M101-6's - Any expert opinions

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>BlackSoxFan</b><p>How rare do you think these really are? I've read several opposing thoughts regarding this issue. Also, has anyone confirmed the date of issue for the 'set'? (EDITED FOR POOR EXPLANATION OF QUESTION) Was it in fact 1917, or a series of years, or what? I have read the thread from sept. on this ... which is why i ask. Have we determined whether the issue was produced as late as 1919?<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />Black Sox Fan<br /><br />- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br /><a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a><br /><a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>But the set is tough. I seriously doubt it was issued in 1917, as Mendelsohn had another set in mind for that year. It certainly appears to have been issued over at least two years, as that Ruth fella can be found for both Red Sox and Yankees, and since he didn't join the Bombers until 1920, it appears it was issued that late. So either 1918-1920 or 1919-20 would be my take, probably the former.<br /><br />Many don't collect it because it's scarce and, at present, is too big to slab, which turns off some. Many sellers may not know what they have, either, as there are no identifying marks other than Mendelsohn's initials, and the stock is thinner than typical cards, such that some may list them as photos (my speculation). <br /><br />Edited to add: I'm tired. Completely forgot that Bob Lemke found an ad showing these available in September 1917--different than the set Mendelsohn offered in TSN that Spring. Thus, it seems 1917-20 seems to fit.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>BlackSoxFan</b><p>Have you seen this add??? And could you elaborate on FM....i've done your basic google and such..but I'm looking for some better information.<br><br>Regards,<br /><br />Black Sox Fan<br /><br />- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br /><a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a><br /><a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>I'll e-mail you the ad. Felix Mendelsohn is the "father" of m101-4/5 and 6. He issued these sets, as well as an uncatalogued set in 1917, the last being extremely scarce if it was issued at all.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>BlackSoxFan</b><p>Cool thx!<br><br>Regards,<br /><br />Black Sox Fan<br /><br />- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br /><a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a><br /><a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>actually, the SCD big book would support the 1917-1920 period also. There are five players shown on two different cards, with different teams. Grover Alexander appears for Philly and the Cubs--he played for Philly in 1917 and Chicago in 1918. Walter Holke and Ed Konetchy are shown for teams they played on in 1918 and 1919, and the aforementioned Ruth for teams he played on in 1919 and 1920. The anomaly is Hugh High, who is captioned with the Yankees and Tigers, when he hadn't played for Detroit since 1914. Probably just a glitch.<br /><br />I used to have about 2/3 of the set checklisted as to team, mostly courtesy of an old Larry Fritsch catalogue. Alas, the file was on my stolen laptop, so I'll have to do some digging for old backups, if anyone's interested.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bob Lemke</b><p>My findings on the M101-6 set were presented in my column in the Nov. 18 SCD. Further information on the apparently aborted 1917 M101-? Mendelsohn set and a few related items appeared in the Nov. 25 column. Stll more information on what was possibly a pre-M101-4 Mendelsohn set will be forthcoming in SCD.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>I look forward to reading your reports--how can I get those back issues?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>BlackSoxFan</b><p>likewise Bob! I'd love to read those finding!<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />Black Sox Fan<br /><br />- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br /><a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a><br /><a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jim Manos</b><p>I feel the price is so undervalued for the lack of available cards&gt; I have seen none at any auction house, ebay and/or dealors tables. They are so cool also. They are all action shots. I can buy 50 Joe Jackson Cracker Jacks or find his M101-4 cards. But I have never even seen a copy of the M101-6 Jackson. These cards derive huge premium's and nobody has them. Hope this helps.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bob Lemke</b><p>Sorry to report back issues of SCD are not available. PDFs of back issues are accessible on-line at www.sportscollectorsdigest.com. There is an "Online Issue" option in the menu bar at left.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jim Manos</b><p>I was told from a individual that has 90 different(and did not want me to use his name) says that there is only 90 or 95 not the listed 110. I was also told to back this up that there is no Wagner(but listed??)?? Bob, I hope this helps. If I get any other info I will contact you. Regards.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>BlackSoxFan</b><p>Let's, for the sake of argument, assume that to be true. Where would that leave the analysis of identification?<br><br>Regards,<br /><br />Black Sox Fan<br /><br />- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br /><a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a><br /><a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>Perhaps you can find out which 15-20 or so were not issued?<br /><br />The original ad, or at least the first one in the Sporting News, claimed that the set had 100 "photos".