Found this T206 missing magenta in my collection.
 

I have a bunch of T206's that I have not gone through for quite some time and I came across this one that has been sitting quietly in the collection. I assume it is one of those missing magenta ink cards. I figure you T206 guys might want to know about the card in case it has not appeared previously.
Robert

http://i1135.photobucket.com/albums/...psdedf9275.jpg

nice card
 

That's a nice one. I would think the T206 people would think that it's a cool find.

Very cool...and I moved this thread for you.....

Thanks Leon! I thought I had it in the wrong spot. I am still trying to find my way around this site.
Thanks Again!

missing ink
 

Awesome discovery...congrats! I'm sure it will go nice in your collection :)

Excellent card. I've never seen a Carrigan missing color before. :cool:

Nice card Robert!

If you could please, what is the back brand, series and factory number on this beauty?

PM on the way.



Jantz

Nice find,

To the best of my knowledge it is a missing 'red' variety (tend to be found most commonly on Boston players). I understand that red was the last color process used for T206 printing, hence the card looks complete except for the red lettering.

It's a nice example and happens to be quite high grade an error of that type. Most of my missing reds are beaters.

If you become interested in selling/trading shoot me a line - scottglevy@yahoo.com

Best Regards,
Scott

That's a nice one! Keep it. Dave.

Nice card, congrats!

Nice Carrigan and if everybody wants to say it's missing red, then it must be true. However, in the parallel universe I belong too, the card would be classified as faded. In all probability exposed to light for a period of time. I've been exposed to light myself for the past 50+ years and believe me, fading is real and definitely exist. Kenny Rogers and his once rosy cheeks can attest to that.

Lovely day...

Iggy,

See the little strip of orange on the left border of the red Carrigan?

Looks like the same color doesn't it? Do you think that tiny strip was exposed to light?

Rob

So you're saying the red on this hat and the "STON" simply disappeared from sunlight? I don't think so...this card obviously missed the red in the printing process.

Hello Rob and Dan,

I'm happy to see I struck a nerve, especially in light of Bruce(s) passing. Believe me, I we want to believe and would be more than happy to drink the kool-aid, but T206 fade and red is the first to go. That is a fact.

Do T206 cards exist from 1909 that were printed without the red color? Of course, that is also a fact.

Can we really tell whether a T206 was printed in 1909 without the red? I know people alot smarter than me will disagree, but I'm not convinced.

Lovely Day...

Hey you are correct Caramelcard. There is a strip of orange on the left border of the red card that matches the other card. To me, this proves it is missing the red ink.

The back does have a large amount of glue residue on it though.

The reverse of the missing ink card is a Piedmont 350 Subjects Factory 25 2nd Dist Va. This reverse is identical to the red card.

Robert

Can we see the back? Undoubtably the card is intended to be printed with Orange (yellow, then pink/buff) and overlayed with Magenta (red), but if there is glue on the back, it's a whole new ball game.

OK Back scan coming in a few minutes.

top dollar paid on this item should it be for sale....meaning don't sell it without negotiating with me also.

willing to pay well on it.

kevin

OK here is the reverse. The missing ink is the one on the right.

http://i1135.photobucket.com/albums/...ps39865a2e.jpg

Hi Robert,

Thank you for posting scans of the backs.

Just one more question and I'll leave you alone.

After looking at the back scan you provided, is there glue residue on the backs of both Carrigans?

Thanks

Jantz

First off, ask as many questions as you like. It's no bother.

And yes there is glue on the backs of both cards. I have many T206's with glue residue purchased at different times, locations or collections. I do not recall whether or not the Carrigan's were bought at the same time.
Robert

It definitely missed a pass and is not faded. The team name BOSTON does not appear on your card at all and the red line in Carrigan's hat does not appear either. Nice card!

can the bidding begin now? lol.

humity humity hum humitty....400 humitta humita

kevin

Can't imagine what this would sell for in an auction by one of the major auction houses. Definitely a seller's market right now.

i can. there is a good precidence. i have a large collection.

unslabbed a couple hundred depending. slabbed and labeled about 1k.

kevin

I would not sell, this is a rare color oddity, and it would bring stupid money at major auction.....

"Precidence" and your large collection not withstanding, given the often-crazy prices these types of T206s bring, a straight sale probably wouldn't be the right choice for an owner not wishing to leave money on the table.

Then again, I'm not in the market to buy this card.

yea. its also possible you don't get that much as well. its presumptious to think you would get more because you listed it an auction house although it is possibe.

i am interested in buying the card, however that doesn't mean the prices i listed in the post are favored towards me. they are based on research and recent purchase histories.

it doesn't really matter. he hasn't said the card is for sale yet :D

kevin

That glue residue bothers me!

Craig

Yes, an Auction House sale would probably bring more money, but after the comission you might be better off with a private sale. Especially if you want the cash now rather than in 4-5 months.

Craig M - What is it about the glue that bothers you? This Rube Waddell has the same kind of glue residue but in a smaller area and not as thick or dark. Does this bother you as much? I have many others with the same kind of residue. Please know I am not asking in a sarcastic way, as I am just trying to broaden my knowledge of the T206 set and get others perspectives.
Thanks,
Robert

http://i1135.photobucket.com/albums/...psfa2e0b63.jpg
http://i1135.photobucket.com/albums/...ps494579b3.jpg

My understanding is that there are scrapbook adhesives that can soak through to the front of T206 cards, sometimes altering the colors on the front over time. In the case of your card, it appears to me that your card simply missed a printing pass.

Bidding Alert.....You've been Outbid!



Jantz

I have had many inquiries on the Carrigan card both in this thread and private messages.

I do not have the intention on selling the card. My only reason to start this thread was to make other T206 collectors aware of it.

However, if someone makes an offer I can't refuse.......................

Thanks
Robert

lol. warning. no one wins an item when i want something.

damn, not for sale. well i guess i will just have to add it to my want list.

kevin

Carrigan...
 

Great card....looks like the real deal.....only one way to know for sure...

send to SGC....:)

Peace

Johnny

Would sending it to SGC be better than sending it to PSA?
Thanks,
Robert

let me make you an offer you can't refuse and i will take care of that end of it :)

kevin

Robert,

You will have a better chance at getting "Missing Red Ink" listed on the label/flip with PSA than any other grading company.

Thank You again for posting the Carrigan and providing the back information.

That information means more to me than putting that beauty in my collection.

I appreciate it!


Jantz

carrigan...
 

Jantz is right...PSA will label faster than SGC, but this looks like a "no brainer" for SGC.....SGC , to me, is a more stringent error evaluator:)....this should pass the litmus test;)

A few observations, if I may and hopefully I am not in anyway cutting into Roberts European vacation plans.

1. Glue residue on a T206 card could conceivably cause some discoloration on the front, but the discoloration would not be consistent. In other words, we would still see some red on the front of the T206 Carrigan. A more viable theory in regards to the glue residue and something that raises a red flag in my book, is that the orange version Carrigan could have been mounted in a picture frame as opposed to a scrapbook. Thus, exposed to light.

2. What exactly does the strip of orange on the left border of the red Carrigan prove? Can someone please explain that to me. I'm a bit bedazzled with that one! My T206 Carrigan also has a small strip of orange (on the right side border as opposed to the left). The strip of orange only verifies what we already know and has already been stated by Erick in this thread.........."orange (yellow, then pink/buff) was the next to last colors used, with Magenta (red) as the last overlayed color." With exposure to light, the red gradually disappears and we are left with the color that was underneath. In this case, it's orange.

3. What is so wrong with the idea that the red on this hat and the "STON" on his uniform simply did gradually disappear by being exposed to sunlight. When I look at the card, I actually see a faint STON on the orange version Carrigan (a slightly faded pink/buff perhaps). A plausible reason for why we don't see orange behind the STON and hat, is because only pink/buff and not yellow was used. One would expect pink to fade along with the red.

Let the bullets fly.

Lovely Day...

Well, I'm definitely no printing expert, but it sure does look to me like it missed the whole red pass. I don't think the red would just evaporate away (or fade so consistently with no trace left at all). I would think even if it were faded, you would still see evidence of the red somewhere?

No bullets for you Iggy, just my opinion ;) :D

Sincerely, Clayton

Sunlight exposure
 

Iggy, you bring up some interesting points for debate, but I do not believe this is a case for Hercule Poirot. I once left a 1959 Jim Bunning on top of a stack of cards near a window for over 5 years and the card faded. I will try and find that card this weekend and post a scan. As to value, a Sweeney missing ink sold for 1500 this year, so I would guess this one would go for around that.

I've shown this before but here is a classic example of a T206 red Cobb that was sold as faded.


Attachment 109393


You can see the photo-corner mount in the upper right corner and the results of fading (how certain shades fade at different rates (red is always the first to go). I would expect a '59 Jim Bunning that was exposed to light for 5 years to be badly faded and the loss of color (besides red) would be quite obvious. I'm not denying that T206's don't exist without the red , I'm just pointing out that verifying whether these cards were actually printed that way is not a slam dunk.

Lovely Day...

Four or five months? Most auction houses pay their consignors within a month, and there are auctions being held seemingly every week. Saying the seller would have to wait 4-5 months for his money simply isn't accurate.

As for the commission, I think most auction houses would sell this card with no consignment fee. The fact there likely would be a handful of bidders driving up the price pretty much means a private sale would make no fiscal sense. At least for the seller.

All of this is probably a moot point, because the OP has said he doesn't plan on selling the card.

Cobb
 

That Cobb is certainly evidence that the red fades away to orange. The contrarian's view is often the correct one in these "find' debates. The registration on the OP's card looked good for a missing ink card to me from the scan, but it's just my assumption.

You sure about that? Bold statement. :)

I'm with Iggy on this one. Any glue on the back of a missing red is a bad sign. If you look at the percentage of missing red ink cards have glue on the back, you'll see a much higher percentage than t206's in general. So yes, glue often removes the red ink...it's obvious and not even a debate really.

That said, no one cares why the red ink isn't there...they'll pay tons for them anyway. Neat looking card, I'd love to have it...but didn't come out of the factory that way.

Mac

is it obvious? please elaborate for us uninformed...i find it HIGHLY unlikely that a small dab of glue, that dries quickly, has the ability to make to most intense color (red) disappear....wouldnt you see the outline of the red lettering still on the jersey?:confused:

Okay, one last post before I let this thread recoil into the abyss.

In my opinion, this is not the case on the T206 Carrigan but here is a classic example of what exposure to stuff can do to the color of a card (I found this image on the Gorenet): Obviously, fading due to exposure to chemicals is very easy to spot.

Attachment 109429

For the record, did I once try to collect T206 magenta-less cards? Sure, I have a couple, mostly beaters. In due time, I realized they were not all that rare (at least not like a W554 Ruth with an ad back). Plus, I could never convince myself that I could adequately ascertain whether these cards came out of the factory without the magenta or the lack of red was caused by some form of exposure to light.

Attachment 109435
Attachment 109430
Attachment 109431
Attachment 109438
Attachment 109433

Lovely Day...