When is a Card Not a Card?

[ScottFandango]

sounds like you had a 1914 Cracker jack in your hands...super thin stock, even compared to the 1915...that is surely a "card" even though it didn't stack so well...you still have it?

[JLange]

If it was intended or desired to be saved or collected, and its made using paper or cardboard, it's a card to me. Individual pictures in newspapers or magazines would not qualify in my book, unless they were intended or desired to be removed, saved separately, and collected.

[robw1959]

No I don't. It was a card of Rariden. And I would have felt cheated as a kid in 1914 opening a package of Cracker Jacks just to get that "card." I know I'm treading on scared ground here, but had I been a kid in 1914 I would have had to beg my dad for a cigar box just to store those Cracker Jack issues. Think about it - kids couldn't even bind them together loosely with rubberbands without causing serious damage. Forget about playing games like "flip-em."

[tschock]

Originally Posted by robw1959

Think about it - kids couldn't even bind them together loosely with rubberbands without causing serious damage. Forget about playing games like "flip-em."

Compare to the early '90s CJ cards, which would also make for difficult flipping and a rubber band would totally cover? But I get your point.

Just curious. Where the 1914/15 CJs even marketed/listed as "cards" on the box? Or player pictures? Does anyone have a photo of an actual CJ box from back then they could share?

[CW]

Originally Posted by tschock

Compare to the early '90s CJ cards, which would also make for difficult flipping and a rubber band would totally cover? But I get your point.

Just curious. Where the 1914/15 CJs even marketed/listed as "cards" on the box? Or player pictures? Does anyone have a photo of an actual CJ box from back then they could share?

They are referred to as "baseball picture cards" on the reverse of the advertising poster sold by REA in 2009. It is interesting that for the first part of the writeup, they are referred to as only "pictures".

Still, I think it is hobby blasphemy to say 1914 CJs are not "cards".

[robw1959]

The 1915 Cracker Jacks appear, to me, to be just as thin as the 1914s. The only way I can tell them apart is by the upside down text on the reverse.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by robw1959

The 1915 Cracker Jacks appear, to me, to be just as thin as the 1914s. The only way I can tell them apart is by the upside down text on the reverse.

1914s are much thinner....if you have each year in your hand at the same time it is easily seen