Vintage Tobacco Packs- Let's see them

[canjond]

Neither belong to me, but both incredible items.

[NYHighlanderFan]

The counterfeit "GQ" packet posted earlier in this thread must have existed at some point. It would be the ATC variation, possibly early-mid 1890's? Has anyone seen a true pack of that design?

[1880nonsports]

pretty sure copied from some other image - NOT A PACK. It actually looks a little familiar.....

Jon - can you provide a larger picture of the image next to the Mono pack? I'm old and can't see anything that small (mainly a problem when I need to pee).

[canjond]

Henry - unfortunately that's the largest scan I have. However, if you look to the upper portion of the photo, you will see large Mono cigarette display packs (similar to the Ramly display packs from Leon's post).

[NYHighlanderFan]

You would think, at least one of those large pack displays survived and is somewhere on earth!

[ValKehl]

Leon, I suspect that your neat RPPC showing the Ramly storefront display helps explain why T204 Ramly cards are so easy to find compared to T204 T.T.T. cards.

[Joe_G.]

Originally Posted by 1880nonsports

pretty sure copied from some other image - NOT A PACK. It actually looks a little familiar.....

Interesting Henry, Jim and I thought it was front, side, and back to a shell that was unfolded. Would love to know it's origin.

Originally Posted by jerrys

You suggest option two: GQ-t2 no card - however the likeness of the design of the card to the pack suggest they were related therefore packaged together. They were printed at the same time for the same reason. You can't prove a negative - so why not consider option 3?

In my belief of option 1 or option 3 I show images of the GQ and OJ packs as sources of the N162 on my website. What must I do???

The N162 cards are pretty but not sure why you suggest they are styled in the same format as the ornate GQ pack. They don't share colors, fonts, or style that I notice. To me, the facts are that the pack we know from 1887 and 1889 would be the pack that was used to distribute N162 cards in 1888 (the plain appearing pack). By your reasoning, did they also have an ornate OJ pack for N162 distribution?

Originally Posted by jerrys

As for the A&G - not scientific, can't set your watch by my dates, the year is as close as I could determine.

You provided pretty specific dates on your website as follows which we now know to be in error.

Originally Posted by jerrys

The Allen & Ginter Company, who had been producing advertising cards, made a promotional decision in the spring of 1888 to produce and insert the N28 lithograph cards of World Champions into their Richmond brand 10-cigarette packs. Later in 1888 the N29, a second series, succeeded the N28 . . .

Your spring of 1888 timing for N28 should retreat to fall of 1888 and your N29 date should get bumped to 1889, August of 1889 was start of distribution. The cards were also inserted in packs of Virginia Brights. For the VB packs, The "Crop of 1885" is correct for N28, the "Crop of 1886" is correct for N29. As I mentioned earlier, I will post details in another thread that repeats what I've published in OC and on this forum previously but with more details and evidence.

Here is an 1888 VB pack (A&G used ~3 year old tobacco). VB packs are easier to come by than many others and consistently have dated over-prints on the tax stamp to allow accurate dating of the pack. I have three 1888 VB packs dating from Feb. 28th to Dec. 18th, 1888 and all are "Crop of 1885".

[jerrys]

Joe -

With almost no hard evidence forming absolute facts is nearly possible. Your new information alters earlier opinions. If I had access to more information it would have been ideal. I used what I had.

As I stated previously, this article was published last year. The webpage you see I wrote in HTML for submission. It was transformed by Beckett webpage designers to give it a 19th century atmosphere for the magazine. This subject is one of the five of my VC articles - they did a superb job on all. VC is a high quality sports card and memorabilia magazine.

Some of the statements you have made here have already been addressed - some are unfriendly to comments I made in jest. Some of my statements were overlooked.

The N28s were previously booked for the year 1887 - changed to 1888 just a few years ago. New information comes along as we progress. No reason to condemn the originators.

We have more than exceeded the purpose of this thread. There is more but not suitable for this forum.

[Leon]

Using what you had doesn't change the facts. We all make mistakes. That said, thanks for your research.

And thanks to Joe for the great information....(and everyone in this thread, it's really good)

Originally Posted by jerrys

Joe -

With almost no hard evidence forming absolute facts is nearly possible. Your new information alters earlier opinions. If I had access to more information it would have been ideal. I used what I had.

As I stated previously, this article was published last year. The webpage you see I wrote in HTML for submission. It was transformed by Beckett webpage designers to give it a 19th century atmosphere for the magazine. This subject is one of the five of my VC articles - they did a superb job on all. VC is a high quality sports card and memorabilia magazine.

Some of the statements you have made here have already been addressed - some are unfriendly to comments I made in jest. Some of my statements were overlooked.

The N28s were previously booked for the year 1887 - changed to 1888 just a few years ago. New information comes along as we progress. No reason to condemn the originators.

We have more than exceeded the purpose of this thread. There is more but not suitable for this forum.

[oldjudge]

Jerry-It's a good thing when more and better information comes out. Don't think of yourself as being attacked (you are not); think of the body of hobby knowledge being added to. And BTW, there is not a nicer, more diligent, hobby researcher than Joe Gonsowski.