T206 Joe Tinker with 1910 stamp

[ErikV]

While the board is regularly inundated with various T206 posts, I found this
card listed on E-Bay and wanted to get the boards opinion. Specifically, the
stamped date on the back of the card.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/T206-1911-Sw...item4d1b76e98b

If I'm reading Scot Reader's "Inside T206" correctly, pages 24 and 25 indicate
that T206 350 subjects "seem supportive of winter/spring 1910 creation for
350/460 RP subjects with initial release likely within a few months thereafter.

So, my question is could the May 8, 1910 date stamped on the back of this
card be an accurate release date? Could the original owner theoretically have
stamped this card the day he purchased it?

All opinions are welcome.

ErikV

[Jantz]

Looks like November 8, 1910 to me.

Only month with a "V".

And I've seen other T206s with the same date stamped on the back.



Jantz

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by Jantz

Looks like November 8, 1910 to me.

+1

And so long as you can still stamp T206s today with whatever dates or designs you want, you'll forgive me if I just assume they were all stamped last night.

[Bpm0014]

T206 collector... Whereas I agree 100% with you, what incentive would someone have to "stamp them yesterday"?

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by Bpm0014

T206 collector... Whereas I agree 100% with you, what incentive would someone have to "stamp them yesterday"?

People collect back stamps on T206 cards. Thus, people must pay some premium for them sometimes. Thus, the incentive to add value. Obviously, not in the case of the cards in great shape. But the beaters, maybe. Toy Town stamps, etc.

[Sean]

Erik, I'm not following your point. You quoted Scot Reader's description of when the Sweet Cap 350-460 Series was printed, but the card in your post is from the 350 Series, which was printed earlier.
So yes, it seems that the card could have been stamped on the day it was acquired... or on any day thereafter.
I think that was what you were asking, but if I missed your point, well, sorry.

[Leon]

I usually assume the stamps on backs are legit. However with the finding of the Toy Town stamp games it does make one wonder? I try to think of motive and there really isn't a good one to do it today, imo. Most of these stamps actually detract a little (to a lot) from the value.

[wolf441]

Originally Posted by Leon

I usually assume the stamps on backs are legit. However with the finding of the Toy Town stamp games it does make one wonder? I try to think of motive and there really isn't a good one to do it today, imo. Most of these stamps actually detract a little (to a lot) from the value.

Agreed. The only stamp that I find concerning in terms of potential fraud due to opportunity for increased value is the stamp that purportedly belonged to F. Scott Fitzgerald. And of course, the "Old Put" stamp...

That said, I do find the random stamps (i.e. carriage, castle, names, etc..) pretty cool. It would be quite a downer to find out that they were put on long after the cards were issued as that is the main allure of them to me (and granted, I'm not a high end condition collector).

[frankbmd]

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=147783

In case you missed it.

[t206blogcom]

I have a T206 w/ the same stamp!

[caramelcard]

I believe I have two with the stamp.