Possible 3 Types of Ruth 1928 Harrington's

I would think they would have all cards on hand to be handed out with each ice cream purchase or redemption. Just like Dairy Queen Team USA baseball cards were handed out with a purchase of the USA helmet sundae.

[doug.goodman]

Is that how the cards were distributed, at the store with a purchase of ice cream?

If that's the case, with a Ruth card being worth a free ice cream, it seems like they would have less of them, or at least hand them out less frequently.

Also, I don't see them replacing your card when you turn it in for your free ice cream, I just see them giving you an ice cream.

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

Is that how the cards were distributed, at the store with a purchase of ice cream?

If that's the case, with a Ruth card being worth a free ice cream, it seems like they would have less of them, or at least hand them out less frequently.

Also, I don't see them replacing your card when you turn it in for your free ice cream, I just see them giving you an ice cream.

I would think the Ruth would be taken for the Ice Cream Novelty and not given back but for the quarts of Ice Cream, who knows, it could be a corrected printing flaw or a gimmick needed for the quart of Ice Cream thank you for your responses it’s a mystery

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by rgpete

I would think the Ruth would be taken for the Ice Cream Novelty and not given back but for the quarts of Ice Cream, who knows, it could be a corrected printing flaw or a gimmick needed for the quart of Ice Cream thank you for your responses it’s a mystery

I think it's a typo.

I think it has nothing having to do with the redemption(s), and I think when cards were redeemed (Ruth for the single, a full set for a gallon) nobody got any cards back in the deal, just ice cream.

Am I possibly wrong? Absolutely, but it would make no sense for cards to be returned to the person redeeming them for ice cream. That would mean variations of cards that shopkeepers would have needed to keep track of, and effectively two different supplies of cards used for two different reasons and that's more work than any shopkeeper would care to be involved in, and that's not to mention the possible employees of those shopkeepers, and it's all just a recipe for disaster for the shop inventory.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

I think it's a typo.

I think it has nothing having to do with the redemption(s), and I think when cards were redeemed (Ruth for the single, a full set for a gallon) nobody got any cards back in the deal, just ice cream.

Am I possibly wrong? Absolutely, but it would make no sense for cards to be returned to the person redeeming them for ice cream. That would mean variations of cards that shopkeepers would have needed to keep track of, and effectively two different supplies of cards used for two different reasons and that's more work than any shopkeeper would care to be involved in, and that's not to mention the possible employees of those shopkeepers, and it's all just a recipe for disaster for the shop inventory.

I agree it is most likely an incorrect typeset or unintended stray mark, but I do believe it's possible for the cards to have been returned with the ice cream redemption. It would be easy for the store owner to simply stamp cancelled on the redeemed cards or hole punch them-- it has been done with other card sets. Of course, the lack of any surviving cards with these qualities (to my knowledge anyway) suggests that if it happened that way, it wasn't very often.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I agree it is most likely an incorrect typeset or unintended stray mark, but I do believe it's possible for the cards to have been returned with the ice cream redemption. It would be easy for the store owner to simply stamp cancelled on the redeemed cards or hole punch them-- it has been done with other card sets. Of course, the lack of any surviving cards with these qualities (to my knowledge anyway) suggests that if it happened that way, it wasn't very often.

I agree with you that it's possible cards could have been returned, but only if they were marked as you mention, not with a different card. But if that were the case I would think that the majority of surviving examples would have been marked as redeemed. Especially the Ruth.

It makes more sense that it is a mark from the print process along with the cut off “A”

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

Is that how the cards were distributed, at the store with a purchase of ice cream?

If that's the case, with a Ruth card being worth a free ice cream, it seems like they would have less of them, or at least hand them out less frequently.

Also, I don't see them replacing your card when you turn it in for your free ice cream, I just see them giving you an ice cream.

What are your thoughts?