REA reveals a 24 year mystery....the PIEDMONT Plank

[benjulmag]

Ted,

First, to identify myself, benjulmag is your buddy Corey. I'm still adjusting to this new forum which doesn't have a separate place to post your name (Leon, are you listening?)

Second, I hear what you're saying and, as is always the case with your points, there is much merit to them. I'm just still having issues with Piedmont Wagners and Piedmont Planks. To my knowledge, none are known with original factory cuts. I recognize I'm in the extreme minority with what I'm about to say, but I for one cannot entirely discount what Bill Heitman said on this board some time ago--that in the early 1950's professional printers who had access to original t206 plates made repro cards, including Wagner. Was Heitman hallucinating when he said that? Perhaps. But what if he wasn't? It seems to me that IF someone were to do that, and did so with the intent not to deceive, he/she would intentionally use a different back than the cards were known to be issued in. I for one when I look at the Conlon Piedmont Plank just sold by REA, or the Gretzky Wagner, can't help but notice that they look different (sharper/more colorful) than the Sweet Caporal Planks/Wagners. Yes, that could be because different factories had different printing methodolgies. But maybe it goes beyond that.

But putting that aside, what Barry says is dead on correct. IMO the OVERWHELMING sentiment is that neither the Gretzky Wagner nor the Conlon Plank was issued in a cigarette pack, but were instead cut from a sheet. REGARDLESS what might or might not have been done to the Wagner after that point, the fact that they were cut from a sheet means that both should be graded the SAME way, either both 8's or both A's. I simply don't see how that point can be reasonably disputed. The fact that one is an 8 (and therefore has a purported market value substantially more than the next highest example) while the other is an A (with a market value substantially less than the highest known example) makes no sense and is as good an example as any of how form rules over substance. To go further, does anybody really think that if the Gretzky Wagner was submitted today to PSA (in the same manner as REA recently submitted to them the Conlon Plank), the card would come back anything other than an "A"? Yet because the submission was done years ago at the time of PSA's founding, somehow that 8 has become etched in stone, regardless of the blatant inconsistencies/contradictions that creates.

One of the items in my collection is a final-production-run E93 sheet. The Cobb is in the middle of sheet and (to the naked eye at least) is perfect front and back. Yet if I were to have that card professionally cut with perfect centering/dimensions, it would grade an "A". How can that be while at the same time the most valuable/publicized card in our hobby grades an 8?

[tedzan]

There's a lot of us here that share your....shall I say....skepticism regarding these two cards.

You cited Heitman and one of his "strange" comments. Anyhow, do you recall a time when he chimed
in and told us his first hand knowledge of the PSA grading of the Wagner ?

I tried to find Bill's comments, using the SEARCH feature here; however, this feature does not appear
to function as well as it did in the old Net54.


TED Z

[Jim VB]

Corey,

Go to your profile page and fill out whatever information you're willing to share. One of the options is "Real Name." If you fill in that field, it will appear in all your posts (as it does with Frank Wakefield, above, under his blue, highlighted name.)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Ted,

First, to identify myself, benjulmag is your buddy Corey. I'm still adjusting to this new forum which doesn't have a separate place to post your name (Leon, are you listening?)

Go to user CP, then edit my details, then real name.

[wonkaticket]

May or may have not been said but to be clear there are (2) other Piedmont 150 Planks.

Both came from the Halper Collection and both are handcut like the current one in REA.

Glad to hear a fellow Board Member won! I hung in as long as I could...

Here are the other Planks...

[wonkaticket]

Also I'm not one for hobby legend, but I do find it interesting that there seem to be many more 350 subject Planks that come up vs. 150 subject Planks.

And the visual diff. between that of a 150 and 350 is night and day. 350's always look really bad compared to 150's a real printing change per say. Who knows maybe that is a clue to a printing issue of some sort.....

[jmk59]

I thought the REA lot description for the Plank was a masterful display of tiptoeing around all of these issues.

I don't have it open in front of me, but it vaguely mentioned the early days of grading in which there wasn't as much focus on alterations and whether hand cut from a sheet was the same as trimmed. It also talked generically about printer's sheets.

I thought they went gracefully and perfectly right up to the line of saying "Look. These were both cut from the same sheet and should both be graded Auth by current standards." without actually saying it. They just went on poetically about the days of yore in cards and grading and sheets and Wagners and Planks.

Great job by someone writing that description.

J

[Jim VB]

Truth is PSA has had two shots (at least) at the Gretzky Wagner. As Ted mentioned it is the first card they graded and has a serial number of 00000001. But it must have been resubmitted later for re-labeling, because it was tagged as "McNall/Gretzky".

I know that for a re-holdering/re-labeling PSA doesn't necessarily do a re-grading, but you would think, with the card in question, they might look at it again.

[philliesphan]

Originally Posted by Jim VB

Truth is PSA has had two shots (at least) at the Gretzky Wagner. As Ted mentioned it is the first card they graded and has a serial number of 00000001. But it must have been resubmitted later for re-labeling, because it was tagged as "McNall/Gretzky".

I know that for a re-holdering/re-labeling PSA doesn't necessarily do a re-grading, but you would think, with the card in question, they might look at it again.

Jim -- PSA has reholdered the Wagner a number of times. I know that there is a picture of Brian S. with the card reholdered with his name on the pedigree. I believe he ultimately said that it didn't look right that way and had it changed back to the Gretzky label.

m

[toppcat]

Corey, even if you had the plates how would you match the ink? Especially on the backs, where it would be easier to see a single color not matching what had been printed 40 years prior. What of the card stock? I believe the reprint theory is just hearsay and old hobby legend.

Now, combining the Olbermann first chase card theory and Ted's pulled sheet theory, that is another story and I would like to hear more on that if it's possible.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by toppcat

Now, combining the Olbermann first chase card theory ... .

The chase card idea is very interesting. I believe that ATC may have done some chase cards. The T220 boxing set is found with white or silver borders. Only 1/2 of the set is known in silver. Of those, one card (Mike Donovan) has only 1 known example. My hunch is that this was a chase card and that if an ad medium ever appears we may find some sort of contest. Also, isn't there a missing T227 card (the set advertises 25 but I've been told that no one can seem to checklist more than 24)?