1936 V355 World Wide Gum ?

[jp1216]

Just saw a BST post for several of these. Card #76 Vosmik caught my eye.
The final sentence on the back reads "Traded to StL from CLE in early 1937". I found the date of January 17th, 1937 listed on Baseball Reference.
Would that make this set a 1937 release, not '36? Did this set have a Series 2 release or updated edition?

Found this:

https://sabrbaseballcards.blog/2021/...g-zeke-bonura/

[Leon]

Nice SABR article. Seems they might have been put out in both years unless there was some kind of trade before the season ended, and it was announced sooner than finalized..Maybe I missed that part of it.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Jon:

Thank you for presenting this information. Besides being very interesting and likely prompting further research, this could have a big impact on a huge card in the hobby, the Joe DiMaggio from this series. Always believed to be a 1936 issue, most advanced collectors singled out this DiMaggio card to be the premier rookie card choice amongst his other 1936 Goudey cards, which were mostly all oversize compared to more traditional cards. In recent times, this card has climbed well into five-figures with high-grade examples even reaching 6-figures. If further research does wind up ultimately dating this set to 1937, this DiMaggio is really no longer a rookie card then. How much impact does that have on this card value in the future?

This scenario has played out in the past a number of times and those cards originally considered to be rookie cards ultimately were not and subsequently, values dropped quite dramatically. Probably a long way to go here before we reach that point but knowing this, would the WWG DiMaggio card be one that you would invest a huge sum of money into at today’s prices?

[Baseball Rarities]

The set appears to have been issued over the two years of 1936-37. While the Vosmik card seems to have been produced in 1937, there are several cards that seem to have been issued in 1936.

The back the card of Al Lopez card references his trade to Boston "At the close of last season..." This trade occurred on December 12, 1935 which would lead one to believe that it was produced during the 1936 season.

Gehrig's card states that he "Scored the most runs in 1935." which he did, crossing the plate 125 times. He also led both leagues in runs in 1936 with a career high 167. If this card was made in 1937, you would certainly think that this would be mentioned as well.

Images were stolen from the interwebs.

[nolemmings]

It’s pretty clear that this set was issued in 1937, at least in part. Bob Seeds is identified as being with the Newark Bears– both on the team line and in his bio (“with Newark at present”), and he was not optioned there until mid-January, 1937. He is card #28, so the set was likely not issued in multiple series starting in 1936 unless it was skip-numbered. Also, if no variation exists for Seeds with different (1936) info then it appears that not all cards were produced in both years.

The back info on these cards is inconsistent. Several cards indicate 1936 performance stats or events, and others refer to “last season” stats or events that occurred in 1935. Then there are cards like Vosmik, which refers to “last season” stats taken from1935 while then stating he was traded in 1937. Seems it would not have been difficult to either update to his 1936 stats or simply replace “last season” with “in 1935".

I’ll leave it to the WWG aficionados and/or Goudey experts to provide more research and info, but it is an interesting topic given Joe D’s status in the rookie card world.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

If further research does wind up ultimately dating this set to 1937, this DiMaggio is really no longer a rookie card then. How much impact does that have on this card value in the future?

None whatsoever.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

None whatsoever.

I politely disagree. It makes a difference, just not sure how much lower it would be. There are lots of rookie hof collectors.
.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by Leon

I politely disagree. It makes a difference, just not sure how much lower it would be. There are lots of rookie hof collectors.
.

At least three reasons for my opinion. I'm forgetting a fourth.

1. The 52T Mantle has never been a rookie card, yet... And for DiMaggio, the WWG may now apparently be his equivalent to that.

2. As someone already mentioned, other 1936 issues are oversized.

3. This card is too iconic to lose sustained value based on such findings. (Yes, points one and three are pretty much the same thing! Wish I could remember the other factor I thought of last night.)

Its value naturally diminishes if handled with nacho fingers and one fails to deftly lick it off.

While I'm not comparing the two cards, if a stash of 10 (let's just say low grade) Wagners was discovered and they all hit the market simultaneously, it wouldn't dampen value in the slightest, would it? Maybe a little at the time of initial sale, but that would quickly fade afterward. Then again, maybe it wouldn't. The added attention from such a find might even increase value not too much down the road. It makes me wonder what would happen if ten PSA 10 52 Mantles were discovered/sold all at once. I'm sure both these scenarios have previously been discussed to death; I don't read through everything on the main page.)

[bcbgcbrcb]

I’m not seeing the connection between the T206 Wagner/52 Mantle and the DiMaggio card in question. The first two are 1 and 1A for most desirable card in the entire hobby. I don’t believe that the DiMaggio is in the top 100 of that category.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

The thoughts were unrelated.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

At least three reasons for my opinion. I'm forgetting a fourth.

1. The 52T Mantle has never been a rookie card, yet... And for DiMaggio, the WWG may now apparently be his equivalent to that.

2. As someone already mentioned, other 1936 issues are oversized.

3. This card is too iconic to lose sustained value based on such findings. (Yes, points one and three are pretty much the same thing! Wish I could remember the other factor I thought of last night.)

Its value naturally diminishes if handled with nacho fingers and one fails to deftly lick it off.

While I'm not comparing the two cards, if a stash of 10 (let's just say low grade) Wagners was discovered and they all hit the market simultaneously, it wouldn't dampen value in the slightest, would it? Maybe a little at the time of initial sale, but that would quickly fade afterward. Then again, maybe it wouldn't. The added attention from such a find might even increase value not too much down the road. It makes me wonder what would happen if ten PSA 10 52 Mantles were discovered/sold all at once. I'm sure both these scenarios have previously been discussed to death; I don't read through everything on the main page.)

1. The 52T Mantle is the most recognizable card in the hobby. 99.9% of hobbyist's, or more, know that card. Far less than 1% of the hobby (including all collectors) knows the '36 WWG Dimaggio.

2. Oversized cards are only a tad bit less collected, in our space. There are some other 1936 Dimaggios that aren't oversized (the 1936 Sport Stamps, for one).

3. The 36 WWG is mostly only iconic to us vintage/pre-war collectors.

Thus, my position remains, if the 36WWG is found to be a 37 WWG Dimaggio, the value goes down. How much is hard to say.

[brianp-beme]

Utilizing the gallery of the 1936 World Wide Gum set seen on the Trading Card Database site, which includes images of most of the backs, I was able to identify the following cards that include biographical data on the back that indicates that particular card was either produced later in the 1936 season or after the season was over.

#6 Arky Vaughan - "...in the following years he played for Pittburgh, 1932-33-34-36." It is possible the '36' was an error. All the rest of the cards are more straightfoward as far as dating.

#26 Glenn Myatt - Traded to Tigers 7/12/36 (team identification on back Tigers)

#27 Bob Seeds - "Sold by Montreal to New York Yankees on August 22, 1936. Played in last World Series (1936 with Yankees). With Newark at present" (team identification on back Newark, played for Newark 1937-38).

#79 Harry Smythe - "...succeeded Frank Shaughnessy as manager of the Montreal club on Aug. 5, 1936. Piloted team until the end of the year."

#100 Lon Warneke - Team identification on back Cardinals. "He was recently traded by Cubs" (October 8, 1936).

#114 Monte Pearson - "He was one of the outstanding pitchers of the Yankees-Giants World Series of 1936"

#116 Marvin Duke - Mentions Bob Seeds deal (August 22, 1936) that sent Duke to Montreal.

#120 Norman Kies - Also mentions August 22, 1936 Bob Seeds deal.

#121 Harold King - "Bought by Orioles from Montreal close 1936 season."

#124 Ray Schalk - "Ray managed the Buffalo club, International League Champions 1936."

#125 Paul Dunlap - Mentions playing for Binghamton in 1936. Team identification on back Montreal, the team he played for in 1937.

#128 Stevie Stevenson (Stephenson) - Team identification on back Montreal, which he only played for in 1937.

#134 Estel Crabtree - "He finished sixth in the International League with an average of .346 last year" (1936).

#135 Phillip Weintraub - "He was second in the International League batting honors, with an average of .371 in 1936."


For the most part I did not research the team identification listed on the back of each card to the player's record. If/when I were to do that, I might be able to come up with additional examples of later 1936 and 1937 card production.

Some preliminary thoughts and conjectures. This World Wide Gum set is 135 cards, a number which lends itself into 3 potential 45 card sheets (9 x 5 configuration). Perhaps this set was issued skip-numbered, like what is seen on the existing sheets of 1933 Goudey set, and that the production of these three sheets was spaced out, with the first issued earlier in 1936, the second later in the season, and finally, with the Vosmik card in the original post being the most obvious example, the third sometime early in 1937. The dating of the #51 Joe DiMaggio card is inconclusive, as it just lists his 1935 PCL stats and no indication of 1936 beyond the New York Yankees team identification on the back of the card, and Joe wearing a Yankees cap on the front.


Brian