REA E93 front w/E97 back
 

What do y'all think of this card?

An E93 with an E97 back?

http://bid.robertedwardauctions.com/...x?itemid=30413

How far apart were the cards printed (temporally)?

E97 are presumed to be 1909 and E93 1910.

Admittedly I'm not very familiar with the printing background on these sets so this may be already known. However, I think the combination points that both sets were printed by the same company and then distributed to the specific vendor for distribution - Briggs in Boston and Standard in Lancaster.

Also knowing the similarity of several cards in the sets compared to e98 (Dooin/Cobb with e93/e98 & Myers/Young with e97/e98), I believe this suggests that e98 quite possible originated with the same printer.

Does anyone know who was the specific printer?

DJ

Pete what does this have to do with T206's I don't follow you here?

Well played

I saw that lot too and thought it was a stunning error. How would one explain it? Did the same printer issue both sets?

If this is in fact a true...Rosetta Stone...bridge error...this must be the case, Barry. MAybe they were test printing the E93 and used an old back plate from the previous year? Def interesting.

John...this of course relates to T206...could you imagine what a t206 with a coupon type I back would sell for???

Hey Pete- there was obviously some relationship there, but I've never seen anyone document a connection between the two issues. Time for one of our E-card scholars to do a little research.

There is an E92 Cy Young E card with an E78 back and I recall seeing a boxing front with a NS back. Doesn't Leon [hi Leon] have one of these freak prints?

Hey Adam
Yes, I have a few E cards with different backs. Here are a few and also I have recently seen another E card with a different E card ghost image on back..... but can't seem to locate it now. Eventually I believe more information will be gleaned on how these were produced.

http://luckeycards.com/pe92younge79back.jpg
http://luckeycards.com/pe92mageee78back.jpg
http://luckeycards.com/pe92menageriemurphy.jpg

Leon, was just about to mention the menagerie backs on the E92's. However, off the top of my head I cant think of any e92/e101/e102/e105/e106 images that have the same image either e93/e94/e97/e98 sets. The REA card links the e93 set and e97 sets to the same printer. I'm not aware of any cards that would link the "checklist" style backs to the "advertisement" style backs. So are those two groups from two or more different printers?

DJ

All the e-card wrong backs seem to be upside down. Could this have been done on purpose so that printer would make sure they stood out from the final printing when that time came?

Makes sense to me!!! But...there are examples of e92 as well as others with upside down backs?

Just a guess but like $1,000,000,000.....

That is kind of where I was going with that. Is it possible that those other upside down backs in the e92 set were original tests as well, but since those cards were suppose to be with those backs no one thought much of it rather than them being upside down?

I don't suppose we'll ever really know?

John...I have a few of those ultra rare T206's with Coupon backs I'd part with for 200,000 a piece...as well as an unheard of T206 with a red cross back...but that one is 400K.

It may not be possible to ever know for sure, but it was just a thought that was going through my head as to why they only exist this way.

A lot of the baseball candy issues share the same printing design (on the backs) as the non sport issues and boxing issues from the same couple of years.

E102 and E8 battleships have the same backs (both anonymous)

E1 is the same back design as the E93-E98 and on and on.

Many of these are the same companies for both non sport and baseball (dockman, philly caramel, etc), but it's interesting when for example a Breisch Williams non sport issue has the same design as the E97s.

Obviously they were printed at the same place, but we can only speculate why the errors occured.

It makes a bit more sense to see a menagerie back on an E92 because they're both dockman issues, but I've never seen an error that involves two baseball issues. Pretty neat card.

Rob