View Full Version : OT a little bit. American Beauty thinness....T42
In going through the small original collection, which will be in our next auction, there is a grouping of around a dozen T206 American Beauty baseball players. In addition to the baseball cards there are several hundred various non-sports cards. In the non-sports there are some T42s (T42- Bird Series white or gold border). Out of approximately 40 of them there was 1 American Beauty back. When handling them it is interesting how trimmed the borders are on the AB. This goes to continue to prove the narrowness of the AB packs themselves.
GasHouseGang
02-07-2014, 02:41 PM
If I would have seen that bird card mixed in with the others, I would have figured someone trimmed it. Why were the American Beauty packages so much smaller?
tedzan
02-07-2014, 03:22 PM
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt113/zanted86/abcigpackt206.jpg
AB cigarette packs containing T206 cards with AB backs were the standard size as the other T-brand packs.
Furthermore, T205 cards with AB backs are the standard size (2 5/8" x 1 7/16") as the T206 cards (except AB ones)..
So, the mystery remains as to why the AB - T206 cards were cut narrower than the other branded T206's, or T205's, or T207's.
TED Z
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt113/zanted86/abcigpackt206.jpg
AB cigarette packs containing T206 cards with AB backs were the standard size as the other T-brand packs.
Furthermore, T205 cards with AB backs are the standard size (2 5/8" x 1 7/16") as the T206 cards (except AB ones)..
So, the mystery remains as to why the AB - T206 cards were cut narrower than the other branded T206's, or T205's, or T207's.
TED Z
I believe the AB pack I have is a later version and is narrower. Also, still a mystery why the T42 AB was cut down unless to fit in a pack? I dunno....
brianp-beme
02-07-2014, 03:36 PM
Nice photo illustration of the American Beauty card in the pack Ted.
Were there other, slimmer AB packs? If so, maybe ATC decided that all AB cards should be cut slimmer so that they could fit either pack no matter what.
Just a thought...that Leon kinda gave a possible answer to while I was slumbering over the keyboard
Brian
MMarvelli
02-07-2014, 06:00 PM
Same front with AB and Sovereign backs. Pretty severe trimming required to fit into an AB pack. Virtually all white and most of gold border removed.
131964
Vintagecatcher
02-07-2014, 07:55 PM
If AB cards weren't cut thinner to fit in narrower packages perhaps the producers of American Beauty Cigarettes decided that wanted more cards per sheet. If the space between cards were decreased more cards could be fit on a sheet. Just a thought. The AB producers may have simply wanted a slightly different look for their product to differentiate it from all the other brands.
Patrick
Bridwell
02-08-2014, 12:35 PM
Here's the skinnier pack I have.
steve B
02-08-2014, 02:10 PM
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt113/zanted86/abcigpackt206.jpg
AB cigarette packs containing T206 cards with AB backs were the standard size as the other T-brand packs.
Furthermore, T205 cards with AB backs are the standard size (2 5/8" x 1 7/16") as the T206 cards (except AB ones)..
So, the mystery remains as to why the AB - T206 cards were cut narrower than the other branded T206's, or T205's, or T207's.
TED Z
The one AB T205 I have is narrow just like the T206s. I also have a few other T205 and T206s that are in the AB range side to side.
I've also seen a handful of ABs that were normally sized.
Steve B
wonkaticket
02-08-2014, 02:14 PM
Very thin indeed of all the ones I have…I even recently picked up an uncut two card panel. Perhaps this gives some insight into the printing and cutting process….
http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/net54shared/huge/Birds%20AB.jpg
Blitzu
02-09-2014, 07:19 AM
Here is my back run of T42's. Even though my AB looks like a bird used it to build a nest you can still it's much thinner than the other brands.
toppcat
02-09-2014, 08:05 AM
I am wondering if the skinnier packs were intended for distribution to US Military personnel. I'm just speculating but do know when Topps had a contract to provide gum for field rations, they had to alter the normal size of the gum tab to meet government specs to fit in the ration kit. Just a thought.
I am wondering if the skinnier packs were intended for distribution to US Military personnel. I'm just speculating but do know when Topps had a contract to provide gum for field rations, they had to alter the normal size of the gum tab to meet government specs to fit in the ration kit. Just a thought.
Now that is an interesting thought. And if I am not mistaking many, if not MOST, of the narrow packs are circa 1916!!
I Only Smoke 4 the Cards
02-09-2014, 11:10 AM
I am wondering if the skinnier packs were intended for distribution to US Military personnel. I'm just speculating but do know when Topps had a contract to provide gum for field rations, they had to alter the normal size of the gum tab to meet government specs to fit in the ration kit. Just a thought.
Could this be learned from contacting the military for purchase order records?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
toppcat
02-09-2014, 11:13 AM
Could this be learned from contacting the military for purchase order records?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think your best bet is newspaper accounts or maybe old tobacco journals as a lot of trade information used to me published in them; I'm not sure what records would exist still although there is a lot of esoteric stuff on Google Books that is really just lists and lists of things which are sometimes on point. In my dealings with the military through my job I have not found them to freely provide information about anything to do with logistics, no matter how far in the past.