 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
07-25-2018, 09:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't different T206 backs have their own designation?
I apologize if this has been covered over the years. I did search, but it's been 10+ years since taking my hiatus from the board. There are countless pages that came up in the search results.
Caramels/novelty/magazine cards with like fronts and different backs all warrant individual designations (e.g. E90, E101, E102, etc...). Why haven't T206s been re cataloged in a similar fashion? If I had to guess, it may steal some of the allure from the T206 Monster designation. It would also be tougher to keep track of the dozens of possibilities, when factory, color, series, etc..are added to the mix. It just seems odd that the logic is different with T206s than with candy cards. 
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| FS: T206 Nap Rucker PSA 5 Double factory designation! | CMIZ5290 | T206 cards B/S/T | 1 | 06-18-2013 05:20 PM |
| Fs/ft: T206 nap rucker psa 5 double factory designation!! | CMIZ5290 | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 08-04-2012 04:34 PM |
| ** On Hold ** T206 Tinker Portrait - NO Factory designation | PEEK enterprises | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 2 | 12-25-2009 08:47 PM |
| T206 Magie on Ebay -- Without that annoying factory designation | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 18 | 11-15-2007 11:26 AM |
| Partial red designation ???? On t206 | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 09-02-2006 09:19 PM |
Threaded Mode