Quote:
Originally Posted by robertsmithnocure
Everyone has their own definitions, but I also consider items like the M101-1 and M101-2 The Sporting News and W601 The Sporting Life issues as being supplements, but are much more "card-like" than a magazine or its cover. These were stand alone items that were obviously made to be collected individually on their own and were part of a set. They were even advertised that way within their publication. The backs of the M101-1s even have detailed biographies which are very much like cards. Heck, even Jefferson Burdick game them their own ACC number within the "M" Periodical Issues heading.
I like magazines and they make great collectibles, but these The Sporting New supplements were made to be collected and are much more card like IMHO. Yes, they are on thinner stock and somewhat oversized, but they are very similar to the some of the premiums put out in the day from the likes of Butterfinger, National Chicle, Goudey, etc.
For comparison, this 1905 W601 The Sporting Life Detroit composite sold for $8,400. The same image is available on the front cover of their weekly newspaper and would only sell for a small fraction of that.
|
I agree. I was being a little dramatic. In the range of collectibles that could be considered someone’s rookie “card”, I agree that a supplement is closer to a card/rookie piece than a magazine or newspaper picture/piece.
Let me be clear- I think those early sporting life supplements are totally awesome. And I think a reasonable argument could be made that, at least with Wagner, it could be a rookie “card”. I just don’t think it is. I don’t think they are cards. I don’t think the composites are either. They are more like a collectible picture or poster or something. I think one could argue that cabinets and post cards are not “cards” also, although I think they are. But that’s just my opinion, and you know opinions are like assholes…
Collect what you like, that’s really all that matters.