Tattoo orbits

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mike</b><p>Is it my imagination, or have there been an inordinate amount of people seeking tattoo Orbits lately? What's up with that? Are they getting more popular? Seems like there are many people looking for them. This isn't a thinking mans thread, but anybody have a reason why this is the case? i've always liked them, but I was under the impression that they weren't all that popular. Thoughts?<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Mike- Count me in as one of the TO fanatics lately as I try to complete my set before the prices go even higher. It is a very tough set to complete and the little cards are great looking IMHO. You see a lot more of the TO pins than the TO cards these days. Speaking only for myself, I have collected most of the tobacco and caramel cards I am interested in from 1909-1919 and was looking for a small set to collect from a later era but one before WW2. Goudeys and Diamond Stars didn't appeal to me so I went with TO and DeLongs (which are also experiencing an interest revival). The TO set is chock full of not only HOFers but the "commons" are stars of their era who have never gotten the publicity or noteriety they deserved. It is a set which is full of the players who were the best in 1933 like Foxx, Hornsby, Cuyler, P. Waner, Lombardi, Diz, Grove, etc. as opposed to other sets which contain players who were either over the hill but once great or prospects. Notable by his lack of inclusion, of course, is Lou Gehrig. Other than that, a great little set. <br />Bob

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mike</b><p>I believe you bought your Foxx from me. As I told you it is a nice card. Since then, I found a grade 6. I had been looking to upgrade. As fragile as they are, it is amazing any survived beyond a 2 or 3. I am a Foxx collector, and my goal is get them all. Including variations. I am half way there. And as you say, the Goudeys do absolutely nothing for me either. They're over rated. You can find them on E bay like fleas. They are everywhere. I like the 38's. Unique and kind of cute. Good luck with your search.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Mike- I did and it is a really nice card. I have found the way to go on the TOs is buy them now and upgrade later. They are so hard to find! I also have seen more of the "reportedly scarce" TOs for sale than some of the so-called commons. <br />Bob

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>ockday</b><p>I am a pretty recent addition to TO collecting.I bought the set in Mastros Dec auction and have been upgrading ever since. Like Bob, I also wanted some 30's sets and now have a complete '33 Goudey set and also a complete '33 Delong set to go along with my TO set.<br />Alan

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Richard</b><p>Greetings, I also love those little cards. What cards are considered the more difficult to find in the set? I have read the Ivy is tough.<br />Thanks

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Tradition has it that Andrews, Hadley, Root, Seeds and Blaeholder (not in that order) are the toughest, although the Hornsby and Mack are also considered tough because they are very desired. I have my own idea which are the toughest but until I get the set completed, I won't be expressing my opinion <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Kenneth A. Cohen</b><p>For the Tattoo Orbit aficionados:<br /><br />Do these cards frequently have small variations in size from the 2X2 1/4 stated in the SCD?<br /><br />Thanks for your help.<br /><br />Ken

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Chris Counts</b><p>It is my belief that the gum cards from the 1930s are undervalued compared to cards from the tobacco era. Back in the days when I first started going to card shows, you could pick up t206s (included many HOFers) for $1 each, while Goudeys and Diamond Stars were $2-3 each. So 30-35 years ago, there seemed to be consensus that 1930s gum cards were tougher to find. In recent years, the prices for tobacco cards have simply gone nuts, leaving 1930s gum cards in the dust. Which has always puzzled me. As far as I'm concerned, there was never an era of baseball more interesting than the early gum era. Just think about it ... Ruth Gehrig, Foxx, Cochrane, Grove, Dizzy Dean, the Gashouse Gang, Dimaggio, williams, Feller and a higher percentage of HOFers (thanks to Frankie Frisch) than any other era.<br /><br />Regarding Tattoo Orbits ... they are scarce, they are attractive, they are unlike anything else out there ... and they don't cost any more than a comparable t206. I just checked eBay and found only 26 Tattoo Orbits there. Some days there's less. Curiously, the cards were split between two different spellings (Tatoo & Tattoo). Now there's a sign this set gets no respect ... dealers can't even spell it!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mike</b><p>I couldn't agree more. There are many many late 20's and early to mid 30's cards that are much harder to locate, let alone in any decent condition, than say the 205's and 206's, or many of the T Cards. I'll just name a few. The buttercreams? lets see someone throw a set of decent ones together. US caramels. George Millers. W574's. Ugly but rare, the 33 Eclipse's. And on and on and on. Conceivably, all can eventually be rounded up into sets. The cost? The challenge? Why are are they given less respect? Not as old? Not as attractive? Thats debatable. I love the art deco cards of the early 30's. Many are much rarer than the revered 206 Wagner. So rarity certainly doesn't come into play. So, who knows. And the tat's. I think they're very cool. I always liked them. I used to like the 206's. I think they are overrated, not because they are so common, but I just don't find them all that attractive. And the Goudeys are more common than sand on a beach. And they are popular. So....who can make sense of it. Why is a great artists painting worth 10K and another great artist's is 10M ? Aren't we humans goofy ? But don't ya' love collecting crap ? I'm incurable. <br /><br />