Missing Card Question

[savedfrommyspokes]

Welcome Bo... Here is a link that discusses your Mizell question...he signed with Fleer, but never had a card produced by them, just a 61 Post card.

https://law.marquette.edu/facultyblo...ard-contracts/

[ALR-bishop]

Thanks for the link. Some folks think a Topps lawsuit halted the 63 Fleer set, but I have never found one. More likely a second series was halted by poor sales from not being able to sign enough players and trying to sell cards with cookies, since some players in the 63 Fleer set did have Topps contracts which were exclusive as to marketing with gum or confections. Leaf had tried earlier, in 1960, with a marble.

[Bo]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

Welcome Bo... Here is a link that discusses your Mizell question...he signed with Fleer, but never had a card produced by them, just a 61 Post card.

https://law.marquette.edu/facultyblo...ard-contracts/

Thanks for the answer. I'd always ignored Wills' absence on a '59 card since he didn't even play for the Dodgers until part way through the season.

And I'd never seen anywhere else that Mizell had signed with Fleer. Why would he do that? He was on the '57 and '58 cards and then nothing other than the Post cereal card. Why would you sign a contract with a company that wasn't going to print a card? And if he signed a contract with Fleer, how could Post issue his card?

Is there a link anywhere that lists players (by year) not on Topps cards?

Somehow my youthful mind drew the connection between Ted Williams not being on a 'regular' baseball card in 1959 and his set on Fleer. I bought about 30 or so of the Williams packs when I was a kid and was not impressed. When he and Mizell weren't on any 1960 cards either from Topps or Fleer I gave up the hobby.

[ALR-bishop]

Several players appear in both the Fleer and Topps sets. Topps contacts were not exclusive except as to distribution with gum and candy, hence Post with cereal, or Fleer with cookies or Leaf with marbles could distribute players under contract with Topps, if they could sign them.

As I mentioned above, Fleer had very poor sales on it's first ( and ultimately only) series in 1963. Topps had a good product that year, and the market ( little boys) was primed for and apparently favored gum over cookies.

Mizell and others were likely signed with the original Fleer plan that there would be a second series, or even more. Because of poor sales, there never was.

There are several reported and on line FTC cases in which many of the Topps/Fleer factoids are presented in various complaints filed by Fleer against Topps

[savedfrommyspokes]

Al, since Mizell's last Topps card was in 58, it would seem that he (like Ted W), signed sometime in 58 with Fleer. Why do you think would Mizell would sign 3-4 years ahead of a supposed card issue coming out? Clearly Ted had his own set in 59 so the time of him signing with Fleer makes sense, but not with Mizell. Do you think Fleer may have misled MIzell as to when they would produce a set with him in it?

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Several players appear in both the Fleer and Topps sets. Topps contacts were not exclusive except as to distribution with gum and candy, hence Post with cereal, or Fleer with cookies or Leaf with marbles could distribute players under contract with Topps, if they could sign them.

As I mentioned above, Fleer had very poor sales on it's first ( and ultimately only) series in 1963. Topps had a good product that year, and the market ( little boys) was primed for and apparently favored gum over cookies.

Mizell and others were likely signed with the original Fleer plan that there would be a second series, or even more. Because of poor sales, there never was.

There are several reported and on line FTC cases in which many of the Topps/Fleer factoids are presented in various complaints filed by Fleer against Topps

Al,

Is "FTC" the Federal Trade Commission?

[ALR-bishop]

Yes. When I first started looking into whether Topps blocked the further production of Fleer's 1963 set, I looked for court cases but found none. But I did find several FTC complaints filed against Topps by Fleer. Some had interesting production figures for certain years for Topps and Fleer. It is my belief poor sales due to inability to package their cards with gum rather than Topps legal moves shut down their 1963 effort . I do think their original plans were to issue further series and that they did have other players under contract to do so. The 59 set could be distributed with gum because Williams was exclusive to Fleer that year, but in 1963 several of Fleer's cards involved players also under contract to Topps, whose contracts were exclusive to distribution of such player cards with gum or candy.

[IMG][/IMG]

[Jeff Alcorn]

Hi Guys,

Missing cards has been an area that I have always been intersted in. The Maury Wills story has long been known in the hobby- about his anger at Topps for not signing him in training camp because they did not think he was much of a prospect and his subsequent refusal to sign with Topps until 1967. However, there are other players that have no cards or are missing years. Off the top of my head-

Marshall Bridges - no cards
Tony Horton - no cards
Diomedes Olivo - no cards
Eddie Kasko - missing in 65 & 66
Bob Lillis - missing in 65, 66, 67
Al Worthington - missing in 69
Doug Clemens - missing his whole career except 67
Arnold Earley - same as Clemens, nothing until 67
Rusty Staub - had a personal services contract with the Mets from 72-74
Jim Gilliam - missing in 65 & 66
Ron Brand - missing in 67
Julio Gotay - missing after 68
Sandy Valdespino - missing after 68
Ron Kline - missing in 70
Juan Pizarro - missing in 70
Jim Grant -missing in 70
Reggie Jackson - missing in 67 & 68
Al Downing - missing in 77
Jim Bouton - missing in 69 & 70
Steve Bailey - no cards
Clyde Wright - missing in 67 & 68
Rickey Clark - missing until 70
Jerry Grote - missing in 77 since he had threatened retirement - there is a prototype in existence, though.

The list could go on & on. In listing missing players, I tried to use only those that were established Major Leaguers or that had played a significant number of games the year before. If I got out the Baseball Encyclopedia I could probably list 100 more that should have been in sets but were not, and these are just the mid-1960s until the mid-1970s. If it had been me, I would print every player, coach, and manager for every season, and with every team they were with, however, only with current photos - not with old photos on the wrong team.

However, since Topps never asked me as a kid back then it is still just a wish of mine that these cards had existed to collect. I am sure that the minute I post this I will think of some more.

Jeff

[ALR-bishop]

Great list Jeff. Starting in the later 60s my understanding is that individual contracts gave way to Marvin Miller and the Players Association contract. I wonder if being missing could in some cases have been a matter of individual preference and in others just Topps miscues.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by Bo

Thanks for the answer. I'd always ignored Wills' absence on a '59 card since he didn't even play for the Dodgers until part way through the season.

And I'd never seen anywhere else that Mizell had signed with Fleer. Why would he do that? He was on the '57 and '58 cards and then nothing other than the Post cereal card. Why would you sign a contract with a company that wasn't going to print a card? And if he signed a contract with Fleer, how could Post issue his card?

Is there a link anywhere that lists players (by year) not on Topps cards?

Somehow my youthful mind drew the connection between Ted Williams not being on a 'regular' baseball card in 1959 and his set on Fleer. I bought about 30 or so of the Williams packs when I was a kid and was not impressed. When he and Mizell weren't on any 1960 cards either from Topps or Fleer I gave up the hobby.

Your welcome Bo...for me, I am still trying to understand why Topps did not make a Yankees team card in 68???

[ALR-bishop]

Some players signed with both Topps and Fleer. The Topps contracts were only exclusive as to packaging with gum and candy. Fleer prior to 1963 had been trying to sign players to contracts to do some sort of set. I do not know if Fleer would have sought an exclusive arrangement with Mizell as it did for a time with Williams and Wills. It would seem unlikely, but maybe. Maybe Mizell sought extra money from Topps for a renewal and they refused. Who knows. I am just speculating.