NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. When you click on links to eBay on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
ebay GSB
T206s on eBay
Babe Ruth Cards on eBay
t206 Ty Cobb on eBay
Ty Cobb Cards on eBay
Lou Gehrig Cards on eBay
Baseball T201-T217 on eBay
Baseball E90-E107 on eBay
T205 Cards on eBay
Baseball Postcards on eBay
Goudey Cards on eBay
Baseball Memorabilia on eBay
Baseball Exhibit Cards on eBay
Baseball Strip Cards on eBay
Baseball Baking Cards on eBay
Sporting News Cards on eBay
Play Ball Cards on eBay
Joe DiMaggio Cards on eBay
Mickey Mantle Cards on eBay
Bowman 1951-1955 on eBay
Football Cards on eBay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 09-06-2006, 05:25 AM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: David Seaborn

Jay- just wanted to say I agree with you on the expansion of Burdick's work. What he did was an incredible labor of love, but it needs to be updated to be relevant. This certainly does not diminish what he did and I believe he would be all for the continued updating of the baseball cards systematics.

Gil- There are several of us who email regularly and have sat back and lurked on this so far. I, for one, appreciate you picking up the ball on this and find it quite interesting (and important). I'll send an email to you soon.

Leon- Just another thread that illustrates why this board is the best thing around!

Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 09-06-2006, 06:05 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

Jay - my thinking was going in just the opposite direction. When I look at all of the different sets which are derivatives of the e121s, I think that it would be way simpler and easier to understand if they were all under the e121 umbrella, as subsets.

Further, although we may achieve support from many quarters to put names (numbers) on currently uncataloged sets; we may meet resistence to any other changes from all quarters. I am therefore uncertain whether the possible difficulty in the resultant sale of the concept of ACC changes justifies upfront effort. It may be more prudent to assess the feelings of other board members, prior to expending much effort in that direction. Because if you can't sell it here, you are really biting off a tuff one.

Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 09-06-2006, 06:47 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: jay behrens

I will agree, if nothing else, the UNCs need numbers. The rest is just nit picking and not that big of a deal.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 09-06-2006, 07:00 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Brian Goldner

That the ACC could use some tweaking, but this invites the question:

Tell me: exactly who has the authority to make changes, to such a sacred body of work??

J.R. Burdick devoted much of his life to this, and to suggest that a few people on a messageboard could informally decide that they are going to make changes to such a work, IMO is not showing proper respect for the master historian, regardless of whether such changes are warranted.

My suggestion is consultation with the hobby's living elders, about what additions and/or changes could be proposed, and forming a committee of prominant collectors, to formally present such changes for consideration. The National Convention would be a logical place for this to occur.

To consider changing/updating something that one man devoted his life to, would require the blessing of the elders, as well as the blessing of the vast majority of contemporary vintage collectors. It must be done with care, and respect for our predecessors.

Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 09-06-2006, 07:00 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: steve f

ut ohh. I had better dump my 1924 W-UNC's before they become 1926 W***'s

Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 09-06-2006, 07:42 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: jay behrens

Brian, hate to burst your bubble, but if the hobby legends really cared about making changes to the ACC, they would have done so long ago. As Leon has pointed out, most people, including hobby verterans, just don't care. Besides, who is to say who is worthy and who isn't to make these changes? It's not like this message board is populated with a bunch of mindless drones like over at the CU board. You have much of teh cream of the hobby lurking or posting here, including the legends you allude to, so it's not like this little endevore is going on completely unnoticed. If these legends want to be involved, there is nothing to stop them. They can even do so privately as we all have email addresses we can be contacted at.

It's not like we are revamping the whole ACC. We are just going after the baseball cards. I've never done a tabulation, but I'd guess that baseball cards are 20% or less of the book. Saying the ACC is sacred is almost as bad as saying Newtonian physics shouldn't be overturned even there is new evidence to make changes to it. we are doing a disserves to Burdick by NOT updating his lifes work, then leaving it as he left it.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 09-06-2006, 07:52 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

I sure hope that my comments are not viewed as blasphemy.

Edited again to state: I don't get it, this is only cards.

But I guess, Jay, this is a part of the resistence which I was referring to.

And what Brian has shared with us is not an isolated viewpoint. For example to a greater or lesser extent, I think that Leon feels similarly.

Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 09-06-2006, 09:23 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Brian Goldner

You're missing my point.

Read my original post again.
I didn't say that was against an updated version of the ACC.

What i did say is that there is a right way to approach it, and a wrong way, as well.

This messageboard can lay the groundwork for an updated version, but decisions such as these, must still be made by committee, in a format similar to what i suggested in my earlier post.

I realize that a few people want to grab the ball and run with it, but i'm sorry, it's just not yours or my ball to grab and run with.

I am not questioning anyone's hobby credentials here, but only by committee, would we have Burdick's credentials, or the authority to bring about such change.

Would Burdick want his work to be updated?

My guess is: conditionally yes, but only under a set of circumstances similar, to what i have described.

I'm just saying, that a consensus must be built, in order for meaningful change to occur.



Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 09-06-2006, 11:05 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: jay behrens

Aren't we a defacto committee? As I said before, what makes "legendary" collector/dealers any better to do the job than those of us that are truely interested in doing this? They certainly don't have any interest otherwise this would have happened years ago.

Waiting until the National or some other show to form your proposed committee is a major waste of time. All of that work can be done here. I am sure that all these legendary people you are thinking of either read this board, or know someone that does. There really isn't much keeping them from getting involved right now if they want to. And who is going to determine who is worthy of being on this committee? Does Mr Mint get to be on it, because he certainly is a hobby legend.

Your wanting to set up committees, etc reminds me of the ad for RBS where the guy is sinking in quicksand and everyone stands around talking about forming committees and action groups but not actually doing anything to get the job done.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 09-07-2006, 06:18 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

Brian: Please correct me where I am wrong.
It is my understanding that we are proceeding in a committee format. Specifically, I have accepted the responsibility for the initial assembly of the bulk of the set identification necessary to be compiled in order to address the work scope.
Upon completion of this effort (Revision 0 is complete) it will be posted somewhere to be investigated by all. The intent of this posting is to seek input regarding:
- which of the sets are already ACC designated
- which sets were overlooked in my tabulation
- which sets should be combined
- which should be identified seperately
- which set groupings should also be included (foreign, cloth or other materials of construction, advertising trade cards, others
- what else should be done
- what else should be done differently

Once this group effort is complete, I will retabulate the sets, add proposed ACC designations, and repost the "pre-final" revision for final comments, corrections and other adjustments.

Upon posting of the final configuration for this phase of our effort, discussion of how to present the labor of our love, and identification of who it should be presented to will establish the recommended course of action. At that time, someone or several individuals hopefully will pick up those balls.

Any effort to change the existing ACC, if it proceeds at all, could proceed on a different course.

This is my view of what we are doing. I could be alone on this, because as you aptly point out, we have not clearly defined our approach.

I am open to alternate paths, so long as they terminate at the same destination. Please everyone cite the path you prefer that we take.

I am currently seeking a location to post the information (which is in Word format). It does not come out well, if I post it in this thread. If no location is forthcoming, I will seek out the card pricing utility operators, to determine if they will host the posting. Or I will come up with a Geocities page.

ItsOnlyGil

Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 09-07-2006, 10:32 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Brian Goldner

Jay- if you and a few others are truly interested in pursuing this, may i suggest a less aggressive approach.

Coming on too strong, will not convince those who are on the fence, to support your cause.
It will only give them cold feet.

Quicksand?
My goodness, what's the rush?

Gil- i am a believer that this kind of undertaking, is better accomplished face to face, rather than by messageboard and e-mail communications.
However, i do understand that this board and e-mail, would lay the groundwork for such a task.

Also, it has been mentioned in many threads, about many people being hesitant to offer their opinion (about almost any topic) on this board.
That would most certainly apply in this instance.

Perhaps individual, in-person meetings with influential hobbyists, would offer a better idea of what many people might be thinking.

Ultimately, before any person or small group tries to take the bull by the horns, at least 2 questions must be answered:

1)Just exactly who has the right, the authority AND the credentials to update the work of Jefferson R. Burdick?

and

2)If a person or committee was granted the right and authority, and possessed the necessary credentials, would the hobby embrace the proposed, updated edition?

I can't answer these questions, nor can you.

The hobby must answer them, and such people must be encountered, in a setting in which they are comfortable to speak their minds.

IMO, that place is not here.

Another issue that would have to be addressed: in the event that a person or group were to be granted the right & authority to update the ACC, what updating might be considered permissable, and what should be considered off-limits?

I will offer an opinion on this issue, later in the thread.


Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 09-07-2006, 11:18 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: jay behrens

1)Just exactly who has the right, the authority AND the credentials to update the work of Jefferson R. Burdick?

Just exactly who has the right to DETERMINE who has the right, authority and credentials to update the ACC? Maybe we need a committee to determine that too?

and

2)If a person or committee was granted the right and authority, and possessed the necessary credentials, would the hobby embrace the proposed, updated edition?

All you can do is make the effort. No one has bothered before, so who knows, but if you go in with a defeatist attitude, then you are already defeated.

I see no need for face to face meetings. There is no information that needs to conveyed in that manner. If that were one of the requirements, then you are limiting the number of people that can particiapte even more than you think this board restricts participation. How many people are are willing to spend money, out of pocket to travel for a face to face meeting? Yes, most "important" people go tot he National, but that is one show a year. One face to face meeting is not going to make a difference.

You say that people are shy about posting here. There is no requirement to post here. My email address and everyone else contributing here is available. If they don't want to post but are interested, all they have to do is email one of us.

The rush is that there are people interested in moving this forward. Your ideas would only bog it down, causing people to lose interest. Just imagine trying to maintian momentum for this until the National next year. It won't happen.

Plain and simple, you are making this out to be much more complicated than it really is.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 09-08-2006, 05:26 AM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

Brian: I am certain that you speak for many who value thought and reflection as a prelude to action. I can not say that I am not of that ilk.

However, this subject has been discussed before on this board, and prior to that discussion, many viewed the quantity of uncataloged cards increasing. I have undertook the task of assembling a list of these cards from several sources. I have no doubt that this list is incomplete.

Imho, if we continue to turn up card sets without cataloging them, sets will possibly become lost to our awareness, and identifying those which are not lost will be cumbersome and unclear.

Precedent has been set by several persons relating to cataloging needed sets. As fkw pointed out in this thread, trade cards have been organized to some extent, prior to that B.R. Sugar cataloged sets in his SCB, and I imagine others have done similarly.

We diverge on our interpretation of the task at hand, Brian. I see it as of benefit to the hobby. And I therefore conclude that it is my responsibility to do what little I can in that regard. At no point in time do I view my actions as a tresspass on the work which preceeded this effort, because it is not. The cataloging of uncataloged sets supplememts all which as previously been done.

I neither see this activity as a big deal, nor as my work. I view it as a collaborative effort of general benefit. As such we need no permission, and there is no hobby hierarchy anyway to seek permission from. I am uncertain regarding the identity of the elders of our hobby. Oh. I have met T-Rex, and he is indeed a hobby elder, actually, while Julie is on leave he is the elder statesman of our Forum, I believe. I am his junior by half a decade. But I really consider neither of us as hobby elders, and am curious who these individuals are, in your estimation.

I have to agree with Jay regarding dragging this thing out. The longer it takes in my estimation, the less likley we are to maintain momentum.

************************************************** ********
To that end:

If anyone is willing to host a list of card sets including set ID, estimated year of issue and #of cards in the set on their website, please respond by putting your e-mail address in this thread, and I will send our list to you.

************************************************** ******

No manipulation of the list is required. Just viewing of it.

If other approaches seem preferable, please advise me.

Gil

Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 09-08-2006, 08:36 AM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: jay behrens

Gil, I have web space where I can host the list. Just email the file to me.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 09-08-2006, 09:09 AM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Chad

Gil, Jay, get to work. If it's useful it will fly, if it's not, it won't. I appreciate elders as much as anyone, but all the UNC sets are a drag. I would encourage you guys to get the information out there. The ACC isn't a holy text. It isn't even an uncatlogued subset of a holy text. I say just freaking do it. It will be appreciated by many. Just fling it up on a website and ignore the resistance. Websites are cool, yo.

--Chad

Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 09-08-2006, 10:51 AM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Brian Goldner

With regard to updates, my opinion is relatively simple:

1)i have no problem with assigning catalogue numbers, to sets that haven't been previously catalogued,

2)in most instances, i wouldn't object to the designation of sub-types (under Burdick's original catalogue number), to the variety of sets that were lumped together, in the earlier editions.

3)What i would object to, would be the changing of any of Burdick's catalogue numbers, due to real or perceived errors in the original manuscript, or for any other reason thereof.

I just don't see it as wise course of action, to correct any of Burdick's real or perceived errors.

However, expanding upon Burdick's work, in theory, is an acceptable course of action.

Other considerations:

1)who owns the publishing rights to the ACC?
Nostalgia Press Inc.?
What are the legal ramifications, to such a venture?
Would attorney's have to enter into the equation?
Would rights have to be purchased?

2)under an assumption that rights need not be purchased, what if another small group forms, and decides that they are more knowledgable and better capitalized, and can do the job better than the original small group? Then what?

3)along with the notoriety of expanding such a work, comes responsibility.
That responsibility would entail the dealing with a publisher.
Enough copies must be purchased initially, to make it worth a publisher's while, to become part of the venture.
Once published, there is the responsibility of making certain that there enough copies printed, to accomodate everyone who might want one.
I'm sure that there are other things to consider here, as well.

Call it the dirty work, if you will.

In any event, i would recommend that all of the bases be covered, before jumping into this headfirst.








Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 09-08-2006, 11:00 AM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Chad

However, this information doesn't need to be published in a traditional sense. If Jay and Gil can post this stuff on the web and if they're willing to accept criticism and advice on their work in order to refine it and make it more acceptable to the majority of collectors--and there's no reason to think they aren't--then who cares if it makes it onto the carcass of a dead tree. As long as WE all know what's being referred to, the publisher can take a leap. In fact, this wouldn't be a bad feature to add to the Old Cardboard site. In fact, it would be an awesome feature to add.

I do agree that we don't need to reinvent the wheel as regards to current ACC designations. I imagine most of the UNC sets will fit under an already existing designation. If they don't, then go ahead and make one up and we'll all argue about it until we get some semblance of consensus. Fellas, the more I think about this, the more fun it sounds. It would be like the exceptional EPDG thread only moreso. Excellent!

--Chad

Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 09-08-2006, 04:08 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

Chad, as usual, we are on the same page on this subject. Specifically, I see no publication per se. However, if someone wants to include these efforts of Net54 in something which they write, I have no problem with that; I'm not sure how our owner feels about that though. I am not in the publication game, I am in the collect baseball cards game.

And Brian - you have raised some valid points, (or seemed to infer them). Specifically:
- one of the strengths of Net54 is the ability to draw upon the opinions of a diverse collecting base; representing persons of differing ages, financial orientation, backgrounds, and other differences
- there is really no urgency here, things have been awry for a while, we really won't lose momentum if we take a breather and allow some of our collector depth and breadth to chime in with their opinion
- we should be sure that our path is optimized before we charge ahead.

To that end, I will hold off any action for a few days to allow that breather - which I think is a good choice at this juncture.

And Jay, your hospitality in offering your site as a host for this joint effort is appreciated, and if Leon feels that he does not prefer the list posted here, I will certainly take you up on your offer.

Its Not Only Gil

Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 09-09-2006, 05:00 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: leon

I agree almost verbatim with Brian on the updates. I had a few conversations today, with respected members of our community, about this subject. I am all for updating the ACC and leaving the original work exactly the way it is. The Sports Collectors Bible, by Bert Sugar, is what I am thinking our work could emulate. I am researching his works now and believe that is a format I could handle and would generally be accepted. I would also like to get a thumbs up from some of the icons in the hobby, several of which I know, and several are board members. I also agree that there is no big rush on this....easy goes it.....so we'll see.....

Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 09-12-2006, 08:17 AM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

The emulation of the Sports Collectors Bible is a significantly expanded undertaking beyond the initially envisioned tabulation of the sets which are currently uncataloged. This view is due to the SCB including a list of the cards associated with each set (it also includes prices - which I imagine is not envisioned for incorporation).

Although such an endeavor would be worthwhile, and perhaps of long term value; the effort would ideally be dynamic, incorporating the capability of easily updating, as awareness of new cards and sets are presented. The best way, in my estimation, of maintaining the ability to easily implement changes to this new SCB, is to maintain control of the documentation.

As such, the information produced could remain in the possession of this Forum, available in the public domain, but maintained by us. A link to this element of our "library" could easily be offered (I guess).

Progress on the initial effort is under review by Jay, in the hopes that it can be adequately cleaned up to be worthy for initial presentation to this board. It is a stand alone compilation of information, not specifically designed as a supplement to any previously published listing.

Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 09-27-2006, 12:16 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: leon

In our topic about potentially doing an update to the ACC I have acquired #2 and #4 of Bert Sugar's "Sports Collectors Bible". It does in fact look like a supplement to the ACC with much more info given. It is also where our designations of "WG" for game card and "H998" for Western Playgrounds came from. As I read through the revisions I am sure I will catch many more "new designations" too. I have contacted several hobby experts, with more than 30 yrs of time in the hobby ea., and so far everyone is willing to back a project and even help a little if need be. In thinking about getting this project accepted I do believe we need a buy in from many of the hobby icons. I think we can get that. I also think that we need to define a goal. I have never felt good about changing anything in the ACC but adding to what is there. W600's are always going to be Sporting Life cabinets..even though they should be M600. There are many more examples but bless Jefferson's heart as he gave us the ABC's of card cataloguing. I have noticed that there is an expanded list of cards and prices too. I don't think we need to venture into the pricing areas as the SCB did. There are enough ways to ascertain those already. I just figured I would keep the subject alive. It will be slow going but we'll see...One last thing. It looks like Mr. Sugar was a jack of all trades and master of none. There are many stamp and bakery and other issues that he left as "unc". My plan would be to give them all acc-type numbers. We could denote them somehow too......best regards

Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 09-27-2006, 05:23 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

Yeah Leon, Sugar probably included prices because he wanted to sell books. I don't have a book in mind, simply a list.

However, the SCB (I only have #1) contains detail on each set. This detail is identification of each known card for each identified set. There is no way that I have most of that information, nor an idea how to obtain it, for those sets still outstanding.

With regard to my current status: I am in the process of combining two databases, one of which I fowarded to you and Jay for your perusal.

Considering your suggestion of goals for this effort, I recommend
- a determination of whether we want to identify the specific known cards for each set (like SCB) or to just tabulate sets (like ACC)
- an establishment of a timeline for completion of the tabulation phase. A target date.
- identification of a review process including volunteers who would clean up obvious errors and identify areas for further work, before presentation to our colleagues for comment, changes, etc.

I think that we are in agreement that the scope of work identified to be undertaken at this time does not include the changing of anything which has already been done. If at another date, it is viewed as desireable to implement changes to the listings in the ACC or in what we generate, that task can be addressed by others as they may see fit.

And Leon, certainly solicit participation and consultation from all sources of value. This effort was never intended to be mine nor yours. Its thrust as I saw it, was generated by our common need; precipitated by the hobby's prolonged inaction relating to our "newly identified" set cataloging.

Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 09-27-2006, 06:33 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: jay behrens

I'm a little hesitant to make changes such as w600s, etc but don't see and real probnlem with changing e92s to a e92-1, e92-2, etc format, same for m101-4/5s, but tthat one could get a bit messy and might best be left alone.

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 09-27-2006, 06:50 PM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default ACC designations

Posted By: leon

I wouldn't mind for E92's to be something like

E92-1 Dockman
E92-2 Crofts and Allen
E92-3 Nadja
F92-4 Crofts Cocoa (thought I would slip that one in)

regards

Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ACC modification Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 17 05-10-2007 12:15 AM
Need help on designations Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 1 12-31-2006 01:03 PM
Question re: "ACC Designations" Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 16 05-12-2005 08:49 AM
T206 Willis Overprint w/Two Factory Designations Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 6 02-27-2005 12:00 PM
What do the Factory designations on T cards actually mean? Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 4 06-24-2003 10:09 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:10 PM.


ebay GSB