Josh Gibson Tier One knob pulled

16christensen16 said:

i believe you are close on 200 pieces. A typical bat will yield around 1250-1500 bat pieces. A vintage flannel jersey will yield around 2000 jersey swatches with 100-150 patches

Click to expand...

I think you're spot on about the jersey, I was under the impression that a typical bat might yield even more than 1500 especially if you remember how small those bat pieces in 2006 Topps products were. Either way they had a ton left

16christensen16 said:

There is no doubt that topps and panini have internal meetings about how to one-up the competition. That's the nature of business...you want to do better then your competition. I'm waiting until either topps or panini makes a Walter Johnson bat barrel for me

Click to expand...

Absolutely. And with so many niche collectors relying almost exclusively on the secondary market I think it's gotten tougher over the years to sell boxes and cases. That's a good example and there are plenty. I know you own the HOF patch market but not sure if you also do the really rare game used stuff. Remember how valuable the 2006 Triple Threads Lloyd Waner bat card was for a few years before more came out? It was crazy, then it devalued 5+ times what it once went for. Lots of examples

Mighty Bombjack said:

It was like this when I was baseball editor from 2001-2002, and it was like this when the Gibson bat barrel was made (I was still in touch with a few editors there at that time). I can't speak to the situation there currently, but I would wager it is just as disjointed.

Click to expand...

Interesting, the fact that there are a relatively large number of confirmed instances where they put someone's jersey in another guy's relic card is enough to know that it's disjointed. They should have some kind of reference database, especially for the prime game used stuff. It's for their benefit too - more faith in the product means higher secondary market prices and they can charge more for their boxes. Paying someone to scan the printed card and upload it to a database should not be a terribly huge investment. Plus if it's just the prime and high-end stuff we're not talking about many cards. I think they should have done that awhile ago

homerun28aa said:

Interesting, the fact that there are a relatively large number of confirmed instances where they put someone's jersey in another guy's relic card is enough to know that it's disjointed.

Click to expand...

any of those Panini? Looking at their videos, it appears they stick a sheet of the athlete's name repeated on the backside of the relic so if there is an issue of putting the wrong relic piece in a particular athlete card, it just means the Panini contractor put the relic piece in the wrong card relic cavity (uncut sheets seem to have a cavity in every card for the worker to drop the relic piece into and I'm not sure how that cavity sheet is marked so the worker knows what cavity is what athlete without having to place the top of the card over the cavity sheet to verify which cavity belongs to which athlete).

That 2006 TTT Waner bat card drove me crazy as it did you. You couldn't find one much less purchase it. Then in 2012 Panini released them and pretty much killed the market with a flood of them since. I am still happy to have finally found a 2006 version but man that was long wait!

homerun28aa said:

Have to respectfully disagree. I see people's points on the value of the preservation of an unmodified original game used bat but think about the excitement that thousands of baseball enthusiasts feel about owning a small piece of it. Literally thousands. I think it's a cool concept personally but again I do understand the opposing view.

Click to expand...

I would agree with you. Only, we are having more and more trouble with whether or not these items are legit. I've said this before but I feel more comfortable buying Panini because at least their butt is on the line with their wording. Their wording is more transparent. I also trust older GU more than newer GU. Anything pre-2005 I would tend to trust. I could lose that bet...sure. But, I think it was a time before the companies realized they did not have to necessarily guarantee anything for people to want the product. They were actually trying to do the right thing instead of take a shortcut with event worn crud.

So if I'm buying newer cards of current players with a somewhat grain of salt/frugal approach, you're telling me I should spend hundreds if not more on a seemingly rarer stuff? The newer player's stuff ought to be easier for the companies to acquire in larger quantity and they still feel the need to do event worn(which is darn near worthless to me). As a collector, I stand more to lose should there eventually be a question of authenticity. That said, if a rare piece truly does exist, I say keep it unharmed as it'll do two things. It'll preserve the piece. And it won't be cut up to make a card so thousands can enjoy...or so thousands can question whether or not it's legit...however you want to look at that.

r2d2 said:

The issue is as this is private property anything can be done with it.

Click to expand...

This may sound wrong when it comes out...but owning a significant or rare historical item/artifact should not give you the license to destroy it. If the owner decided to do that, I'd question why they really want to own it in the first place. I'd question or say a few other things as well but I'll leave it at that as I do not wish to offend anyone. But with that train of thought, Bill Gates could go buy every rare painting ever and cut them up to use in an art card product so everybody could own a piece of the Mona Lisa or some other famous work. That would not, in my opinion, be a good thing.

homerun28aa said:

Interesting, the fact that there are a relatively large number of confirmed instances where they put someone's jersey in another guy's relic card is enough to know that it's disjointed. They should have some kind of reference database, especially for the prime game used stuff. It's for their benefit too - more faith in the product means higher secondary market prices and they can charge more for their boxes. Paying someone to scan the printed card and upload it to a database should not be a terribly huge investment. Plus if it's just the prime and high-end stuff we're not talking about many cards. I think they should have done that awhile ago

Click to expand...

The bold/underlined is another great reason that I am not hip on this. They cut up a rare item, we might not even be sure we are getting what we think we are. So collectors spend more money to buy something that gets flubbed up and meanwhile a rare piece of baseball history bites the dust and nobody really knows what it's even in or where it's really at come final product. Lose lose. Of course I guess I'm being pessimistic.

Ownership is exactly a license to do with it what you want. I would agree that certain things shouldn't be cut up for cards. And if you do, you should not then bungle the description of the item to a fraudulent level. But in our country, if Valeant and Martin Shkreli exist, baseball card companies are pretty far down the ladder of what needs to be decided by some outside entity.

I really like GU stuff, and have a ton of it, in my player collections and a HOF player collection, but I think the time has come to get out. Too many questionable things have come out, with more all the time. Time to pull my head out of the sand. From the Ramirez cork bat to that Fleer jersey with another guy's name on it, to the knobs with weird numbers, to this Gibson, I'm surprised someone hasn't compiled a comprehensive list of questionable items. Maybe I should.

This was pulled from Big Texas box breaks
not a bad card for a 48.50 buy-in for sure

smapdi said:

Ownership is exactly a license to do with it what you want. I would agree that certain things shouldn't be cut up for cards. And if you do, you should not then bungle the description of the item to a fraudulent level. But in our country, if Valeant and Martin Shkreli exist, baseball card companies are pretty far down the ladder of what needs to be decided by some outside entity.

I really like GU stuff, and have a ton of it, in my player collections and a HOF player collection, but I think the time has come to get out. Too many questionable things have come out, with more all the time. Time to pull my head out of the sand. From the Ramirez cork bat to that Fleer jersey with another guy's name on it, to the knobs with weird numbers, to this Gibson, I'm surprised someone hasn't compiled a comprehensive list of questionable items. Maybe I should.

Click to expand...

The list is endless of questionable stuff no doubt. But if you do your research the list is also endless of really good stuff!