T206 Coupon type 1 scarcity level?

[Orioles1954]

What about those "Pirate" backs, the foreign issue which we erroneously like to ascribe as T215? Would those become T206-4?

James

[barrysloate]

Another possible solution is to liberate the T206's- break them into 15 different sets, so that Cobb with a Piedmont back, and Cobb with a Sweet Caporal back, would be parts of two different sets. If all of our opinions are based on which company issued the product, then each advertising back should stand alone.

Admittedly, a Drum or Uzit set would be rather small, but so is an E93, or E94, or nearly any other candy set. Then collectors can decide if they want to complete several different subsets under the T206 umbrella, or simply collect one example of each front as they do today.

So a Piedmont set might be T206-1, a Sweet Cap T206-2, a Sovereign T206-3, etc. Then everybody would be happy (except that it would be expensive).

[judsonhamlin]

Two further observations based upon the recent posts

I think that T215 Pirates need to be given a designation outside of "T", just like any non-US tobacco issue.

For me, it is not about "wanting" a certain result; I have no horse in this race. I don't have a hidden hoard of cards that I might sell if demand for Coupon or Red Cross cards increases. Weighing all the evidence presented seems, to me, to favor this result- if not beyond reasonable doubt, at least by a probable cause level of proof.

[drdduet]

One way to consider this is to develop criteria that would do the classifying for us....

Major Criteria could include--
Front design
Front subjects/pose
Series issue
Back design
Card dimensions
Producer/Printer
Year issue
Etc.

Minor Criteria
card stock
font color
font type
etc.

And after a summit of all type pre-war guys and gals criteria could be decided upon and reclassifications may be done incorporating the facts.

For me, it's hard to ignore the look of the T213-1, the "producer", the style, the subjects, and most importantly the 68--350 series of T206. It's not just the appearance, most importantly it's the subject inclusion.

Furthermore I do like the idea of breaking up T206 into T206-1 (the first 150 subjects), T206-2 (350 Subjects), T206-3 etc, as they were all issued at different times reflecting team changes, etc. The whole idea of reclassification is to get it right and reflect more accurately all the facets of an issue.

I humbly believe the more correct the classification the more to be gained in this issue as a reference to history. Sophisticated tobacco card historians such as Ted Z., Barry A., Scott R., etc, have brought to light the detailed history of the monster. I think there is a lot to be gained by being precise and calling things by their real names.

[Epps]

If all of the T206 brands were separated into their own sets, would a complete T206 set still be 524 cards or just how many cards are under that brand?

[tedzan]

Epps, you asked......
" If all of the T206 brands were separated into their own sets, would a complete T206 set still be 524 cards
or just how many cards are under that brand? "

The answer is....NO !

Here are my numbers........

PIEDMONT, Factory #25 would be foremost....complete with 522 cards

SWEET CAPORAL, Factory #30....complete with 469 cards

SOVEREIGN....complete with 407 cards

Folloiwed by OLD MILL, POLAR BEAR, and TOLSTOI....each consisting of approx. 300 cards

Then AMERICAN BEAUTY 350 (with frame)....192 cards

And, AMERICAN BEAUTY 460 with approx. 72 cards

I'll stop here, because as is evident, the big unknown in collecting the various T206 sub-sets, is identifying the
cards that were not printed...."No-Prints". And, this is not a easy matter.


TED Z

I am still confused as to why no one has answered:

Wether or not the Type 1's were printed before or after the Cycle run?

When was the Cycle print run in accordiance to the T206 set. First, Mid, Last?? What order were the T206's run in anyways?

Is there any proof that the Coupons were actually printed in 1910 and not later after the T206 runs had been completed and made a short run for distribution.

All I have heard about is that they were printed in NYC for sure which Frank made clear for me. That they have thin paper stock (does not really matter). A few of you own them and the $ increase if it is a 206 is a blinder for an honest opinion. I think it is simple if you can answer these questions then you get your answer to wether or not the Type 1's are T206's and that the Type 2's and 3's should be Type 1's and 2's from an actuall set run later and not a continuation.

I am no expert and this is a very intriging question. I am fascinated by this and would like to learn more about the beginings of the hobby. This is why I like this era of cards. So much to learn.

[tedzan]

First of all, did you read my answer to you in my Post #47, regarding where all these Tobacco cards were printed ?

Now, for your latest question....we have documentation that indicates that the American Litho. Co. (ALC) printed
and issued the American Beauty 350 cards in the Summer of 1910. Between the Summer and Fall of 1910, ALC also
printed and issued the Broad Leaf 350, Coupon #1, Cycle 350, and Drum cards. As is obvious here in my scan, the
back design is essentially identical for all 5 of these T206 brands. This tells us that these backs were drawn by the
same artist at ALC, and in the same timeframe.





TED Z

[FrankWakefield]

.

[drdduet]

Criteria listed were just examples---by your statements Frank I'm sure you don't consider Cobb with Cobb back a T206 either....right?

Well it seems we rehash some of the same arguments over and over again as others familiarize themselves with the differences and similarities.

In Louisiana, most dealers have a history of referring to ALL white border tobacco cards (Victory, Pirate, Coupon, etc.) as T206's. To this day that urks the heck out of me. But I can say that it is only through sound research and the weighing of all the facts that I classify T213-1 as T206.

While this controversy may receive some mention in future catalogues and price guides, the only real determinant of the acceptance of T213-1 as T206 by the vintage card collecting community will be prices realized.

[FrankWakefield]

.

[tbob]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Bob- Ted Z. and I were discussing that find just this morning and we were wondering what the breakdown was. That is very interesting, and may explain why the type 1's are so tough- they were not brought into the market by that famous find.

Barry: Type 1 0%
Type 2 90%
Type 3 10%

Just a guess but I think a pretty good one. The most prevalent card which wasn't a common was the T213-2 Cobb. I had a near set of T213-2s with multiple cards of all HOFers and I also put together a complete T213-3 set including 1 card which was not previously known to exist. Of the cards in the 213-3 set, about 10% had the factory overprinted backs.
That's the best I can do.
tbob

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by tedzan

From ALC in NYC, the individual cards (and uncut sheets of cigarette packs) were shipped by rail to the various Factory's
in the ATC system.


TED Z

Ted-why would the packs be uncut but the cards cut?

[drdduet]

I believe all the "white border" t-cards of the period deserve a looking through--consider subject, series, design, etc...The pieces of the puzzle may reveal a bigger picture---

Just to clarify--I'm in no way saying all white borders are T206's, but I am suggesting that there are links between issues that have yet to be discovered. For example T214, T215, and T213-2 & -3--how are they related--are they similar in subjects and series in a fashion like T206? They sure look alike on the front! Is their a pattern across these issues to suggest they were the "second coming" of T206 or were they produced with leftover supplies in swamps of Louisiana...the regional separation does suggest that there was perhaps an attempt to recreate the T206 (ATC) model in Louisiana using Coupon, Victory, Red Cross, etc. instead of Piedmont, Old Mill, Drum, etc...

Similar patterns do exist in the caramel world as well between E90-1, E92, etc. and T216....Makes me wonder if the tobacco industry in Louisiana was trying to model their distribution policies after the Northeast albeit a couple of years later with the same subject manner....

I believe research of this type could help tell the tales needed to reveal the history behind the hobby's most intriguing mysteries. There must be some unifying theory out there that explains and delineates all the moving parts without faulter--to the Bat Mobile, but let's get another Abita Amber first....

[drdduet]

Furthermore,

It would be much more difficult to discover a unifying theory of this sort if one did not take into consideration the nonsports issues of this period as well. Putting it all together is possible, but not without all the pieces.

[drdduet]

And don't get me started on the T210-8 and T211 issues....

Originally Posted by tedzan

First of all, did you read my answer to you in my Post #47, regarding where all these Tobacco cards were printed ?



TED Z

I am sorry Ted I misnamed you Frank by accident

As is obvious here in my scan, the
back design is essentially identical for all 5 of these T206 brands. This tells us that these backs were drawn by the
same artist at ALC, and in the same timeframe.

Also your Theory that just because they are all made or drawn by the same guy they were printed at the same time frame. Holds water like a bucket full of holes. Has there never been printing plates made for print runs then put awayt and a few yrs later brought back out and some mods made and reused?I am looking at this from a logical piont of view. We know that there are several backs of the same design. You have dating for those in the appropriate time frames. Coupons . So they could date from 1909-1913 right.

we have documentation that indicates that the American Litho. Co. (ALC) printed
and issued the American Beauty 350 cards in the Summer of 1910. Between the Summer and Fall of 1910, ALC also
printed and issued the Broad Leaf 350, Coupon #1, Cycle 350, and Drum cards.

If you have or it is definite that there is documents that 100% name and support that Coupons were printed in that date and during the T206 runs then this should have never been a disscussion because it is for 100% sure a T206 and has been misclassified and needs to be adjusted to its correct identifier. This would make the Type 2's and 3's into 1's and 2' then or make them T206-2's and 206-3's.

[tedzan]

Dave
You asked......" Ted-why would the packs be uncut but the cards cut? "

Assembled cigarette packs are 3-dimensional, and shipping them as such is not as practical as shipping stacked uncut sheets of
these packs. The T-factories certainly had the machinery (or workers) that would cut, fold, and assemble the packs on location.

Proof of this operation was found some years ago, when an uncut sheet of 24 Piedmont packs were found in an Antique shop in
North Carolina.


Thanks for a great question,

TED Z

[tedzan]

Andrew

So, you are skeptical of my "back design" theory ?

I will leave you with one more tidbit....please notice that the name "COUPON" is in quotes. This provides us with a timeline,
as the Coupon Tobacco Co. had been acquired by the American Tobacco Co. (ATC) in the 1909/1910 timeframe; and, the
ATC Copyright was still pending.

Now....I will approach this argument from the "front design" facts. The 48 major league players in the COUPON #1 set are
all from the 350 series (printed and issued in late 1909 to 1910). This fact is undeniable.
Whereas, in the T213-2 & T213-3 sets, the front designs are derived from many players in the 460 series of the T206 set
that were issued in 1911. This fact by itself, is sufficient to narrow the window of time when the COUPON #1 set was is-
sued to 1910.

There are 48 Southern Leaguers (SL) in the T206 set which were ONLY printed and issued in 1909 & 1910. American Litho.
selected 20 SL (listed here) from these 48 SL in the T206 design for the COUPON #1 set that represent the region served
by the Coupon Tobacco Co.

American Litho. did not design these white-bordered cards in a random fashion. Throughout the T206 set, it is evident that
it was designed, printed and issued in a certain timeline, with a lot of due diligence. And, this includes the 1910 COUPON
set of 68 cards.


List of 1910 COUPON Southern Leaguers

Bay.....Nashville
Bernhard.....Nashville
Breitenstein.....New Orleans
Carey.....Memphis
Cranston.....Memphis
Ellam.....Nashville
Fritz.....New Orleans
Greminger....Montgomery
Hart....Montgomery
Hart.....Little Rock
Hickman.....Mobile
Jordan.....Atlanta
Lentz.....Little Rock
Molesworth.....Birmingham
Perdue.....Nashville
Persons....Montgomery
Reagan.....New Orleans
Rockenfeld.....New Orleans
Smith.....Atlanta
Thornton.....Mobile

Finally, I have to say that I don't follow your logic on your other comments.


TED Z

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Dave
You asked......" Ted-why would the packs be uncut but the cards cut? "

Assembled cigarette packs are 3-dimensional, and shipping them as such is not as practical as shipping stacked uncut sheets of
these packs. The T-factories certainly had the machinery (or workers) that would cut, fold, and assemble the packs on location.

Proof of this operation was found some years ago, when an uncut sheet of 24 Piedmont packs were found in an Antique shop in
North Carolina.


Thanks for a great question,

TED Z

Ted: I may have phrased it incorrectly-I meant to ask why the cards would have been cut before shipping. It would seem to me to be easier to ship uncut sheets and then cut the cards and feed them into the packs as they were assembled at each factory.

Thinking out loud, perhaps this method would explain why American Beauties are thinner, since they could have been cut at the factory and not been truly uniform compared to the cuts on other brands.

Just a WAG but curious as always on the means and methods of T206 distribution.

[drdduet]

Here's a question,

Cobb with Cobb back is most like which of the Coupon issues?

[tedzan]

Regarding your post #59......
" And Ted, while those images look nice, and the frame lines are compelling... 4 of them mention "350" one doesn't...."

Very true; however, the "COUPON" tobacco company was a recent acquire by ATC (circa 1909/1910....and, it appears as if American
Litho. (ALC) designed this set as an ASSORTED series of cards.

Let us view this COUPON issue from their FRONT's standpoint. ALC selected 48 Major Leaguers from their 350 series gallery (which we
know was in print in the Summer/Fall of 1910) and 20 Southern Leaguers from the 48 in the earlier T206 series, that best represented
the region served by the Coupon Tobacco Co.

So, I'm not concerned that the wording "350 Subjects" was omitted on the COUPON back.


Best regards my friend,

TED Z

[tedzan]

The gloss on the Ty Cobb/Ty Cobb back card is similar to the T213-2 cards issued in 1914-1916. However, we have
a 1910 Macon, Georgia newspaper clipping advertising this card in 1910.

Furthermore, in Senator Russell's collection there is this a Ty Cobb/Ty Cobb card. Russell collected his Tobacco cards
as a teenager in the 1910-1911 period.

TED Z

Originally Posted by tedzan

Andrew

I will leave you with one more tidbit....please notice that the name "COUPON" is in quotes. This provides us with a timeline,
as the Coupon Tobacco Co. had been acquired by the American Tobacco Co. (ATC) in the 1909/1910 timeframe; and, the
ATC Copyright was still pending.

Now....I will approach this argument from the "front design" facts. The 48 major league players in the COUPON #1 set are
all from the 350 series (printed and issued in late 1909 to 1910). This fact is undeniable.
Whereas, in the T213-2 & T213-3 sets, the front designs are derived from many players in the 460 series of the T206 set
that were issued in 1911. This fact by itself, is sufficient to narrow the window of time when the COUPON #1 set was is-
sued to 1910.

There are 48 Southern Leaguers (SL) in the T206 set which were ONLY printed and issued in 1909 & 1910. American Litho.
selected 20 SL (listed here) from these 48 SL in the T206 design for the COUPON #1 set that represent the region served
by the Coupon Tobacco Co.

American Litho. did not design these white-bordered cards in a random fashion. Throughout the T206 set, it is evident that
it was designed, printed and issued in a certain timeline, with a lot of due diligence. And, this includes the 1910 COUPON
set of 68 cards.


TED Z

Ted this is exactly what I was looking for to hear. So with this info there is no doubt that the Type 1's were printed during the T206 runs thus making the Type 1's another sub set of the T206's. So hearing all this I vote that Coupons should be reclassified to T206's and now the part about where the Type 2's and 3's should go. Would they as well as some other Sets be able to fall into T206-2's?

[FrankWakefield]

.

[teetwoohsix]

I have to agree Frank.I HIGHLY respect Ted Z's knowledge on the subject(and also everyone else contributing to this thread),but I still feel the same way about it.

I am not for reclassifying these T cards,regardless of any and all similarities.There are obvious reasons T213-1's are grouped with the T213-2's and T213-3's.Jefferson Burdick did not go into this blind.

If you want to change a Burdick designation to a card,why not go after changing the H801-7 Old Mill Cabinets????This is something I think everyone would agree on-that these examples should've been assigned a "T" code.

This is a great discussion-I love it!!But I do not want to see T206 turn into "T206-1,T206-2,etc.,etc.,.........it's already big enough guys!!Except for some certain T206 collectors who have been collecting T206's for decades,and have completed the set and many sub-sets within.........hhhmmmnnn.....

[ethicsprof]

I,too, have faith in Mr. Burdick.
But I also know from spending a career serving as editor of numerous published volumes written by distinguished figures in my own field, that the very best make errors and have no problem with the 'touch ups' which make their work better and sometimes even the best out there. Errata sections still are added to and adjusted to volumes written by the giants in all fields which show how indebted to them we are for their work, so much so that we give our scholarly lives to fully assimilating,honoring,and,yes, expanding their work. This is the honor that I think this thread is bestowing upon Mr. Burdick.
For me this thread is groundbreaking.
Darren has helped me to recognize a major weakness in my own approach which i am going to tackle for some time---when he suggests that there are links between issues that have yet to be discovered and that there may be a
'unifying theory' that makes some sense of the various moving parts we are sorting through. Ted's primacy of piedmont theory with trajectories through the various series and backs is a major illuminator in beginning to discern the 'unifying theory'. Stepping back and coming to grips with the reason for
the relative 'centrality' of various regions at various times,e.g. Darren's point re: louisiana and coupon,victory,red cross, etc. is a must in the 'unifying' task. Clearly delineating the various 'battles' between tobacco companies,candy companies, and the like with attention given to dating, geographical locations/factories particularly, and star baseball players who may well be critical to the discussion is a must in this 'unifying' task. And there are other elements which will arise 'in media res'.
Granted, it may well be that we will find that these pieces of the 'puzzle' are largely chaotic,haphazard pieces of little or limited design but i just don't think so...today.

all the best,
barry

[teetwoohsix]

You brought up a key question Barry-is it an error?Is it something overlooked?Or was it deliberate?

Just for the record,Darren,Ted Z,Frank,Barry & Barry,and too many to name have far more experience & knowledge than I do on these cards.But I do my homework also,as much as possible-I learn so much from you all-thank you.

I am not discounting anyone's theories or saying anyone's wrong.

I only speak my opinion,and try not to be offensive.

So,in my last two posts,I've brought up a couple of things-T205's with similarities to T202,and the H801-7's(which seem to belong in some way to the same group as T210's).I only use these as a couple of examples of how these cards/cabinets,etc. can somehow seem to be tied together,but have their own designations.......and there are plenty more(as Darren stated)........so where does it go and where does it end??

Thanks for the great thread,one of the best IMO.

Sincerely,Clayton

[ullmandds]

So you guys choose to have this discussion...one of my favorite topics, while i'm on vacation in SE Asia?!?!

Question...has any set's designation ever been changed from acc designation? I'm guessing not.

I re-cast my vote for coupon type I's inclusion in t206...as well as any other white borders with brown/black type...but would also be ok if all of the different backs were known as separate sets...but...this will never happen...T206 is an institution...perhaps the most well known of all baseball sets ever...it would confuse too many!

I have 3 of them, by the way...1 sgc 40...1 50...and 1 20...and I'd rank them betwen red hindu and lenox as well...great discussion though...perhaps I'll rejoin it in Bali...or in-between thai massages!

[tedzan]

Double post.

[iggyman]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...=STRK:MEDWX:IT

Ebay items like the above link, is what makes that flea market so darn unique, and is something that "Grand Salami" will have to somehow emulate if they are to be truly successful. So I'm browsing eBay, going through the usual piles and piles of "Sanford and Sons" quasi reprints. When all of a sudden, I encounter a T206 Grossman with a Sovereign back. No big deal, but I look at the insides and........wait a minute......this auction is actually for a T213-1 Grossman, and the opening bid is only $49.99 bucks!!! No way! Holy heck! So I put in a snipe and hope for the best..............Alas, never the bride always the bridesmaid.

Lovely Day...

[drdduet]

Lucky I didn't see it!