My T206 Plank theory....New Follow-up info

[tedzan]

Brian

The T206 Plank was printed with 3 backs when the 150 series was 1st issued in the Summer of 1909.

This version is commonly found with SWEET CAPORAL 150, Factory 25 and 30 backs; and, an extremely rare PIEDMONT 150 back.
The 350 series version is only found with SWEET CAPORAL 350, Factory 30. This Factory was located in the NYC area.

Now, I noted that......"By 1910, T206's (350 series) included numerous A's players that were not in their 1909 issue."

Portrayed in the 350 series are Barry, Bender, Collins and 10 other A's. So, I'm speculating that American Litho. tried to "sneak" Plank
in this 2nd series by inserting him only in the SWEET CAP cigarette packs in the NYC market. But, whoever (American Caramel or per-
haps Ramly) held the exclusive rights to portray Plank had to (again) force American Litho to discontinue their T206 Plank.


TED Z

[Brian-Chidester]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Brian

The T206 Plank was printed with 3 backs when the 150 series was 1st issued in the Summer of 1909.

This version is commonly found with SWEET CAPORAL 150, Factory 25 and 30 backs; and, an extremely rare PIEDMONT 150 back.
The 350 series version is only found with SWEET CAPORAL 350, Factory 30. This Factory was located in the NYC area.

Now, I noted that......"By 1910, T206's (350 series) included numerous A's players that were not in their 1909 issue."

Portrayed in the 350 series are Barry, Bender, Collins and 10 other A's. So, I'm speculating that American Litho. tried to "sneak" Plank
in this 2nd series by inserting him only in the SWEET CAP cigarette packs in the NYC market. But, whoever (American Caramel or per-
haps Ramly) held the exclusive rights to portray Plank had to (again) force American Litho to discontinue their T206 Plank.


TED Z

That's a hypothesis about why the 350 series is rare, but why would any of the 150 series Planks be that rare?

[tedzan]

Please read this entire thread. Furthermore, also check-out my 1st thread on my Plank theory, that I posted in 2006........
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...t=plank+theory

Then, I will gladly try to answer any questions that you (or anyone else) have. Back then, I and many Net54er's, discussed
the merits and/or questions regarding this subject.

To your latest question......simply because American Litho. was immediately forced to discontinue their 150 series Plank. It
appears about 50 cards got out in the market before this occurred.

I have to go out now, and remove some more snow from my 240 foot driveway.


TED Z

[Brian-Chidester]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Please read this entire thread. Furthermore, also check-out my 1st thread on my Plank theory, that I posted in 2006........
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...t=plank+theory

Then, I will gladly try to answer any questions that you (or anyone else) have. Back then, I and many Net54er's, discussed
the merits and/or questions regarding this subject.

To your latest question......simply because American Litho. was immediately forced to discontinue their 150 series Plank. It
appears about 50 cards got out in the market before this occurred.

I have to go out now, and remove some more snow from my 240 foot driveway.


TED Z

Hi Ted... I've read all of these before. So you're saying that ATC and ALC discontinued Plank in the 150 series because of a threatened lawsuit, but then started up production of Plank again for the 350 series?

[caramelcard]

Ted,

Here is a partial quote from Erik Varon's "Sweet Recollections..." book:

"...the Philadelphia Caramel Company issued a "25 Ball Player" card set in the summer of 1909. "

Not 1910.

Rob

[tedzan]

I find it interesting that the Philadelphia Caramel Co. issued their 25-card set (E95) with Plank. But, followed this
set with their 30-card set (E96) that did NOT include Plank.

There is no doubt that there was fierce competition between the American Caramel Co. (based in Philadelphia)
and the smaller Philadelphia Caramel Co. (based in nearby Camden, NJ).

As far as the actual dating goes, I have found that certain E-card sets are off a year in the ACC dating. I can
prove this by certain players in these sets whose trades in the 1909 and 1910 period are reflected in their cards.
Germany Schaeffer is the first one that comes to my mind.

My contention that the E90-1 set was really issued in 1908 is based on my research of certain player's trades.
However, as you know, the ACC dates the E90-1 set's 1st series as 1909.


TED Z

[tedzan]

My best answer for now to your......
" Hi Ted... I've read all of these before. So you're saying that ATC and ALC discontinued Plank in the 150 series
because of a threatened lawsuit, but then started up production of Plank again for the 350 series? "

1st....These entities did not threaten lawsuits back then, they simply filed a "cease and desist" order.

2nd....Yes, ALC was free to portray the A's that they were prevented from doing in the 150 series. So, when ALC
printed an additional 10 players from the A's team (as I noted above), they slipped in Eddie Plank. After all, they
still had Plank's plate image from their 1st series, so they thought they would give it the "good old college try" once
more. But note, that they selectively chose the NY market. I guess their thinking was, that they would be able to
get away with it. Eddie Plank was one of the most popular pitchers of that era.

In any event, ALC was forced to discontinue their 350 series Plank. Assuming 100% surviveability, then approx. 50
cards of this Plank were out in the market by then.


TED Z

[Brian-Chidester]

But this is all just your hypothesis, right? No cease and desist order has been found?

Is there any other theory besides the ACC cease and desist theory that would account for a card being so rare that was issued in the Piedmont 150, as well as the Sweet Caporal 150 and 350?

[caramelcard]

Hi Ted,

The E96 set didn't include Plank because it was clearly and intentionally marked as the second part of and a continuation of E95.

Rob