1975 sspc
 

Often I have wondered why the 1975 SSPC set never seems to gain any value. The set has all the major stars but they never sell for much. The Brett and Yount are as cheap as it gets. What are other peoples thought on the set

I'm surprised it has the value it has. Was not licensed and is of poor quality. And for the purposes of honest disclosure, I do own a set. It's inexpensive, a part of hobby history, and just plain fun. Does everything have to come down to dollar value?

It has actually been determined to be a 1976 set, for what it's worth, that makes the Eckersley the only HOF Rookie Card in the set.

There are a handful of these sets out there-some are from '75 and I think some go into the late 70's but the main set is indeed 1976. I actually remember them being advertised in The Sporting News.

Sspc
 

I'm not too proud to ask....what is it ?

76 sspc
 

I acquired a complete set of 76 SSPC as part of a collection I acquired. Neat set but not something I wanted to hold onto. It was in great condition, NM-MT. So I listed on Ebay, I think it sold for about 12 bucks or so. Guess who bought it? Keith Olbermann. I shipped to his address in NYC. I think his user name was merkelsboner or something to that effect. Probably not a surprise to those who have watched him.

Keith was involved in the making of the set - as was Bob Laughlin. I always enjoyed the set, myself - there was really no full size set to compete with Topps back then, and I liked the pure card format. Yeah, some of the pictures weren't the best - I would have loved to have seen some action shots reminiscent of the Pee Wee Reese from the 1953 Bowman set it was likely in homage to. The makers got sued by Topps, as I recall. I think SSPC had obtained rights to produce and were going on the premise that since they weren't sold with gum Topps' monopoly didn't apply. I think in the final settlement SSPC was allowed to sell what inventory they had left but were not allowed to produce any more. SSPC did produce later sets that were sold as magazine and yearbook inserts.

Sspc
 

How were they packaged ? The Topps player contacts were only exclusive as to the sale of their images with gum or confections. The Fleer cookie issue ( 1963) and the Leaf marble issue ( 1960) were not done in by Topps litigation, but rather poor sales

Al-I believe the '76 was sold as a full set only-no packs.

Reviving a long dead thread but... this is correct. :)

This is also correct :)

I have always enjoyed this set also. Out of complete curiosity, would you be willing/able to divulge the print run of this set?

Just asked my father and he states it was ten thousand or less, but there was a second print run. I'm attempting to get more info on that from him :cool: .

Ok, the second printing was done years later and was illegal. Somehow the negatives were obtained from the printer and used to create the cards. No telling how many illegal sets were reprinted.

This is where the "Noland" error card came from, as when the original cards were being produced my father noticed the superfluous "d" and personally removed it from the printing plate ;) .

Thank you for the great info....if I can ask a few more questions, is there a way to tell which sets were from the original run versus the illegal run? Would this "Noland" Ryan error help to determine if the set was from the original 10k run or not, or is there another way? I have several sets, and I have noticed two of the sets have sporadic miscut cards....is it more likely that the MC cards were from the original set?
Thank you again!

Yes, the "Noland" error only appears in the illegal reprint sets. Other than that I'm not aware of another way to tell the sets apart. If you have both I would compare and see. It's been too long since I've seen a complete set :) .

Nearly every card in the set can be found with two differently cropped photos like this Brett (the gap above his cap), could that be from the illegal printing?

Wow, interesting. I'll try and get some more info on that :) .

I am down to needing the following cards for my set so if anyone has them for sale at a reasonable price let me know:


41 (Rose)
238 (Yount)
239 (Aaron)
425 (Hunter)
433 (Munson)
494 (Reggie Jackson)
593 (Noland Ryan CL)

Spoke to my father and he said it's hard to know. There may have been multiple printing plates where the borders were moved just slightly. Best bet is to compare one of the sets with the "Noland" error and compare the cards to those in a set without the error card. That way you can compare the borders and see if one set has one variation of the cropping, and the other set doesn't.

As far as production run of the "illegal" sets, a quick check on e-bay revealed more Nolan error cards than correct ones, I take that to mean that there are more "illegal" sets out there than "legal".

SSPC set
 

Back In the day, late 70's or so my brother and I were working on getting the entire SSPC set signed. A number of the players would not sign them as they stated they were not paid to appear on the cards. I remember Kent Tekulve being one of them. We thought they would look great signed as the front have nothing but the photo on it. Still like the set.

I also remember the sets being sold at Cooperstown by the store that had lots of TCMA material back then too.

That store is Baseball Nostalgia, in the Doubleday Field parking lot :cool: . Believe it or not it is still co-owned by my father and they still have a treasure trove of original TCMA items. I'm in Cooperstown every year for Induction Weekend and often speak to people who tell me BN is their favorite store in town. Many fond memories for me there :)

Yeah, That was it. Haven't been there in decades but remember it well.
At the time I thought it was cool that you could buy get stuff to get signed. I need to get back there. Man, the autograph memories we made were just great.

Reading this thread makes me think of a lot of questions regarding this set. One question I have is, is it true that the set wasn't licensed? Or, perhaps it was not licensed by MLBB but only by the Baseball Players Union? Another question that came to mind, if the set was illegal, how do you illegally reproduce an illegal set? Does someone still own the rights to the set? Maybe TCMA knows some of these answers.

1975 sspc
 

I have a couple of sets I put away in 75-76 They came in a white box with a brown green packing tape sealing the box. I can spot one of theses sets at a show from two aisles away :). Always liked this set as I felt someone needed to stand up to Topps because the quality of their cards was falling rapidly through the 70's. Topps bullied SSPC in court, but from the court rulings came the "gumless" baseball card sets from Donruss and Fleer in 1981.
I had a autograph experience similar to the previous post I was trying to get a 1975 SSPC Yankee set autographed and got a couple at my local mall Catfish etc. but at a card show( I think in 76 or 77) a player said he would not sign SSPC cards so I put the project down.
I may go out on ebay and buy one of the so called second printing sets and put together a list of variations. Anybody else interested? let me know we can compare notes.

J

http://i1107.photobucket.com/albums/...psb2157766.jpg

I looked up Rod Carew on comc and got the these four results. I was able to find other copies of each on ebay. The first one has a break in the border below the groin. The second has a break but it is to the right of Carew. There were two cards with a full border. The full bordered cards seem to have better coloring. They are also the most readily available graded on ebay. You'll notice that the shades of green print on the backs are also inconsistent. One seller on ebay with several of the Noland error had Carews that looked most like the 3rd one or full borders and a lighter green text.

It's an awesome set. To be honest I prefer it to my 1976 topps set (but not my 75 or 77). It is a great value IMO and a must have for any 1970s baseball collector

Found this article from Bob Laughlin's newsletter in 1976 - I imagine it would have been pretty disconcerting to get notice that you were being sued for a couple of million!

Continued...

Curious, is there an address label on those sets? If so, what does it say?

Thanks for posting that! :)

My brown box has on it:

TCMA
PO Box #2
Amawalk, MY 10501



I am guessing this contained one of the original 10K sets.

Is there a sales list or website anywhere for the store?

Unfortunately, there is not. I would give them a call: (607) 547-6051 .

Yup, that label certainly was our mailing address.

Screw Topps, if you ask me. They don't have a monopoly, as other companies can print baseball cards, but they might as well, since they alone have the licensing required to use the team logos. They release about 30 sets a year, and 27 of them are crap. They have the nerve to release T206 cards, and Turkey Reds, and Allen & Ginter, and Heritage, which is basically a rehashing of one of their classic sets with new players. They have zero creativity. And this BS they pulled with the Kris Bryant Bowman Chrome prospect autos. They pushed their 2014 Chrome, and Kris Bryant's auto was the big ticket item. So people lined up to buy cases and cases of this stuff, and they got their Kris Bryant 2014 Bowman Chrome prospect autographs, and the prices went through the roof. Only, then their next product came out, 2014 Platinum, I think.....which included Kris Bryant 2013 Bowman Chrome prospect autos. So, all those people who had thought they were getting the most in demand Bryant card saw the value of their cards plummet overnight. Completely unethical if you ask me. They should sue themselves, bastards.

Read about the BS here: http://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com...ate-questions/

Topps hasn't always made the best cards in the hobby, but they have always had the best lawyers.

Bill, I know you're worked up on this but I would say the Kris Bryant auto isn't even the largest Topps injustice to be mentioned in this thread. Having an inflated card value drop 13 months earlier than expected doesn't rise to the level of a multi-million dollar lawsuit where the legal system was used to bleed out the competition.

Amusingly Topps lost most of their major lawsuits in the 1950's but were able to bleed most competitors dry on the legal expense front. It's been a time honored business tactic since the dawn of corporations and lawyers.

I think the fact that Topps lost many legal decisions is less important than the success of the primary objective which was make the litigation as long and expensive as possible. In some situations even though the case was decided against Topps by the time of the resolution the issue had become moot to a large degree.

Side note: David, I was able to find time to read your work on the early history of Topps this past month. Thanks for sharing it . It was an interesting read and I was introduced to a lot of early nonsports sets that I wasn't aware of.

I have a letter that has been tucked away with my set for almost 40 years. It is on SSPC letterhead from 100 Ringgold St., Peekskill NY 10566. It reads:

Dear Baseball Fan:

We are very happy to report that the lawsuit has been resolved. Enclosed you will find your set of 1976 SSPC cards that you have waited so long to get. These cards are being shipped to you by Renata Galasso Inc. This company is doing the sorting and mailing of the cards for us. If you wish to purchase any additional sets you may do so by consulting the enclosed flyer and ordering directly from Renata Galasso Inc. Thank you for all your support during the time it took to end the lawsuit.

Sincerely,
Michael P. Aronstein
President

Great post!! Thanks for sharing that :)

Guys, here is a post Keith Olbermann wrote in his blog talking about taking some photos and writing the backs for the SSPC set. Insightful stuff if you're a fan of the set:

http://keitholbermann.mlblogs.com/20.../chuck-tanner/

:)