If you had exactly $117,603.60 to spend on a Prewar Ruth/Gehrig item, which one?

[D. Bergin]

If somebody who knows game used stuff far better then me, can convince me that was an actual Babe Ruth game used bat, and will be considered as such far into the future, no matter what technology or evidence comes along to possibly dispute it......then.....of course.....the bat, for all the reasons already given in this thread.

I feel like it wasn't that long ago, Exhibits were practically being given away, even of stars, at least in comparison to Goudeys, T-Cards and Candy cards.

Exhibits weren't even considered "cards", by the majority of the hobby, and were pretty well looked down upon. I never agreed with this sentiment, but I sure wish I had the foresight back then to sock a few key exhibits away for a rainy day.

[packs]

Bat all the way. A Gehrig rookie is a monster card but I find myself drawn to tangible history as well. Holding Ruth's own bat in your hands puts you closer to the game than any card.

[raulus]

Can I vote for none of the above?

Don't get me wrong, they're both cool.

I just worry about whether the bat turns out to be a fake. Also, I've stayed away from memorabilia simply because it takes up so much space.

And as much as the Iron Horse was an amazing player, for that kind of bread, I'd rather deploy it towards something other than this piece.

[JustinD]

Another vote for the bat here too.

Just like others said, it’s certainly rarer and just is a showstopper for anyone whether they collect or not. I find the carving distracting, but in the same breath it’s a large part of the story and provenance.

[Topnotchsy]

The market for cards and the market for memorabilia are pretty distinct markets. Sure there is some overlap, but not a ton.

For people who like memorabilia, I think it is pretty much a given that the 'value per dollar' in terms of scarcity and history is far higher. There's a reason that when considered side by side but the buying is theoretical, that the bat will be the item selected 90% of the time (or some other high number). But practically, the card sold for as much, and could easily increase in value at a faster rate. Because the audience of people pursuing a Gehrig rookie functions largely independently from the audience who pursues a GU bat, even of Babe Ruth. And the card audience is much, much larger.

I was first clued into this when I bought a Roy Campanella minor league contract from his first Minor League season (the year that he integrated the Minor Leagues for a team in the United States) for much, much less than a high-grade rookie card. Despite him signing the contract in the same offseason as Jackie Robinson and being one of the first 4 black players to sign. Despite it being signed twice.

I would take the Ruth in a heartbeat for my personal collection. But as an investment, I would have to seriously consider the Gehrig rookie card.

[brianp-beme]

I have to admit, the Ruth bat does have the 'Sultan of Swat, all-time great touched and used it' allure. But since I have never have been a memorabilia collector, it would seem out of place with me. I might be tempted to modify it for use as a table lamp.

But that would undoubtedly turn the whole collecting world against me, so probably it is in my best theoretical interest to use that $117,603.60 toward the Gehrig card, as it is likely to continue to rise in value, and my temptation to turn it into a lamp would be dampened by daunting technical design issues.


Brian

[Kutcher55]

Did they really go for the exact same price or is it a misreport? Seems unlikely.