Posted By:
davidcyclebackI consider trade cards as baseball cards. CDVs are baseball cards if they have advertising them or were sold commercially to the public. All baseball CDVs are collectable, but not all are baseball cards.
The Peck & Snyders fit the bill of baseball cards, as the were used commercially. Some have ads on back, and the CDVs are known to have been sold to the public. Someone, I beleive Hal, posted a Peck & Snyder advetisement for ordering the CDVs. There are earlier than Peck & Snyder CDVs, but none that I've seen that are known to have been sold to the public or used as trade cards.
Some will say that all CDVs should be considered baseball cards, as they are baseball and the are cards (cartes is french for card). However, by the same argument all baseball player business cards and season passes would also baseball cards.
The problem with real early baseball items, ala 1840 trade card, is that it's difficult to impossible to be sure the sport depicted is baseball. By my definition, if you aren't certain it's baseball, it shouldn't be labelled as a baseball item. For example, if you find a 1849 trade card that depicts a game that might be a baseball game but also might be round ball, the item is not considered the earliest baseball card-- despite what an auction house might advertise ... It's similar to someone trumpeting a 'newly discivered card that is Nolan Ryan's true rookie card, but we aren't certain it's Nolan Ryan in the image.' You gotta be sure it's Nolan Ryan before you can call it Ryan's rookie card.