1955 Armour coin variation discoveries

[Bob Lemke]

Long-time Standard Catalog contributor and Armour coin specialty collector Phil Garrou has reported three new variations in the 1955 set.

I'm currently undecided about how deep to go in listings the ever-growing number of minor variations within the pages of the book. Given the relatively small number of collectors interested in such minutiae, I'm not sure it is the best use of available page count.

Phil has reported the existence of Jim Finigan coins with his birthplace spelled as QUINCY and as OUINCY.
Armour Finigans detail.jpg

He also has spotted Duke Snider pieces with and without a decimal point in front of the 1954 batting average.
snider details small.jpg

My concern is whether or not these are true examples of error/correction or whether the tail of the Q and the decimal point were lost due to wear of the molds during production.

Specifically, I'm inquiring whether anybody can show coins with a partial tail on the Q or a "vanishing" decimal point.

The third newly reported variation is one of the many letter/word spacing variations seen in the series. We currently list all of those, but these are the type of variation I'm considering dropping.
Armour Haddixs small.jpg

Your thoughts?

I've covered this more thoroughly in my blog (linked below). The Finigan piece is up now, the Snider will be posted Monday and the Haddix on Wednesday.

[toppcat]

Bob, a separate web page for minor variations you don't want to print might work.

[Bob Lemke]

Trying to move the corporate behemoth that owns the Standard Catalog to create a companion website is a daunting challenge.

While any middle school kid could do it, getting a huge international corporation to do so would be a nightmare of negotiating between IT departments, etc.

The best we could hope for is that such data could be captured in the catalog data base and made available some day in CD form.

[barrysloate]

These are comparable to T206 Murray and Nodgrass, just little glitches that collectors differ as to their importance.

[steve B]

The missing dot and tail on the Q maybe shouldn't be in, but the different location/spacing of the lettering seems like a big enough difference.

Maybe the corporate guys would consent to someone having access to the full database to self publish a group of very specialised catalogs? That way you could shrink the listing of variations to a mention that they exist and people could find the more detailed catalogs if they felt they wanted to get into it to that degree.

Or maybe splitting the catalog into 2 volumes like the Scott stamp catalog.
I think you could easily produce two $50 books instead of one. And if the cutoff date was well chosen, the sales of each would probably be about equal to the sales of just the one book. And I'll be that the corporate guys would be ok with making double the money.

The Scott catalog lineup makes a pretty good model. They even have a specialised book for just worldwide pre 1940 that's hardcover and pretty expensive.

Steve

[rhettyeakley]

I say list them all! It would only be a few lines in the book in the overall scheme of things. If you want to be THE source for us vintage collectors this is the kind of info that NEEDS to be in there. The "Q" and "O" thing I think is 100% a legit variation-it would be hard for just the little tail to have been knocked off or anything leaving a perfect "O" afterwards. The decimal point not so much, but if there is more than one found this way it IS a variation.
-Rhett