T206 Coupon type 1 scarcity level?

[tedzan]

Andrew

So, you are skeptical of my "back design" theory ?

I will leave you with one more tidbit....please notice that the name "COUPON" is in quotes. This provides us with a timeline,
as the Coupon Tobacco Co. had been acquired by the American Tobacco Co. (ATC) in the 1909/1910 timeframe; and, the
ATC Copyright was still pending.

Now....I will approach this argument from the "front design" facts. The 48 major league players in the COUPON #1 set are
all from the 350 series (printed and issued in late 1909 to 1910). This fact is undeniable.
Whereas, in the T213-2 & T213-3 sets, the front designs are derived from many players in the 460 series of the T206 set
that were issued in 1911. This fact by itself, is sufficient to narrow the window of time when the COUPON #1 set was is-
sued to 1910.

There are 48 Southern Leaguers (SL) in the T206 set which were ONLY printed and issued in 1909 & 1910. American Litho.
selected 20 SL (listed here) from these 48 SL in the T206 design for the COUPON #1 set that represent the region served
by the Coupon Tobacco Co.

American Litho. did not design these white-bordered cards in a random fashion. Throughout the T206 set, it is evident that
it was designed, printed and issued in a certain timeline, with a lot of due diligence. And, this includes the 1910 COUPON
set of 68 cards.


List of 1910 COUPON Southern Leaguers

Bay.....Nashville
Bernhard.....Nashville
Breitenstein.....New Orleans
Carey.....Memphis
Cranston.....Memphis
Ellam.....Nashville
Fritz.....New Orleans
Greminger....Montgomery
Hart....Montgomery
Hart.....Little Rock
Hickman.....Mobile
Jordan.....Atlanta
Lentz.....Little Rock
Molesworth.....Birmingham
Perdue.....Nashville
Persons....Montgomery
Reagan.....New Orleans
Rockenfeld.....New Orleans
Smith.....Atlanta
Thornton.....Mobile

Finally, I have to say that I don't follow your logic on your other comments.


TED Z

Originally Posted by tedzan

Andrew

I will leave you with one more tidbit....please notice that the name "COUPON" is in quotes. This provides us with a timeline,
as the Coupon Tobacco Co. had been acquired by the American Tobacco Co. (ATC) in the 1909/1910 timeframe; and, the
ATC Copyright was still pending.

Now....I will approach this argument from the "front design" facts. The 48 major league players in the COUPON #1 set are
all from the 350 series (printed and issued in late 1909 to 1910). This fact is undeniable.
Whereas, in the T213-2 & T213-3 sets, the front designs are derived from many players in the 460 series of the T206 set
that were issued in 1911. This fact by itself, is sufficient to narrow the window of time when the COUPON #1 set was is-
sued to 1910.

There are 48 Southern Leaguers (SL) in the T206 set which were ONLY printed and issued in 1909 & 1910. American Litho.
selected 20 SL (listed here) from these 48 SL in the T206 design for the COUPON #1 set that represent the region served
by the Coupon Tobacco Co.

American Litho. did not design these white-bordered cards in a random fashion. Throughout the T206 set, it is evident that
it was designed, printed and issued in a certain timeline, with a lot of due diligence. And, this includes the 1910 COUPON
set of 68 cards.


TED Z

Ted this is exactly what I was looking for to hear. So with this info there is no doubt that the Type 1's were printed during the T206 runs thus making the Type 1's another sub set of the T206's. So hearing all this I vote that Coupons should be reclassified to T206's and now the part about where the Type 2's and 3's should go. Would they as well as some other Sets be able to fall into T206-2's?

[FrankWakefield]

.

[teetwoohsix]

I have to agree Frank.I HIGHLY respect Ted Z's knowledge on the subject(and also everyone else contributing to this thread),but I still feel the same way about it.

I am not for reclassifying these T cards,regardless of any and all similarities.There are obvious reasons T213-1's are grouped with the T213-2's and T213-3's.Jefferson Burdick did not go into this blind.

If you want to change a Burdick designation to a card,why not go after changing the H801-7 Old Mill Cabinets????This is something I think everyone would agree on-that these examples should've been assigned a "T" code.

This is a great discussion-I love it!!But I do not want to see T206 turn into "T206-1,T206-2,etc.,etc.,.........it's already big enough guys!!Except for some certain T206 collectors who have been collecting T206's for decades,and have completed the set and many sub-sets within.........hhhmmmnnn.....

[ethicsprof]

I,too, have faith in Mr. Burdick.
But I also know from spending a career serving as editor of numerous published volumes written by distinguished figures in my own field, that the very best make errors and have no problem with the 'touch ups' which make their work better and sometimes even the best out there. Errata sections still are added to and adjusted to volumes written by the giants in all fields which show how indebted to them we are for their work, so much so that we give our scholarly lives to fully assimilating,honoring,and,yes, expanding their work. This is the honor that I think this thread is bestowing upon Mr. Burdick.
For me this thread is groundbreaking.
Darren has helped me to recognize a major weakness in my own approach which i am going to tackle for some time---when he suggests that there are links between issues that have yet to be discovered and that there may be a
'unifying theory' that makes some sense of the various moving parts we are sorting through. Ted's primacy of piedmont theory with trajectories through the various series and backs is a major illuminator in beginning to discern the 'unifying theory'. Stepping back and coming to grips with the reason for
the relative 'centrality' of various regions at various times,e.g. Darren's point re: louisiana and coupon,victory,red cross, etc. is a must in the 'unifying' task. Clearly delineating the various 'battles' between tobacco companies,candy companies, and the like with attention given to dating, geographical locations/factories particularly, and star baseball players who may well be critical to the discussion is a must in this 'unifying' task. And there are other elements which will arise 'in media res'.
Granted, it may well be that we will find that these pieces of the 'puzzle' are largely chaotic,haphazard pieces of little or limited design but i just don't think so...today.

all the best,
barry

[teetwoohsix]

You brought up a key question Barry-is it an error?Is it something overlooked?Or was it deliberate?

Just for the record,Darren,Ted Z,Frank,Barry & Barry,and too many to name have far more experience & knowledge than I do on these cards.But I do my homework also,as much as possible-I learn so much from you all-thank you.

I am not discounting anyone's theories or saying anyone's wrong.

I only speak my opinion,and try not to be offensive.

So,in my last two posts,I've brought up a couple of things-T205's with similarities to T202,and the H801-7's(which seem to belong in some way to the same group as T210's).I only use these as a couple of examples of how these cards/cabinets,etc. can somehow seem to be tied together,but have their own designations.......and there are plenty more(as Darren stated)........so where does it go and where does it end??

Thanks for the great thread,one of the best IMO.

Sincerely,Clayton