T205 A Latham or W.A. Latham
 

I just got this back from grading and was scanning it to add to my pic catalog of T205's I have. I thought at first that it was a mark on the scanner or case but I looked closer to find the faintest W and the period before the A. I pulled out my other A. Latham and it has not a single mark like this nor does any others I could find.

Can anyone supply me with a pic of an A Latham with the same markings or is this a misprinted W.A.Latham???

http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/6239/scan0093m.jpg
http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/5503/scan0095.jpg

I am looking for pics of A.Latham backs. Any and all for comparison to the Honest back.

Interesting...

I do know these were printed with movable type.

So, two theories...first one is that the W. broke on the type face. It happened a couple of times on the T206 set with the front lettering. So this might cause a ghost to appear before the W. was removed from the box.

Theory #2 is that someone tried to add or remove the w. later on to cash in on the rarity (which there really is none).

I have to say that the W.A. Latham is seen with less back advertising but the numbers of samples are close. I would say that the W.A. card is about 1 1/2 to 2 times as rare as the A. Latham card.

Joshua

Curious to see any other examples of this card with a high res. scan of the HLC back.

With movable type, it could shift during the printing process. And the printers could shift it back where it belonged. This faint 'W' card could be from where that letter had worked a bit loose, but still faintly transferred a bit of ink. Evidently it eventually shifted to where it didn't strike the paper at all, or it broke and wasn't replaced. That faint 'W' looks complete, just faint, so it doesn't look broken to me. So I think it shifted, but didn't break.

Looks like an M to me.

Is it true that the W.A. version is only found on Sweet Cap. Backs. The SGC pop report has many listings but only one labeled W.A.

I called them today and they want to see the card again. Want to make sure it is not a stray type error. Even after seeing pics of it. I hope so cause that would make it the W.A. version hopefully.

It is a upsidedown W. After looking under the loupe and a better light you can see the outline. The W is upside down!!!

Now what. Is it still a W.A. Latham or a new variation M.A. Latham:D

Do you think it will qualify for the 3rd line of type as an misprint or Error??

I would just be happy with the W.A. version but I have to ask.

Perhaps you've found the reason for the variation?

Doesn't there have to be others found for it to be considered a variation? Also a corrected version? What do you need to make a card a variation?

Its a special card but I don't think its that special. Maybe I am wrong though. I need more pics of other Lathams for comparison.

I assure you, there are several A Latham's and W A Latham's.

As far as I know, I have documented the following backs for the Latham cards.

W.A. comes with Polar Bear and Sweet Cap Red Fact. 42.
A. comes with Cycle, Drum, Honest Long Cut, Piedmont Fact. 25, Polar Bear and Sovereign.

Joshua

My A. Latham is a Polar Bear back and it does not have a period in front.

Matt I am quite aware of the amount of W.A. and A. Lathams out there. I guess I thought you were talking about the W being upside down. There would have to be more found to be considered a variation, and also a corrected version.

Josh the card is going to SGC this week hopefully for them to review it again. I hope to be able to have you add it to your list as a W.A. HLC back.

I am so curious to what the future holds and the other discoveries that are going to be made in the hobby. :)

Joshua,

I have seen a Broad Leaf as well on A. Latham, but have never seen the Polar Bear for W.A - thanks for the info...

Ed