View Full Version : e97 B&W questions
quinnsryche
11-19-2009, 04:56 PM
I have some questions if someone has some answers. What exactly are the e97 black and white cards? I have seen them referred to as "proofs" by some and just b&w by others. Are they unissued, non-colored variations, are the pictures actual photos or artwork of photos? What do vg examples of commons sell for? Are they readily available or scarce, rare? Sorry for all the questions but I can't find any in depth info about them on the net.
Thanks in advance!
1stly they are not proofs, they were obviously issued and circulated and found in old time collections. While not know for sure, the B & W ones were probably issued by some other party than C.A. Briggs and purchased from the same lithographer, they were just on a budget and went B & W and no printed back, just a hunch of mine.
The pictures are identical lithographs of the full color E97's. The cards are on much thinner stock.
They are not rare, perhaps scarce is appropriate. They used to command 4 figures for even g/vg examples but can now be found in the mid 3 figure range for that grade or nicer(however g/vg is about the best you will find). We have auctioned a couple in the last year.
Scott
Jacklitsch
11-19-2009, 05:59 PM
http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g5/jacklitsch1/Murray/MurrayE97Proof.jpg
I agree with Scott. A related issue, not a proof.
I agree with Scott. A related issue, not a proof.
Agreed. Certainly not proofs and they remind me of Colgan's "Proofs"...as those aren't proofs either.
Abravefan11
03-23-2010, 06:06 PM
I ran across a couple of these in a card shop today. The owner had them mixed in a box, unlabeled, with an assortment of other cards.
Are the prices for these dropping as more people believe them to not be proofs?
The cards I saw were a Murray (Good) and Mullin (Poor, slight tear on border and pencil writing on reverse.)
Ballparks on their value?
Jacklitsch
03-23-2010, 06:20 PM
How much is he asking? We can then better advise whether the price is in line.
Abravefan11
03-23-2010, 06:45 PM
Steve,
He won't set a price without knowing what the cards are. If I put them back in the box and don't tell him they'll stay there with no price. It's an odd relationship I know. I have vowed in the past to stop this practice but enjoy the discovery even if I don't end up with the cards.
I have the two cards in hand as he will let me take what I am interested in for research. I will post scans in a bit.
Abravefan11
03-23-2010, 07:08 PM
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_UrSHvogCrmM/S6llpC-cUcI/AAAAAAAACMs/n_t2PoMAWqs/Recently%20Updated18.jpg
Jacklitsch
03-23-2010, 07:29 PM
The Murray is a very nice card. I would value it at between $450 and $550.
The Mullin not so nice. Maybe a $150 to $200 card.
Your Murray is nicer than mine and I think I paid about $350 back in the day. Buy then I collect all three: the regular issue, the blank back and the black and white.
http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g5/jacklitsch1/Murray/MurrayE97Trio.jpg
rhettyeakley
03-23-2010, 07:53 PM
Removed post because it didn't really add anything to the thread.
-Rhett
caramelcard
03-23-2010, 08:18 PM
These are obviously called E97, but we really don't know if they're a candy issue.
I would guess they weren't inserted into any product.
They're really fragile and I haven't seen them with any kind of candy stains.
I would guess a very small firm used them as some kind of premium or give away. I say very small firm cuz they cut corners on the paper stock and decided to go with no color which was probably a lot cheaper.
In fact, as Scott hinted at, perhaps there was an excess of cards that didn't have color or backs printed yet after Briggs decided to stop using them and whoever had the stock decided to sell them to a local store/company. That would make slightly more sense if the stock was the same thickness however.
Several of the images were also used for W555.
Rob
Everything Rob said, right above this post, I agree with :):). And of course what Scott said is true too. I would only add that I have actually seen quite a few with a water looking stain on them. Mine has it and many I have owned had it. It's like they got wet and dried, or something like that.I don't think they are candy stains.
A 40 is very high grade for this series. I don't think I have seen more than 3-4 above a 3-4 :D. . regards
Bicem
03-24-2010, 07:33 AM
I think Pete Calderon's caramel website helped to over-hype them a bit.
"E97 Black & White Near Impossible - you don't buy it, I will."
Jacklitsch
03-24-2010, 07:55 AM
As Rob stated here is the same Murray image on a W555:
http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g5/jacklitsch1/Murray/MurrayW555.jpg (http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g5/jacklitsch1/Murray/MurrayW555.jpg)
Bosox Blair
03-30-2010, 02:43 AM
One thing that makes them seem "proof-like" is that they were definitely printed early - before any of the corrections were made to the color E97 cards. All six subjects with a variation in the color version of E97 appear in the B&W set in their early ("incorrect") form.
Cheers,
Blair
I have most of the E97 black and whites but I find the E97 color blank backs more intriguing and have started collecting them.
Bosox Blair
03-30-2010, 11:20 AM
I have most of the E97 black and whites but I find the E97 color blank backs more intriguing and have started collecting them.
Hi Bob,
From the B&Ws you own and have seen, am I correct in my belief that the E97 variation cards are always the "early" versions in B&W?
So that would mean for the 3 name spelling errors, the B&W versions would always be the incorrect ones: Dolan, Hartsell, and Steinfeld.
And for the 3 team variations, the B&W versions would always be: Sullivan (BOS), Young (BOS) and Nichols (PHI).
These are the only versions I have ever seen...
Cheers,
Blair