Question about 1959 Fleer Ted Williams set

[camaro69]

I have always wondered why the one card in this set was short-printed.Card #68 seems to be hard to find and can be a bit pricey when you do find it.So how were the sheets made so that only one card was short-printed,With it being only an 80 card set I would just assume that it would be easy to make sheets with 80 cards and have them cut.So I thought I would ask the very knowledgeable baseball collectors here on this site.PLMK your thought and reason why this may have happened.Thanks.

[Cliff Bowman]

#68 had to be removed from the set because it pictured Bucky Harris who was under contract with Topps. I don’t know what card replaced it on the sheet, I’m guessing they double printed another card in its place. ETA, I did not know this but I read in an article about the card that #68 was apparently not even distributed in wax packs, someone had to write to Fleer and request a #68 and Fleer would send them one, similar to the 1933 Goudey Nap Lajoie unissued card.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

#68 had to be removed from the set because it pictured Bucky Harris who was under contract with Topps. I don’t know what card replaced it on the sheet, I’m guessing they double printed another card in its place. ETA, I did not know this but I read in an article about the card that #68 was apparently not even distributed in wax packs, someone had to write to Fleer and request a #68 and Fleer would send them one, similar to the 1933 Goudey Nap Lajoie unissued card.

If that's true, they may have just tossed most of them when they cut the sheets.
The late 80's K-Mart set sheet had lots of non- card spaces and a few of the cards pulled from modern sets were similarly just removed during cutting.

[camaro69]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

#68 had to be removed from the set because it pictured Bucky Harris who was under contract with Topps. I don’t know what card replaced it on the sheet, I’m guessing they double printed another card in its place. ETA, I did not know this but I read in an article about the card that #68 was apparently not even distributed in wax packs, someone had to write to Fleer and request a #68 and Fleer would send them one, similar to the 1933 Goudey Nap Lajoie unissued card.

Well thank you very much.I appreciate you letting me know.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

#68 had to be removed from the set because it pictured Bucky Harris who was under contract with Topps. I don’t know what card replaced it on the sheet, I’m guessing they double printed another card in its place. ETA, I did not know this but I read in an article about the card that #68 was apparently not even distributed in wax packs, someone had to write to Fleer and request a #68 and Fleer would send them one, similar to the 1933 Goudey Nap Lajoie unissued card.

Well said, Cliff.

Furthermore, TOPPS had an exclusive contract with Ted (1954 - 1958). And, TOPPS became very upset with Ted Williams
for giving FLEER the Rights to print his story on their 1959 BB cards. Incidentally, FLEER paid Ted $5000 for these Rights.





TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[G1911]

I'm pretty sure it is a myth that Card 68 never even made it into packs, simply because it is not very difficult at all. PSA has graded over 1,000 of them, it's clearly short printed and relatively tougher, but it hardly as rare as its reputation suggests. There are over 20 of them (real ones) on eBay right now.

I would be interested to know what card possibly replaced it on the sheet part way through the run (and is thus a partial DP), but have never seen uncut material that would place a different card in its slot.

[Cliff Bowman]

From The Topps Archives by Dave Hornish here is the letter that Fleer sent to people who wrote to them inquiring about the #68 card:
Due to the possibility of legal overtones, card #68 was not put on the market for sale. However, it was made and we have been able to send several to people such as you that have inquired.
As we are new to the card business we certainly do not want have any ill feelings among card collectors. Therefore I am forwarding you a number of our card #68.
As stated in your letter we request there is no charge is made for any of these cards.
Fleer definitely intends to stay in the card business and will produce more baseball cards when the opportunity arises.
Cordially,
Art Wolfe
Assistant Promotion Manager

[G1911]

I've seen the letter, and do not doubt some were mailed out like this like the 33 Goudey Lajoie, but the very large surviving population seems to indicate this card was probably packed out early in the run. Due to the legal issues, I doubt Fleer would have told collectors this. The card is awfully common to be something given out only in an unadvertised response to a letter. "Several" vs. thousands.