Quote:
Originally Posted by tedzan
The L & M label on these cartons proves nothing in determining when the 1910 COUPON cards were printed. All this indicates is that some 1910 COUPON cards were affixed
to these cartons post ATC Divesture.
The most significant key to determining when the 1910 cards were printed (besides the 48 subjects from the 350-only Series) is in the labelling on the backs of these cards,
namely "COUPON"
The QUOTES surrounding the Brand name signify that ATC has not yet received the Registered TRADEMARK of this new brand (circa 1909/1910) at time of their printing.
Other such examples of QUOTED new Brands are these...........
 
 .  . 
TED Z
T206 Reference
. |
As you like to say we have discussed this already Ted.
First of we know the Coupon Cigarettes existed as early as 1908
Quote:
Originally Posted by tedzan
That's the 1908 Times Picayune article which I referred to regarding the "COUPON" Cigarettes brand. I knew you would find it.
Come on Pat, this is silly.... "but it doesn't say anything about baseball pictures.".
T206's were not issued until approx. a year later (circa Spring/Summer 1909).
Anyway, thanks for finding this Newspaper article.
TED Z
T206 Reference
.
|
and the quotes seemed to be used on tobacco products frequently back then
Here's a Carolina Brights coupon I have that they used the quotes on
img408.jpg
so your case closed evidence that they were printed in 1910 is
A similar back design
48 subjects from the 350 only series
Coupon in quotes
Paper missing on some backs where they were glued to cartons
These things according to you are case closed evidence they were printed in 1910
but the these facts
they're printed on a different stock
the t213 type 1 subjects don't match up with any other t206 back (except Piedmont)
the ledger pages from an atc journal covering 35 tobacco brands from 1909-1912 doesn't have Coupon cigarettes in it.
you claim that they were glued to cartons and that's what the paper loss on on the back of some of them is from but the carton with paper loss on it that Jeremy has you yourself said is no earlier than 1913.
so all of these facts are just meh... a coincidence?
it really seems to me that you're grasping at straws to prove they were printed in 1910.