

I guess, though I can't imagine that is what generally motivates buyers to pay up.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Topnotchsy

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks!





I guess, though I can't imagine that is what generally motivates buyers to pay up.

It sure would for me, but everybody's different.