Questions about 1952 Topps Advertising Panels

[hharm3]

I originally posted this in the Pre-War forum but they pointed me here.

We're currently going through my late FIL's cards. He has the 5 1952 Topps panels below. Only 1 of them currently appears on tcdb. Is there any idea on how many different 3 card combos were made? Is it known how many were made? Any other relevant info would be great.

Thanks







Backs are all the same

[irv]

These 2 have been for sale for quite sometime.
They do not have the typical salesman back but that is what the seller concluded. (big write up as you scroll down)
I wrote and asked him some questions to that but he never replied.
Maybe you will have better luck or will be able to receive some more information?
Good luck.
https://www.ebay.ca/itm/265526260113
https://www.ebay.ca/itm/265526273043

[hharm3]

Thanks. Although those look more like uncut cards? than what I have. All the others I have found online have been 3 cards and have the same backs as mine.

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by irv

These 2 have been for sale for quite sometime.
They do not have the typical salesman back but that is what the seller concluded. (big write up as you scroll down)

Those look more like cut from a High series sheet, to me. Why would Topps print up salesman samples for the High Series? If you notice the other samples, they're all from the first series (1-90), right?
#12 Basgall
#13 Wyrostek
#14 B Elliott

#18 Combs
#19 Bucha
#20 Loes

#45 Joost
#46 Goldsberry
#47 W Jones

#10 Rosen
#9 Hogue
#8 Marsh

Each panel seems to be three consecutively numbered cards; is that how they were arranged on an uncut 1st series sheet?

[hharm3]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Those look more like cut from a High series sheet, to me. Why would Topps print up salesman samples for the High Series? If you notice the other samples, they're all from the first series (1-90), right?
#12 Basgall
#13 Wyrostek
#14 B Elliott

#18 Combs
#19 Bucha
#20 Loes

#45 Joost
#46 Goldsberry
#47 W Jones

#10 Rosen
#9 Hogue
#8 Marsh

Each panel seems to be three consecutively numbered cards; is that how they were arranged on an uncut 1st series sheet?

I didn't know they were consecutive numbers. That's great info.
I realized when you posted that I forgot to post the 5th panel.

#42, 43 and 44

Thanks.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by irv

These 2 have been for sale for quite sometime.
They do not have the typical salesman back but that is what the seller concluded. (big write up as you scroll down)
I wrote and asked him some questions to that but he never replied.
Maybe you will have better luck or will be able to receive some more information?
Good luck.
https://www.ebay.ca/itm/265526260113
https://www.ebay.ca/itm/265526273043

Not to derail this thread but there is something very peculiar about those two 1952 Topps High Number two card panels. Every sheet or partial sheet that I have seen of 1952 Topps has the cards in sequential order but those two 52 Topps High Number panels have the cards way out of order, #406 Nuxhall next to #372 McDougald and #400 Dickey next to #321 Black. Here is a 1952 Topps partial sheet with #371 Hofman to the left of #372 McDougald, and a partial sheet with #401 Schultz to the right of #400 Dickey.

[Seven]

I find it incredible, that so many things in our hobby, salesmen samples especially, have withstood the test of time. That uncut panel with Mantle and Jackie

[irv]

Originally Posted by hharm3

Thanks. Although those look more like uncut cards? than what I have. All the others I have found online have been 3 cards and have the same backs as mine.

Originally Posted by swarmee

Those look more like cut from a High series sheet, to me. Why would Topps print up salesman samples for the High Series? If you notice the other samples, they're all from the first series (1-90), right?
#12 Basgall
#13 Wyrostek
#14 B Elliott

#18 Combs
#19 Bucha
#20 Loes

#45 Joost
#46 Goldsberry
#47 W Jones

#10 Rosen
#9 Hogue
#8 Marsh

Each panel seems to be three consecutively numbered cards; is that how they were arranged on an uncut 1st series sheet?

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

Not to derail this thread but there is something very peculiar about those two 1952 Topps High Number two card panels. Every sheet or partial sheet that I have seen of 1952 Topps has the cards in sequential order but those two 52 Topps High Number panels have the cards way out of order, #406 Nuxhall next to #372 McDougald and #400 Dickey next to #321 Black. Here is a 1952 Topps partial sheet with #371 Hofman to the left of #372 McDougald, and a partial sheet with #401 Schultz to the right of #400 Dickey.

Because they have been for sale for a while now, I forget exactly what I asked the seller, but I do recall questioning how he came to that conclusion and questioned him if he could possibly be wrong or mistaken?

Your questions, like mine, and possibly other interested buyers also not receiving replies are likely a big reason why they are still for sale after all this time?

[ALR-bishop]

I just have a cut panel

[hharm3]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

I just have a cut panel

Thanks. Those are the highest numbers I have seen. Makes me wonder if there were samples made from at least the first 90 cards. Want to see the Warren Spahn sample if so.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

I just have a cut panel

Hi Al!

Here as well , but I do have a Hodges and Sauer and sold a spahn. Maybe a whole 1st series set exists?

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by irv

Because they have been for sale for a while now, I forget exactly what I asked the seller, but I do recall questioning how he came to that conclusion and questioned him if he could possibly be wrong or mistaken?

Your questions, like mine, and possibly other interested buyers also not receiving replies are likely a big reason why they are still for sale after all this time?

Those are fake, I'm 99% sure of it

[irv]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Those are fake, I'm 99% sure of it

That crossed my mind too, especially being ungraded and the lack of a reply from the seller, but I just wasn't sure?