Red Sun - Is it really a Louisiana exclusive?

[G1911]

Red Sun is the brand issuer of 2 card series’, the T211’s related to T210 and featuring 75 ball players from the Southern Association, and T226 that features 50 pugilists in the same design. Both bear a tag line for factory 3 in Louisiana.

They are typically said to be a Louisiana regional. The evidence I have heard for this is that Louisiana factory number on the back, and that the baseball player cards feature southern players.

The baseball players are credited to a 1910 issue, I’m not sure if any of the baseball guys have done extensive research on earliest possible date from the player and team designations. The boxing issue is very unlikely to date before mid 1910 based on the roster of names, though as prize fighters lack teams it’s tougher to estimate date. Earliest possible dates are very different from actual distribution dates which may be much later.

So I went searching to see what can be found on Red Sun. A factory number on back does not mean that is where the cards were issued or that they were local to that area, as dozens of T sets were issued far outside of the state or area where the factory there were packed at was located. They were probably printed in the NY area though they do not appear in the American Tobacco ledger or Fullgraff’s Brett records that are publicly available. That leaves the evidence for it being a regional issue in Louisiana the fact that it issued a set of Southern Association cards.

In 1910, the Southern Association had teams in:
New Orleans, Louisiana
Birmingham, Alabama
Atlanta, Georgia,
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Mobile, Alabama
Memphis, Tennessee
Montgomery, Alabama

6 of the 8 teams in Alabama and Tennessee, but the big cities of NO and ATL are represented as well. Possibly proof of some southern focus, but hardly of a Louisiana exclusive.

I found in Tobacco Leaf a statement that Red Sun was being distributed in the greater New York City area in 1903 (Vol. XL, no. 34, September 2, 1903 pg. 9; https://www.google.com/books/edition...&bsq=red%20sun). In an article titled “City Trade of Greater New York”, they give “a practically complete list of the various articles being regularly handled by the distributing depot of the local retail association”. Red Sun is listed under the “Virginia Cigarettes” category. I believe this does may not literally mean from Virginia, but is a style of smoking tobacco product. Red Sun was at the time probably distributed from Virginia.

Red Sun appears again in the August 20, 1904 issue of The Commercial & Financial Chronicle, which even I find to be an incredibly boring read (Page 738 is the one of interest here: https://www.google.com/books/edition...sec=frontcover). A note appears that the Universal Tobacco Co., under an order from the Court of Chancery of New Jersey August 15, 1904, will sell all of its assets including its Red Sun and Sovereign cigarette brands and their formulas. “The sale will permit the carrying out of the plan to merge the company in the Commonwealth Tobacco Co.” The Commonwealth Tobacco Company was incorporated August 3, 1904 according to Open Corporates database (https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_ny/9374).

An earlier issue (page 150 here: https://www.google.com/books/edition...sec=frontcover) has a notice that some of the stockholders have filed for the appointment of a receiver, alleging mismanagement contrary to New Jersey law. It also includes a $1,000,000 10 year mortgage that “covers the plant and appurtenances and tobacco manufactured and unmanufactured now at 697 Greenwich St and 215 West St., New York; in the city of Lynchburg, Va. and elsewhere; also the personal property including the following trade marks…” among which Red Sun and Sovereign appears as the ones of interest to card collectors. Some of the other brands here, like Omar, we know from later documents ended up as part of the trust.


The November 30, 1907 issue of the United States Tobacco Journal (pg. 22-23 of interest: https://www.google.com/books/edition...sec=frontcover) has an article about one of the anti-trust court hearings. It includes a recap of the testimony of Percival S. Hill, a Vice President at American Tobacco. Questioned on why in some cases subsidiaries posed as “independent when it was really owned by the Trust”, Hill stated that it was done “in compliance with the former proprietor, who retained an interest in the management of the firm,” and that in some cases it was because officers of the subsidiary believed the ATC was unpopular. The Pinkerton Tobacco Co. is explicitly called out here as having “concealed nothing, but said nothing” (Do baseball collectors know the T5’s are another ATC issue?). On the next day, there are more questions about Hill’s own letters to subsidiaries where it seems he tells them to cover up their ATC ownership. This relates to many other things previously discussed in research threads, about the shadow subsidiaries and the difficulties in proving ownership today. Anyways, the next section goes on at some length about Hill and the ATC arranging with ‘jobbers’ (which means independent local sellers) to deny doing business with competitors, including the Commonwealth Tobacco Co. of Lynchburg, Va. Whether Commonwealth owned Red Sun and Sovereign still or the ATC had bought them before its formation from Universal’s 1904 sale is not entirely clear to me at present, but I gather they probably already had secured these brands and owned them starting in late 1904 or in 1905. The days testimony ended with a reference to the old Universal Tobacco Co., with Hill being asked if they were a competitor. Hill’s answer is no, because he defines a competitor as “a concern that gets busy in the market with its products”. He is asked “Then the Universal company was not in the market with products?” and answers “Yes, but it wasn’t busy”. So it seems Universal survived but many not have been selling anything and was just a lingering paperwork company wrapping up legal affairs, or Hill is brutally slamming a competitor in court, which seems to be something he did when he had the opportunity.

Adding to the complications, it seems that at this time, or shortly after, Commonwealth was actually owned by the ATC. In a memorandum related to 1908 tax hearings (https://www.google.com/books/edition...sec=frontcover, 187-188), John Yerkes wrote to the Ways and Means Committee about the old HR 6 bill that prohibited the use of coupons and cards in tobacco. He was the head of the IRS from late 1900 to mid 1907 and one of the government officials most looped in on the real scope of the ATC. Yerkes appears in some court cases in this period, speaking at some times broadly for independent tobacco manufacturers who were working together on the legal front to try to get the Feds to take out the ATC for them; he seems to have become what we would call today a lobbyist, counsel and advisor for these firms; his name will be familiar to the nerds who read the primary sources. He notes that since then, many of the companies that had opposed the passage of the bill had sold their “plants” to the ATC or its “allied companies”, i.e. it’s shadow subsidiaries. Several are named specifically before Yerkes states there “are possible others”. An addendum in the record provides a fuller list, apparently produced a little later. It includes the Commonwealth Tobacco company.

So it seems Red Sun was issued in New York City in 1903, and sometime between 1904 and 1908 it became a brand of the ATC, alongside Sovereign which issued T206 and others. It was shifted to being packed out of a Louisiana factory. Sovereign stayed in Virginia. It is possible they stopped selling the cigarettes outside Louisiana as part of this, though this doesn’t strike me as likely. The ATC is always trying to do the opposite, using regional limits as launching points to test a brand, and then trying to push it as broadly as they can if it performs in its test market. Shrinking a brand is not something the documentation I have found really shows them doing; normally such a dying brand is killed off. It’s certainly possible though. However, I can find no evidence this is a Louisiana regional brand. Just as Old Mill wasn’t restricted to the southern area of it’s T210 issue. It is possible the T211’s were distributed in some southern areas and the T226 in pallets shipping north. Is there documentary evidence in support of the Louisiana regional? Anybody have other primary source material on Red Sun and its distribution? I am sure there is much more than this that survives.

[RCMcKenzie]

I dunno. I think T211 are for the South. I've lost interest in the set, and am selling off my cards, but is it really a back east set? I don't see that. Like T215, they have been found in LA, whatever their origin or purpose. Why would people in New Jersey want to open a cig pack and see a minor league player card from New Orleans or Mobile?

[jingram058]

I have one Red Sun, Memphis (pre-Chicks, Turtles? Egyptians?) player-manager, I think, Charlie Babb. I got it in Charleston, South Carolina while I was in the Navy. I have only ever seen a few of these cards in the flesh. Talk about obscure. There apparently were others, but Babb is the only Memphis guy I have ever seen.

[Pat R]

Greg, Red Sun is in the ATC ledger. I've never been able to find much information on Red Sun but I did find a couple of ads where they were listed with the Liggett & Myers brand both ads appeared in Ohio Newspapers in 1914.

ATC Index Ledger page 1 - Copy (2).jpg

Liggett & Myers ad.jpg

Liggett & Myers Ad 2.jpg

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Greg, Red Sun is in the ATC ledger. I've never been able to find much information on Red Sun but I did find a couple of ads where they were listed with the Liggett & Myers brand both ads appeared in Ohio Newspapers in 1914.

Thanks Pat. This page is one of the ones lost or destroyed that we don’t have though, right?

They seem to appear more frequently after the dissolution of the trust than before.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

I dunno. I think T211 are for the South. I've lost interest in the set, and am selling off my cards, but is it really a back east set? I don't see that. Like T215, they have been found in LA, whatever their origin or purpose. Why would people in New Jersey want to open a cig pack and see a minor league player card from New Orleans or Mobile?

I would guess, if I had to, that T211 was probably focused in the South. Like I said, it may be that the 226’s were more in the northeast and the 211’s in the south. The traditional narrative ties this set to a very small part of the south, which I haven’t ever seen evidence to support. Geography distribution might tie into what appears to be certain SP’ing in the 226’s.

However, I hate to assume or guess to fill in blanks, which is why I’m looking for primary evidence. A whole lot of what we’ve thought to be good guesses have been proven wrong by primary documentation the last few years. Why would a Piedmont buyer in Wisconsin or somewhere far away want a Boston Red Sock? They may well have also pulled a minor leaguer with a Piedmont back; it’s not clear to me minor league T cards were only issued around their teams city.

I don’t collect the baseball’s as that set to build will cost more than I think it’s worth, but I build the boxing series. The backs are one of my favorite ad designs. I have no interest in any particular outcome.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by G1911

Thanks Pat. This page is one of the ones lost or destroyed that we don’t have though, right?

They seem to appear more frequently after the dissolution of the trust than before.

Yeah it's a shame too because it probably had a card or cards attached to it like many of the other missing pages did.

[jingram058]

Okay, I'm wading in here with little to no knowledge. The back of my card says "Made In New Orleans" and "Baseball Players Southern Association First Series 1 To 75 Factory No. 3, Dist of La." There is no mention whatsoever of New York on the card, however, according to what little I can find on line, there are only a couple of packs that have ever come to light, and they show "Universal Tobacco Company" and New York. Here is a link to an auction from some time ago:

http://www.baseballandtobacco.com/t211.htm

Also, here are crappy photos of my lone Red Sun card of Babb. The green border is cracking and chipped off in several areas, worst upper right corner, and is no doubt trimmed but otherwise is decent. And a comparison better quality Red Sun back.

Edit: I am probably wrong, but I think the New Orleans Red Sun and the New York Red Sun are two different entities. Why, indeed, would someone outside the Southern Association region give a hoot about these teams?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by jingram058

Okay, I'm wading in here with little to no knowledge. The back of my card says "Made In New Orleans" and "Baseball Players Southern Association First Series 1 To 75 Factory No. 3, Dist of La." There is no mention whatsoever of New York on the card, however, according to what little I can find on line, there are only a couple of packs that have ever come to light, and they show "Universal Tobacco Company" and New York. Here is a link to an auction from some time ago:

http://www.baseballandtobacco.com/t211.htm

Also, here are crappy photos of my lone Red Sun card of Babb. The green border is cracking and chipped off in several areas, worst upper right corner, and is no doubt trimmed but otherwise is decent. And a comparison better quality Red Sun back.

Edit: I am probably wrong, but I think the New Orleans Red Sun and the New York Red Sun are two different entities. Why, indeed, would someone outside the Southern Association region give a hoot about these teams?

It’s the same brand. We traced their ownership and acquisition by the ATC alongside the Sovereign brand and others. Universal previously owned the brand registration.

The factory line does not mean a card was distributed there - that’s the manufacturing and packing facility. For example, Piedmont cards carry a Virginia factory, they were not issued exclusively in Virginia though. The brand being stocked in New York stores wouldn’t be reflected on the cigarette pack for any brand - the factory is manufacture not end area of distribution. Many brands are packed out at one facility and shipped all over many states at this time.

Why would a person care about a minor league T206 card outside of that teams area? Or even a distant major league club? It’s entirely possible that this release is a southern limited release. There seems to be some evidence Red Sun is not a Louisiana regional brand. That doesn’t dictate the cards aren’t regional. They still could be, which is what I’m seeking - what is the evidentiary basis, if there is one, for Louisiana exclusive distribution? Even if it is regional it might be a much larger region than is typically stated.

Nice Babb - I don’t have any T211’s.

[Vintagecatcher]

Advertising for Red Sun Cigarettes can also be found on S74-1 white silks.

It is one of the rarer advertising backs in the S74-1 set.


Patrick

[G1911]

They survived until at least late 1919. Here's a registration renewal from the Official Gazette of the United States Patent Office, found in vol. 274.

Note that use is claimed since 1903 - same brand as the once-Universal brand.

[Leon]

As a "back of the card" collector, I like them...

[tedzan]

Hi Leon....I like them, too.


Here is my Ed Greminger run.






.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[G1911]

Here's some of the "puglistic" subjects. Someone at ALC or Brett or whoever wasn't a good speller.

Some of the boxers are evidently short printed. The 1908 date placed on them is another hobby fiction. They are almost certainly Q2 1910 or later.

The two cards of Mike and Jack Sullivan, twins, use the same exact photograph cropped differently. I'm 90% sure it's actually Jack on both cards.

[gabrinus]

That's cool Greg...Jerry

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by G1911

Here's some of the "puglistic" subjects. Someone at ALC or Brett or whoever wasn't a good speller.

Some of the boxers are evidently short printed. The 1908 date placed on them is another hobby fiction. They are almost certainly Q2 1910 or later.

The two cards of Mike and Jack Sullivan, twins, use the same exact photograph cropped differently. I'm 90% sure it's actually Jack on both cards.

Pretty amazing collection!

Maybe it's just me, but it seems that I have seen way more Red Sun pugilists than ballplayers.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by jingram058

Pretty amazing collection!

Maybe it's just me, but it seems that I have seen way more Red Sun pugilists than ballplayers.

I don't really know the baseball's as well to estimate, but pop reports are very very similar between T211 and T226. The supply in Red Sun boxers has been very high the last couple years due to a couple sell-offs of collections, which is how I built this many up. There was a pretty sizable supply of them in 2011-2013 range as well. People have tended to build up a number and then sell them off, so we see the same handful of copies cycling every few years. I think been more stacks like I have with the boxing, than with the baseball where there is a lot more of the cards in type collections rather than in set collections. I still need a T211 type someday.

I note the boxers do not come with the 'fat borders' that you see on the baseball subjects, like the three shown here. Even your handcut or trimmed Babb has significantly thicker borders. I like the thick borders.

I would estimate no more than 30 copies each of the white boxers in the hobby (some of which may be short printed to some extent as well); pop's max out at about 15 and the majority of these in the hobby seem to have entered slabs. Most of these 34 are crackouts. Adam and some of the other boxing guys probably have a better guesstimate than I. Any of of our T211 collectors have population estimates for the Southern subjects? The evidence that the 4 black 'puglistic subjects' were short printed is compelling, I think. It probably indicates some very interesting distribution pattern, but that is conjecture. The sheet layout must have been bizarre.

[Pat R]

It appears that The Universal Tobacco Company was another Tobacco Company that was actually owned by the ATC either from the beginning or a lot longer than it would seem.


Nov 22 1901
The_Gazette_Fri__Nov_22__1901_.jpg

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Pat R

It appears that The Universal Tobacco Company was another Tobacco Company that was actually owned by the ATC either from the beginning or a lot longer than it would seem.


Nov 22 1901

This is great. Looks like the formal reorganization in 1904 took considerably longer than I would have expected and they controlled it well before then.

[steve B]

It's a bit amazing just how much ATC controlled.

Outside of that control, just my thinking on distribution. I'd have to really get very far into who was who and how distribution happened in that industry at the time to have much confidence.

I think outside of the ATC influence if there was any outside of that at all, each factory producing a small brand would have a distribution area. Sort of like how some large businesses today have distributors with a territory.
So Red Sun being packed and shipped from a Louisiana factory would have been sent/sold to the distributors for that factory.

If I was running the brand, I'd also want to line up distributors in major cities people local to my region might travel to since they might want to buy a familiar brand on say a trip to NY or Chicago or DC. But not to distributors in smaller cities or towns outside the usual area.

The larger brands would have more national distribution, so no matter what factory produced them, Piedmonts would get shipped to ATC distributors nearly everywhere.

There wouldn't be much reason to pack differently for different distributors. It's much more efficient to pack everything the same. The only exception would be the really interesting T206 note saying packing for not the Philadelphia area.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by steve B

It's a bit amazing just how much ATC controlled.

Outside of that control, just my thinking on distribution. I'd have to really get very far into who was who and how distribution happened in that industry at the time to have much confidence.

I think outside of the ATC influence if there was any outside of that at all, each factory producing a small brand would have a distribution area. Sort of like how some large businesses today have distributors with a territory.
So Red Sun being packed and shipped from a Louisiana factory would have been sent/sold to the distributors for that factory.

If I was running the brand, I'd also want to line up distributors in major cities people local to my region might travel to since they might want to buy a familiar brand on say a trip to NY or Chicago or DC. But not to distributors in smaller cities or towns outside the usual area.

The larger brands would have more national distribution, so no matter what factory produced them, Piedmonts would get shipped to ATC distributors nearly everywhere.

There wouldn't be much reason to pack differently for different distributors. It's much more efficient to pack everything the same. The only exception would be the really interesting T206 note saying packing for not the Philadelphia area.

From what I can tell from the Tobacco journals of the period, factories didn't have set areas of distribution.

There do not seem to be distributors tied to a factory, or distributors at all for the most part. Jobbers are ordering direct with ATC or ATC's subsidiary holding firms like Continental, Lorillard, Anargyros and using an internal network. They seem to have had control of distribution themselves. ATC control of distribution and their network seems to have been one of the major headaches they gave the few independent firms that were still around.

From what I can find, there was national (or at least, broad eastern) distribution of most brands. The exceptions seem to be new brands; where they are given a test market for a limited time to see how they perform and then they either disappear or go widespread (geographically, some of them don't seem to move a whole ton of orders).

It would certainly be easiest to pack the same for everywhere. We have the note about Philadelphia, as I recall Pat has shared some articles before indicating local laws that might have posed problems. Some SP'ing patterns may be indicative of geographic differences (like the racial short printing in T226 Red Sun). I wouldn't say that this is the case, it might be. I'm not compelled that they went to the trouble to issue, say, T206 minor leaguers only in the area of those minor leagues. I don't think anyone has claimed that, but that logic seems to be the only basis for Red Sun being limited geographically (with no evidence whatsoever for the Louisiana exclusive distribution).

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by G1911

From what I can tell from the Tobacco journals of the period, factories didn't have set areas of distribution.

There do not seem to be distributors tied to a factory, or distributors at all for the most part. Jobbers are ordering direct with ATC or ATC's subsidiary holding firms like Continental, Lorillard, Anargyros and using an internal network. They seem to have had control of distribution themselves. ATC control of distribution and their network seems to have been one of the major headaches they gave the few independent firms that were still around.

From what I can find, there was national (or at least, broad eastern) distribution of most brands. The exceptions seem to be new brands; where they are given a test market for a limited time to see how they perform and then they either disappear or go widespread (geographically, some of them don't seem to move a whole ton of orders).

It would certainly be easiest to pack the same for everywhere. We have the note about Philadelphia, as I recall Pat has shared some articles before indicating local laws that might have posed problems. Some SP'ing patterns may be indicative of geographic differences (like the racial short printing in T226 Red Sun). I wouldn't say that this is the case, it might be. I'm not compelled that they went to the trouble to issue, say, T206 minor leaguers only in the area of those minor leagues. I don't think anyone has claimed that, but that logic seems to be the only basis for Red Sun being limited geographically (with no evidence whatsoever for the Louisiana exclusive distribution).

The ATC Ledger singles out two areas the state of Ohio and the Philadelphia territory's.

ATC Ohio excluded.jpg

ATC Ohio only.jpg

ATC Phila.jpg

I know I have it somewhere but I couldn't find the Philadelphia law clipping that I saved but I did find this clipping that mentions the "queer" cigarette market in Philadelphia.

Philly The_News_and_Observer_Thu__Jun_29__1911_.jpg

[DixieBaseball]

Is there any other Tobacco Card made or distributed that has Fat Borders besides T211 & T210, in particular Series 8, which mirrors Red Suns ? I find it interesting that T210 Series 6, 1, or 2 for example don't have any Fat Border cards. I think there may be a few Series 3 Fat Borders (will have to dig in and check), which is interesting as they were Southern Texas Leaguers and bordered the Southern Association League/cards. Perhaps this might tell us they were made/distributed somewhere different? (T211 & T210-8 Fat Borders...) Just a random thought... Great Thread, discovery info btw

[G1911]

Originally Posted by DixieBaseball

Is there any other Tobacco Card made or distributed that has Fat Borders besides T211 & T210, in particular Series 8, which mirrors Red Suns ? I find it interesting that T210 Series 6, 1, or 2 for example don't have any Fat Border cards. I think there may be a few Series 3 Fat Borders (will have to dig in and check), which is interesting as they were Southern Texas Leaguers and bordered the Southern Association League/cards. Perhaps this might tell us they were made somewhere different? (T211 & T210-8 Fat Borders...) Just a random thought... Great Thread, discovery info btw

Sot of. There's not another set in the standard small T size from the ATC that has borders like this (that I can think of). There are other thick border sets, but they are larger size cards. T220, for example, has some pretty thick borders in its design. T60 Red Cross is an enlarged release of half of T59 that adds its extra dimension from its thick borders.

In addition to its strong connections to T210, Red Suns are closely related to T218 and T225. Many of its images were used in those in art form, and most of its checklist signed their contracts for those sets initially, based on the Hyland letter. Some of the boxers were not included in any other ATC set. It is not provable or certain, but I would suspect T226 were printed at Brett who had the contract releases. T211 weren't necessarily printed at the same location.

It is interesting the pugilists have a larger image and thinner border than the base ball players. It may just be because the T211's are a copy/paste effort with a different back and border color and the T226's had to be fully designed. You would think "Red Sun" would maintain the red borders of T210 from a marketing angle.

Sereis 2 of T210 has thick border cards. I'm not a T210 guy but one of my handful of type cards is this series 2 card of Wallace with the thick borders. It measures about the same as my thin border types; there is just less image and more border space on this one than my series 3 type.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Pat R

The ATC Ledger singles out two areas the state of Ohio and the Philadelphia territory's.

I know I have it somewhere but I couldn't find the Philadelphia law clipping that I saved but I did find this clipping that mentions the "queer" cigarette market in Philadelphia.

I know we talked about the Philadelphia problems and shared some clippings over email. I'm digging in my email records. There definitely is some regional packing and issuing differences for premiums based on geography.

I did come across a conversation early last year following up to it. In the testimony of Samuel S. Bloch of Bloch Brothers, he gives some rather suspicious statements that the trust is not hurting independent makers, and that he even sells to United Cigar Stores (an ATC owned outlet). He insists that his companies "Mail Pouch" scrap brand that competed with Polar Bear had had its sale steadily increase even as Polar Bear became popular, "except during the period when the 'exclusive' deals of the American Tobacco Co. existed in New England and Philadelphia". He also states that he, Bloch, had been the first to include coupons with tobacco. He testified at request of the ATC. March 7, 1908 US Tobacco Journal (https://www.google.com/books/edition...J?hl=en&gbpv=0)

I remember there were Pennsylvania (or Philadelphia; sometimes it is hard to discern if a report is actually discussing the city government or the state government located in the city) specific laws on coupons in this period that you found.

[G1911]

Also, you shared this article from June 22, 1911 in the News And Observer when we were talking about the Ware-Kramer lawsuit against the ATC. The statement could be clearer, but it seems to suggest that Georgia and Alabama may have had premium distribution problems as well.

The White Rolls actresses cards idea does not appear to have ever been brought to fruition.

[DixieBaseball]

Good stuff Guys! Should we draw correlation with the Fat borders Series in T210 + T211 Baseball players as perhaps made/distributed in a different manner than the thinner border cards? Why would Series 2,3, & 8 be the only Fat Border series.... Series 1 - South Atlantic League, Series 2 Virginia League, Series 8 - Southern Assocation !? Why does the Blue Grass League (KY) Series 6 not have Fat Borders ? Is there correlation to the series that have Fat Borders and the one's that don't to where and when they were made and distributed??

[RCMcKenzie]

I know you guys like anecdotal evidence... I do not remember lots of T211 and T210 at East Texas shows in the 80's like T213.

[G1911]

I would doubt the borders served as an indicator of distribution or geography, as they are just a slightly different aesthetic design choice. It may indicate connections between designers and/or places of printing. They are almost all certainly printed in the NY area; though the myth that the ATC T cards all were done in the American Lithography building in NYC has been busted, we haven't tied any cards to a lithographer outside the northeast. Which shadow subsidiary did which job is mostly a mystery still. It ranges from possible to likely that some sets were done at multiple locations. T210 has more series than any other ATC issue, it wouldn't be surprising if they were done up in multiple locations.

I need to go read the law here, but if these were distributed nationally, as Old Mill and Red Sun were national brands, the choice of minor league subjects from the south may have been to avoid the New York privacy law that forced them to go get contracts and face lawsuits if they didn't. People who played for NL and AL teams or northeastern leagues were from or travelled to the state giving them the problem. The T210 and T211 subjects probably were not covered by the law and did not require releases. Lower effort and lower cost baseball pictures. As the salesman says in the News and Observer, more baseball pictures were in great demand.

[DixieBaseball]

80's Red Sun Pack I own...

[DixieBaseball]

1910 OM Pack

[steve B]

The jobbers mentioned in the articles would be the same sort of business I called distributors.

I would be surprised if ATC sold direct to a small store. The cost to process their bills etc would usually be more than the profits.

But this is just full of surprises, so maybe?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by steve B

The jobbers mentioned in the articles would be the same sort of business I called distributors.

I would be surprised if ATC sold direct to a small store. The cost to process their bills etc would usually be more than the profits.

But this is just full of surprises, so maybe?

The ATC and its component companies put out a lot of ads in the journals, like the below, asking to send orders to their office directly.

There don't seem to be major distributors at all, and even local distributors appear to be rather limited and often sound like they are not independent, but a part of the monopoly. This comes up in the court testimonies sometimes, where the few independent makers are battling with the problems of the ATC's might in areas outside the direct tobacco manufacturing, and cite that they are blocked from distribution. I gather the ATC did not formally own in a clean way these local distribution channels, but they function as an arm of the trust and appear to be part of it; like the relationship between Brett and American Lithography. It seems to be an internal network they are using, not outside distributors like Topps uses today.

I imagine this was probably not more profitable - but a lot of the ATC's work isn't about making direct profit but stifling competition to later make all of the profit. Allowing independent distributors would have made sales easier for their competition. I would guess this is why the system is more complicated than it needed to be, but you know what guesses are like!

[Pat R]

Pretty good read on how big the ATC was in 1910. Sorry about the way the clippings are but it was broken up and on two different pages.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[steve B]

Originally Posted by G1911

The ATC and its component companies put out a lot of ads in the journals, like the below, asking to send orders to their office directly.

There don't seem to be major distributors at all, and even local distributors appear to be rather limited and often sound like they are not independent, but a part of the monopoly. This comes up in the court testimonies sometimes, where the few independent makers are battling with the problems of the ATC's might in areas outside the direct tobacco manufacturing, and cite that they are blocked from distribution. I gather the ATC did not formally own in a clean way these local distribution channels, but they function as an arm of the trust and appear to be part of it; like the relationship between Brett and American Lithography. It seems to be an internal network they are using, not outside distributors like Topps uses today.

I imagine this was probably not more profitable - but a lot of the ATC's work isn't about making direct profit but stifling competition to later make all of the profit. Allowing independent distributors would have made sales easier for their competition. I would guess this is why the system is more complicated than it needed to be, but you know what guesses are like!

That's pretty interesting.

The industries I've been in have been all over the place as far as distributors go. Anywhere from one place where I worked for their distributor and ended up getting every strange request east of the Mississippi. To a company that got really mad at me when I bought from a distributor way outside my area because the local guys wouldn't call me back for 2 weeks on a price and delivery request when I gave them their own part number, and it was basically sold I just had to quote it for my customer who wasn't going to wait a couple weeks.

Bikes produced some bad ones. Fuji had the place I got parts from set up as a distributor. They put together a whole dealer network, then partway into year two Fuji decided to not have distributors and took every one of those places - all of New England - direct. Cost the distributor thousands.
The other is a brand the shop I worked for sort of carried. We could get them, but a much larger local place also has the brand, and for some reason if we want to sell a high end bike they can and have told the distributor we can't have the bike and to send the sale to them. (This would be a point where I wouldn't carry that brand OR do any favors for that larger shop like they asked for a few days after stealing a big sale. But the owner like to play nice. )

I can see ATC not owning a jobber, but being the biggest and nearly only game in town telling jobbers that of they carry a non ATC brand that isn't approved they might not have ATC anymore.

[Pat R]

I guess that I was the only one that was fascinated that the American Tobacco Company controlled 96% of the cigarette output in the world in 1910.

ATC Cairo The_Charlotte_News_Fri__Jul_26__1907_.jpg

ATC Canada and Japan Winston_Salem_Journal_Fri__Jan_6__1905_.jpg

[IMG][/IMG]

[steve B]

I think I just missed it. It is amazing, in many ways.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by steve B

I think I just missed it. It is amazing, in many ways.

It's amazing how powerful they actually were, it took the government 4 years to dissolve the monopoly that they had.

The government even placed a ban on ATC products in the military in 1909.

Soldier ATC banOmaha_Daily_Bee_Tue__Jul_20__1909_.jpg

[canjond]

Sorry for the late reply here. The Red Sun pack pictured above is mine. I only know of 2 period packs - the Red Sun above which is circa 1905 and pre-dates the cards, but was made by the same company (as it would be acquired by the ATC), and one that is period. However, the one that is period sold in an eBay auction probably 15 years ago to a buyer in China and I have no idea where it is now. I only have this relatively poor scan of it.

- Jon

[Brian Weisner]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I guess that I was the only one that was fascinated that the American Tobacco Company controlled 96% of the cigarette output in the world in 1910.

Attachment 564012

Attachment 564013

[IMG][/IMG]

Hey Pat,
Having grown up in Winston Salem… I assumed everyone knew how dominant ATC was during the time. Tobacco products built our city, state, and played a huge roll in rebuilding the South and the Nation after the Civil War.
It’s probably a lot more difficult to see today, as the anti smoking campaigns of the 1990’s raised awareness on the health risks and caused a decline in consumption. Congress also passed a number of laws curtailing the placement of advertising of tobacco products, which further decreased exposure and usage.
20 years ago… everyone knew Winston Salem, as the home of Reynolds Tobacco Co….I doubt most people under 30 have any idea the impact tobacco made on every facet of American life just a short time ago.

Be well Brian

PS I love reading the old articles… makes me remember all of those trips to the library stacks

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Pat R

It's amazing how powerful they actually were, it took the government 4 years to dissolve the monopoly that they had.

The government even placed a ban on ATC products in the military in 1909.

What's amazing is that they achieved so much economic power while apparently forgetting to pay off the Feds

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I guess that I was the only one that was fascinated that the American Tobacco Company controlled 96% of the cigarette output in the world in 1910.

Attachment 564012

Attachment 564013

[IMG][/IMG]

Not at all the only one Pat. That is astounding that they were in control of that much of the domestic cigarette market. What does surprise me is that there had not been a run up in prices. Where else were people going to get their cigarettes/tobacco otherwise?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by BobC

Not at all the only one Pat. That is astounding that they were in control of that much of the domestic cigarette market. What does surprise me is that there had not been a run up in prices. Where else were people going to get their cigarettes/tobacco otherwise?

The illusion of competition, which may have kept them out of trouble for a while.

Plus, with so many different brands they could have different pricing tiers for what was actually the same product.

I would think that what was produced at say factory 30 was the same stuff in different paper tubes.


That's still done today. A friend worked on controls at a plant making vodka. They did 6 different brands, all from the same machine. Monday- Premium brand, Tuesday to Friday different brand each day less premium each day. Saturday, rotgut until the charcoal filters finally gave out. Sunday change the charcoal...

[BobC]

Originally Posted by steve B

The illusion of competition, which may have kept them out of trouble for a while.

Plus, with so many different brands they could have different pricing tiers for what was actually the same product.

I would think that what was produced at say factory 30 was the same stuff in different paper tubes.


That's still done today. A friend worked on controls at a plant making vodka. They did 6 different brands, all from the same machine. Monday- Premium brand, Tuesday to Friday different brand each day less premium each day. Saturday, rotgut until the charcoal filters finally gave out. Sunday change the charcoal...

That is a good point Steve, and well aware that that is still done today.

[cfc1909]

I find it interesting that T210 Series 6, 1, or 2 for example don't have any Fat Border cards

Series 2 T210 Old Mill Fat Border

[Brian Weisner]

Hey Jimmy,
Great card….. I always think of you when I see a Revelle…




Hope you and the family are well. B

[G1911]

From the surviving records, it seems the ATC was largely still operating on a low-cost methodology when Uncle Sam broke them up. Considering they owned or controlled over 90% of the market and high percentages of the market for components of tobacco products, distribution channels etc., it seems a little strange perhaps just how obsessed they were with that last 5-10% of the market out of their control. Their price cutting to drive out and make impossible the success of small companies probably wasn't creating more net profit at the end of the day than just leaving them be and selling some product a little bit higher would have.

They openly own a lot, and many other things are difficult to discern if the company is 1) technically independent and bullied by the ATC into doing what it wants or 2) a clandestine subsidiary kept off the books precisely because of the new anti-trust laws and the vagueness of enforcement in the early 20th century. Knapp's ALC seems to make extensive use of method 2 and less bullying, but the ATC seems to do both quite a bit.

[G1911]

In the course of sorting out some points and putting together a proper account of T226 and its history, I found further evidence about Red Sun's absorption into the ATC and the Universal Tobacco Company that was discussed in this thread. We suspected earlier in this thread that Universal may have been part of the ATC even before the dealings with Commonwealth.

I found in some old court records that have nothing to do with the ATC monopoly directly that Universal was formed in 1901 by a Mr. William Butler. Butler had been an ATC Vice President. He left in the late 1890's to found the Union Tobacco Company - which he then sold mere months later to the monopoly, going back to work for them. He then was one of the founders of this Universal Tobacco Company, which in mere months put together a capitalization of $10,000,000 in 1901 dollars, which is one hell of a lot for an upstart founded by a VP who quit his job to make a start up for the second time.

Tobacco Journal articles later in the decade specify the claim that Universal advertised itself as being created to fight the monopoly and allow independent tobacco firms to reach the market. This claim is echoed even in anti-monopoly literature of the time, for example in John Moody's book The Truth About The Trusts.

In 1907, Universal dissolves as the result of a dispute between some of its shareholders with the company for mismanagement. The firm is dissolved, the implication being money returned to investors, and its brands transfer to a newly formed entity to take them over... the Butler-Butler Company started by the very same William Butler whose career is apparently to quit the ATC, form a new company and source independent suppliers, then bring that company quickly into the ATC field yet again. The operations of this fake shell company were run by a George Hill. George's father was Percival Hill, the very same man from the OP who testified that Universal was not a competitor because they were not active in the market. This essentially fake holding company quickly dissapears. See the May 18, 1907 edition of the Journal.

This seems to be more evidence in favor of Pat's idea that the firm was probably under the ATC aegis before the merger. It seems the likely truth to Hill's statements is that Universal wasn't a competitor because, like Brett and the ALC, they were one of the secret subsidiaries of the ATC even before the merger, not because they weren't active in the market. They weren't active in the market because they weren't supposed to be; they were supposed to source components and give an illusion. It seems likely they were founded specifically to give the appearance of competition without actually doing that. I suspect there are more brands and holding companies like this, that we won't find a 100% smoking gun because no such document ever existed and they were not on paper part of the trust, but operated as part of the trust and lead by the trust's men. I don't think the Federal Government ever fully succeeded in defining the entire scope of the ATC; they defined enough to destroy them and then there was no point in going back to how firms were set up in 1901 and who really had deals with who. Once the monopoly was dead it was all dropped. This leaves it all less than 100% clear when exactly Red Sun joined the monopoly, but I thought I would update.