REA reveals a 24 year mystery....the PIEDMONT Plank

tedzan · #1 05-03-2009, 02:46 PM

When the famous "Gretzky" PSA8 T206 Wagner in its raw state was being shopped around at the Willow Grove
Philly Show, rumor had it that the Plank was on the same sheet as this Wagner. I well recall this rumor, since I
never bought into the old myth that the T206 Plank was short-printed because its "printing plates were broken".
My theory in the early '80s was that Plank & Wagner were printed on the same sheet and when American Litho.
had to discard the Wagner's....the Plank's were discarded along with the Wagner's. This seemed common sense
to me, since it was believed that the same number of T206 Plank's and Wagner's existed....approx. 50-75 cards
of each.

However, what puzzled many of us "dinosaurs" in the hobby was....where are the PIEDMONT Plank's ? If you re-
call, the PSA8 Wagner has a PIEDMONT 150 back. So, 24 years later, we now know that the old rumor was true.
Good old Charlie Conlon owned the PIEDMONT Plank that was believed to be on the same sheet as the Wagner.

And, what a beauty it is. I thought it would have sold for more than $95K. The fact that it is graded Authentic
is immaterial. This Plank card is absolutely the most unique T206 in the hobby, as there is NO other known full-
color Plank with a PIEDMONT back. All 50-100 Plank cards have the following three SWEET CAPORAL backs......

...........Factory 30............................Factory 25........................................Factory 30
[linked image]

Thank you Rob Lifson for a really great auction....if not one of the best.

Also....did one of our Net54 members win it ?

TED Z

FrankWakefield · #2 05-03-2009, 03:28 PM

Great post, Ted.

And a 'pulled' plate makes more sense than a broken plate. Thanks.

Leon · #3 05-03-2009, 03:34 PM

One of our members did win it but I am not at liberty to say who....

e107collector · #4 05-03-2009, 03:44 PM

I agree with Ted, I thought it would've gone higher in price than it did.

I find it interesting that if this was the Gretzky Wagner mate, why did this card get an authentic grade, but the Wagner got an "8?" They were cut from the same sheet, and graded by the same company. Just my 2 cents.

Doug · #5 05-03-2009, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by e107collector

I agree with Ted, I thought it would've gone higher in price than it did.

I find it interesting that if this was the Gretzky Wagner mate, why did this card get an authentic grade, but the Wagner got an "8?" They were cut from the same sheet, and graded by the same company. Just my 2 cents.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who was wondering the same thing.

cfc1909 · #6 05-03-2009, 04:01 PM

great info Ted-wish I was the board member who won it

benjulmag · #7 05-03-2009, 04:06 PM

Ted,

So I'm clear, are you saying the scarcity of the Plank is because that card "reluctantly" had to be pulled when the Wagner was?

If so, respectfully that raises issues with me. You have in a previous thread made a persuasive argument that the absence/scarcity of various Philadelphia AL team members (Collins (only one pose-excluding the proof), Coombs, Mack, Plank) might be because of business conflicts/loyalties Connie Mack had between caramel and tobacco interests. That made a lot of sense to me. If in fact the only reason Plank was pulled was because of issues Wagner alone had, it makes no sense to me, given Planks significant promenance at the time, why another plate wouldn't be created with his image. After all, T206's were manufactured for two years. Seems to me that if Plank had no issues with his image being used, prudent business practice would literally compel his image be used to sell cigarettes. Philadephia is a major market.

FrankWakefield · #8 05-03-2009, 04:21 PM

I can see that if Wagner is whining about his image being used without compensation, and about the same time some of the Athletics players have raised the issue of the use of their image because of their caramel company loyalties or at the request of their owner, then it seems plausible that American Litho would pull the plate that had Wagner and Plank, thereby ridding themselves of two problems. So it still seems consistent to me.

Mark · #9 05-03-2009, 04:25 PM

Frank
Remind me what evidence we have that Honus Wagner was whining about his image being used without compensation.
Mark

(quick reply test)

FrankWakefield · #10 05-03-2009, 04:37 PM

My recollection is that Olbermann had an article somewhere about it, and had language from an old issue of TSN about it. My understanding is that Wagner wanted compensation, or more compensation, and American Litho decided to not pay more, halting production of his cards instead.

This is talks a bit about it, down in there a ways...

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/trea...utont005.shtml

This has a bit more.... Although this article is incorrect about there being 54 major leaguers and 76 Hall of Famers...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honus_Wagner

White Borders · #11 05-03-2009, 04:43 PM

Hi Ted,

I'd be interested in getting your thots on which other players might have been on this Wagner / Plank plate (or was it actually a stone)?

Best Regards,
Craig

tedzan · #12 05-03-2009, 05:08 PM

Your point is....in the form of a question....is worth more than just your 2 cents. It is the "million $$$$$$$ question"....
that should be on every thinking-hobbyist's mind.

However, I will not go there ! ?

TED Z

e107collector · #13 05-03-2009, 05:13 PM

Ted, you said that this Plank is the only known full color example of a Piedmont Plank.

Wasn't there another example with the entire right border missing about 10 years ago? I could be wrong, but I will search my older catalogs to verify.

Mark · #14 05-03-2009, 05:14 PM

Frank
In my opinion, there is no evidence that he wanted more money for the use of his image. Yes, he lent his image to a cigar. But most little kids were not smoking cigars or chewing tobacco back then. But like now some kids smoked cigarettes. As the Wagner family has always told it, he objected to kids buying cigarettes to get his picture. Look at what contemporaries like Tommy Leach say about Wagner's sincere love of children in the Glory of Their Times. I think the theory that Olberman is circulating is a little cynical.
Mark

FrankWakefield · #15 05-03-2009, 05:22 PM

I never mentioned tobacco... so you don't get to post that as if I did, then explain why it is wrong.

What I did say was that Wagner was whining about the money. And that's what it's always about.

Rob D. · #16 05-03-2009, 05:27 PM

Mark,

Kindly stop requesting facts and please settle for speculation. It'll be a lot easier that way. Trust me.

barrysloate · #17 05-03-2009, 05:28 PM

Of course of interest to me, as cited by a few posters above, is how the Wagner got graded a PSA 8. Since PSA correctly assigned an Authentic grade to the Plank, would they care to explain the grade for the Wagner. They are either both high grade or both Authentic; a split decision makes no sense.

And while this topic has been discussed ad nauseum in the past, having this Plank surface certainly sheds new light on the discussion.

Brian Weisner · #18 05-03-2009, 05:39 PM

Hi Guys,
Yes, this is the second Piedmont Plank.... Halper had one with a "white" background that was trimmed that has been sold a few times...

Be well Brian

FrankWakefield · #19 05-03-2009, 05:44 PM

Here's another link that is a bit about it.

Rob D you don't need to read the link.

http://infielddirt.sportscollectorsd...ase+Card+.aspx

barrysloate · #20 05-03-2009, 05:51 PM

Halper's Plank was missing a color pass, and was hand cut. It had the look of printer's scrap.

e107collector · #21 05-03-2009, 05:51 PM

Here is the auction description from the 1997 REA auction, Lot #91

plank_piedmont0001.jpg

tedzan · #22 05-03-2009, 05:51 PM

I'm not quite sure of your question......
"So I'm clear, are you saying the scarcity of the Plank is because that card "reluctantly" had to be
pulled when the Wagner was?"

And, perhaps I wasn't clear when I said that the Plank cards were "discarded" along with the Wagner
cards.

When American Litho. printed the first batch of their PIEDMONT 150 T206's, they were on small sheets.
I read somewhere that their printing press had only a 19-inch (wide) track. They printed many 100's of
sheets which included the major BB stars of the 1908 season (Cubs, Giants, Tigers, including Plank and
Wagner). When they were told to scrap the Wagner cards, they took all the remaining uncut sheets and
discarded the entire sheets. I cannot picture them going to the trouble of scissor-cutting the Wagner's;
and, issuing the remaining cards on these sheets.

There are T206 Subjects in that 150 series that are tougher to find (of course not as tough as Plank or
Wagner). Guys like Burch, M. Brown, Donlin, Evers, Larry Doyle, Reulbach and Schulte that perhaps were
on those sheets.

Now for your 2nd point of reminding me of my more recent theory regarding the possible player rights con-
flict between American Caramel and American Litho. with respect to the Philadelphia A's players. It is still
a valid one....however, I'm mystified to explain how all those SWEET CAPORAL's were issued of Plank ? ?

TED Z

Exhibitman · #23 05-03-2009, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Of course of interest to me, as cited by a few posters above, is how the Wagner got graded a PSA 8. Since PSA correctly assigned an Authentic grade to the Plank, would they care to explain the grade for the Wagner. They are either both high grade or both Authentic; a split decision makes no sense.

It's all about the Benjamins--doesn't have to make sense as long as someone is buying.

Theoldprofessor · #24 05-03-2009, 05:59 PM

And who else do you suppose was on the sheet? There aren't any other T206s for which only 75-100 examples are known. (Demmitt & O'Hara? Don't know how many are out there, but in any case we know why they're so scarce.) So Honus gets ticked off at tobacco and his sheet, which also contains Plank, is pulled, and everybody but Plank is reprinted elsewhere? Just asking.

Bob

Theoldprofessor · #25 05-03-2009, 06:02 PM

Ted;

Thanks. I was writing when you were posting.

Bob

tedzan · #26 05-03-2009, 06:43 PM

Hey guys.....correct me if I'm wrong.....the PSA8 Wagner was the very first card graded by PSA.

The Authentic Plank was recently graded by PSA.

....Could it be, that PSA's grading practices are becoming stricter, after all these years ?....

benjulmag · #27 05-03-2009, 06:45 PM

Ted,

First, to identify myself, benjulmag is your buddy Corey. I'm still adjusting to this new forum which doesn't have a separate place to post your name (Leon, are you listening?

)

Second, I hear what you're saying and, as is always the case with your points, there is much merit to them. I'm just still having issues with Piedmont Wagners and Piedmont Planks. To my knowledge, none are known with original factory cuts. I recognize I'm in the extreme minority with what I'm about to say, but I for one cannot entirely discount what Bill Heitman said on this board some time ago--that in the early 1950's professional printers who had access to original t206 plates made repro cards, including Wagner. Was Heitman hallucinating when he said that? Perhaps. But what if he wasn't? It seems to me that IF someone were to do that, and did so with the intent not to deceive, he/she would intentionally use a different back than the cards were known to be issued in. I for one when I look at the Conlon Piedmont Plank just sold by REA, or the Gretzky Wagner, can't help but notice that they look different (sharper/more colorful) than the Sweet Caporal Planks/Wagners. Yes, that could be because different factories had different printing methodolgies. But maybe it goes beyond that.

But putting that aside, what Barry says is dead on correct. IMO the OVERWHELMING sentiment is that neither the Gretzky Wagner nor the Conlon Plank was issued in a cigarette pack, but were instead cut from a sheet. REGARDLESS what might or might not have been done to the Wagner after that point, the fact that they were cut from a sheet means that both should be graded the SAME way, either both 8's or both A's. I simply don't see how that point can be reasonably disputed. The fact that one is an 8 (and therefore has a purported market value substantially more than the next highest example) while the other is an A (with a market value substantially less than the highest known example) makes no sense and is as good an example as any of how form rules over substance. To go further, does anybody really think that if the Gretzky Wagner was submitted today to PSA (in the same manner as REA recently submitted to them the Conlon Plank), the card would come back anything other than an "A"? Yet because the submission was done years ago at the time of PSA's founding, somehow that 8 has become etched in stone, regardless of the blatant inconsistencies/contradictions that creates.

One of the items in my collection is a final-production-run E93 sheet. The Cobb is in the middle of sheet and (to the naked eye at least) is perfect front and back. Yet if I were to have that card professionally cut with perfect centering/dimensions, it would grade an "A". How can that be while at the same time the most valuable/publicized card in our hobby grades an 8?

tedzan · #28 05-03-2009, 07:00 PM

There's a lot of us here that share your....shall I say....skepticism regarding these two cards.

You cited Heitman and one of his "strange" comments. Anyhow, do you recall a time when he chimed
in and told us his first hand knowledge of the PSA grading of the Wagner ?

I tried to find Bill's comments, using the SEARCH feature here; however, this feature does not appear
to function as well as it did in the old Net54.

TED Z

Jim VB · #29 05-03-2009, 07:13 PM

Corey,

Go to your profile page and fill out whatever information you're willing to share. One of the options is "Real Name." If you fill in that field, it will appear in all your posts (as it does with Frank Wakefield, above, under his blue, highlighted name.)

Adam · #30 05-03-2009, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Ted,

First, to identify myself, benjulmag is your buddy Corey. I'm still adjusting to this new forum which doesn't have a separate place to post your name (Leon, are you listening?

)

Go to user CP, then edit my details, then real name.

wonkaticket · #31 05-03-2009, 07:50 PM

May or may have not been said but to be clear there are (2) other Piedmont 150 Planks.

Both came from the Halper Collection and both are handcut like the current one in REA.

Glad to hear a fellow Board Member won! I hung in as long as I could...

Here are the other Planks...

wonkaticket · #32 05-03-2009, 07:55 PM

Also I'm not one for hobby legend, but I do find it interesting that there seem to be many more 350 subject Planks that come up vs. 150 subject Planks.

And the visual diff. between that of a 150 and 350 is night and day. 350's always look really bad compared to 150's a real printing change per say. Who knows maybe that is a clue to a printing issue of some sort.....

jmk59 · #33 05-03-2009, 08:18 PM

I thought the REA lot description for the Plank was a masterful display of tiptoeing around all of these issues.

I don't have it open in front of me, but it vaguely mentioned the early days of grading in which there wasn't as much focus on alterations and whether hand cut from a sheet was the same as trimmed. It also talked generically about printer's sheets.

I thought they went gracefully and perfectly right up to the line of saying "Look. These were both cut from the same sheet and should both be graded Auth by current standards." without actually saying it. They just went on poetically about the days of yore in cards and grading and sheets and Wagners and Planks.

Great job by someone writing that description.

J

Jim VB · #34 05-03-2009, 08:36 PM

Truth is PSA has had two shots (at least) at the Gretzky Wagner. As Ted mentioned it is the first card they graded and has a serial number of 00000001. But it must have been resubmitted later for re-labeling, because it was tagged as "McNall/Gretzky".

I know that for a re-holdering/re-labeling PSA doesn't necessarily do a re-grading, but you would think, with the card in question, they might look at it again.

sreader3 · #35 05-03-2009, 08:56 PM

Hi Ted,

I'm having trouble finding the email I have with your phone #.

Please email me w/ your #.

Thanks.

Scot

Peter_Spaeth · #36 05-03-2009, 09:01 PM

"And in a 2005 interview, Bill Hughes, a member of the grading service team that issued the card's high grade - Professional Sports Authenticator gave it a PSA 8 on a scale of 1-10 - admitted he knew the card had been cut from a sheet when he graded it.

"The card is so outstanding, it would have been sacrilegious to call that card trimmed and completely devalue it," Hughes explained."

ethicsprof · #37 05-03-2009, 09:36 PM

with all due respect to Mr. Hughes, as much as i love T206s, i must say that
avoiding telling the truth about this card so as to avoid being sacrilegious
is specious at best. furthermore, telling the truth would never devalue the card, much in the same vein TRex spoke of the 150 Pied. Plank. Its inestimable value, even priceless value, is known in the hearts of collectors
for its rarity and aesthetics.

great discussions.

best,

barry

E93 · #38 05-03-2009, 10:41 PM

I am always surprised when the question of why the Wagner is rare comes up. It has been well known for years, via documentation in a period Sporting News interview with Wagner, that the reason he was withdrawn was because he did not want to support kids buying cigarettes to get baseball pictures.
JimB

benjulmag · #39 05-04-2009, 04:40 AM

"with all due respect to Mr. Hughes, as much as i love T206s, i must say that
avoiding telling the truth about this card so as to avoid being sacrilegious
is specious at best. furthermore, telling the truth would never devalue the card, much in the same vein TRex spoke of the 150 Pied. Plank. Its inestimable value, even priceless value, is known in the hearts of collectors
for its rarity and aesthetics. "

The Gretzky Wagner last changed hands for a reported $2.8 million. I'm having a hard time believing that if the grade was changed to an "A" it would transact for anything close to that.

BTW, in the same manner that I got a quick lesson how to display my name, can somebody tell me how to use the quote feature so as to show a quote set off in its own box with the person who said it identified?

barrysloate · #40 05-04-2009, 05:12 AM

For point of reference, the Conlon Plank that was just sold visually looks to be about a 7 (subjective of course). But based on the selling price, it went in the range of about a 4.5 or 5.0. Clearly, the Authentic grade greatly affected the selling price.

Peter_Spaeth · #41 05-04-2009, 05:21 AM

In my opinion, if the card is sheet cut, trimmed, or sheet cut AND trimmed (one version of the story goes this way), and it initially was rejected by PSA and eventually slabbed Authentic when they started doing that, there is not a chance it would have sold anywhere near where it sold. And I very much doubt it would have its current iconic status.

toppcat · #42 05-04-2009, 05:43 AM

Corey, even if you had the plates how would you match the ink? Especially on the backs, where it would be easier to see a single color not matching what had been printed 40 years prior. What of the card stock? I believe the reprint theory is just hearsay and old hobby legend.

Now, combining the Olbermann first chase card theory and Ted's pulled sheet theory, that is another story and I would like to hear more on that if it's possible.

philliesphan · #43 05-04-2009, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim VB

Truth is PSA has had two shots (at least) at the Gretzky Wagner. As Ted mentioned it is the first card they graded and has a serial number of 00000001. But it must have been resubmitted later for re-labeling, because it was tagged as "McNall/Gretzky".

I know that for a re-holdering/re-labeling PSA doesn't necessarily do a re-grading, but you would think, with the card in question, they might look at it again.

Jim -- PSA has reholdered the Wagner a number of times. I know that there is a picture of Brian S. with the card reholdered with his name on the pedigree. I believe he ultimately said that it didn't look right that way and had it changed back to the Gretzky label.

m

e107collector · #44 05-04-2009, 06:25 AM

Guys, please see my attached picture on page 3 regarding another Piedmont Plank that REA had in their 1997 auction. It has brilliant color, but is missing the right border. It is different than the Halper examples that have been discussed. It has the same type of "odd" cut on the bottom left border that just sold in REA's auction 2 days ago.

Exhibitman · #45 05-04-2009, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toppcat

Now, combining the Olbermann first chase card theory ... .

The chase card idea is very interesting. I believe that ATC may have done some chase cards. The T220 boxing set is found with white or silver borders. Only 1/2 of the set is known in silver. Of those, one card (Mike Donovan) has only 1 known example. My hunch is that this was a chase card and that if an ad medium ever appears we may find some sort of contest. Also, isn't there a missing T227 card (the set advertises 25 but I've been told that no one can seem to checklist more than 24)?

bond73 · #46 05-04-2009, 07:03 AM

There are a lot more Plank with SC350 Subject f30 backs than SC150 Subject f30 back but I have NEVER seen a Plank SC150 with f25 back.

Ted, are you sure Plank with SC150 f25 exist?

tedzan · #47 05-04-2009, 07:04 AM

E107

Thanks for posting this Piedmont Plank (I enlarged your scan. Hope that's fine with you). I knew that there were more
Piedmont Planks; but, I was unaware of this one. I doubt if this Plank was ever in a Piedmont pack. So far, we haven't
yet seen a Factory cut Piedmont Plank that could have been in a Piedmont Cigarette pack.

It would be nice to know how many Piedmont 150 Wagner's exist ? We could then make a correlation as to how many
Piedmont Plank's might be out there ? ?

TED Z

tedzan · #48 05-04-2009, 07:10 AM

T206 Plank's with a Sweet Cap 150 Factory 25 back have been confirmed. In fact, a Net54 member has one.

TED Z

Vintageclout · #49 05-04-2009, 07:31 AM

Intersting concept and it certainly makes sense. Additional "food for thought".....has anyone entertained the possibility that BOTH Plank and Wagner had their cards removed from circulation considering that there are NO T201, T202 and T205 Planks???? While there are T204 Ramly Plank's, there are not a significant number of them in circulation and the Ramly was, likewise, issued in 1909. Could Plank have also "pulled the plug" on his Ramly issue as well??? No one can really know for sure but is seems a huge coincidence that Plank is absent on all other MAJOR tobacco issues (other than the 1909 Ramly)! Two other thoughts....

1) I am also wondering if the "removed T206 sheet" applies, has anyone considered the rarity of the other T206 cards on that particular sheet?

2) If Plank, indeed, refused to have his image use to advertise "post" 1909 tobacco cards.....what does that say about the desirability of the T204 Plank?

Best Regards,
Joe T.

Jim VB · #50 05-04-2009, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by benjulmag

BTW, in the same manner that I got a quick lesson how to display my name, can somebody tell me how to use the quote feature so as to show a quote set off in its own box with the person who said it identified?

On the lower, right hand side of every post is a "Quote" icon. Click it and it puts the entire post in your reply. You can edit out the parts you don't want. Just leave the leading and trailing bracketed info.