Quote:
Originally Posted by ullmandds
While I'm not totally disagreeing with you, Leon...if paper stock were the smoking gun...then maybe e97 b/w's/proofs shouldn't even be classified as e97's...they should be a totally separate issue...e-unc? I'm sure there are others. There will always be the t213-1/t206 debate...among others...hell...we need issues to bicker about...if everything were known...we'd have nothing to talk about?
|
Hey Pete
For the record no one that has any hobby experience considers the E97's as proofs. It's absurd to think they are, imo. Since they have the same exact poses I consider them a subset of E97, maybe E97-2. I also think they could actually be a whole different set but since there is precedence in other sets (such as E254 "proofs") I leave them as E97. For the record my feelings on E254 are the same as E97. Both of the E sets that are "proofs" have blank backs. The T213-1 set has a different back, though the caligraphy is similar to other of T206, and I just can't make that leap. There is no Coupon T206 and, if I am not mistaking, the factory and district are different than any other also. (I haven't looked that up though) It's a good debate......and your are right. Without these nuances what would we talk about?