New theory why American Beauty cards are narrower than other T206's

[canjond]

Frank,

I have seen the soft packs before. There are 8-count soft packs dating to 1910 (I'm not sure if the one pictured above is an 8 or 10 count). The majority of the soft packs that are out there came from a New Jersey find circa 2005. I believe the seller came across 8 or 10 of them.

While I've had discussions about the soft pack theory with a few others in the past, I still don't completely agree that the AB's were cut thinner to fit in it.

- Based on ATC records discovered by Terry a few years back, AB was listed as being packaged in 10-count packs, not 8 count packs (not sure if the pack pictured above is an 8 or 10 but most of the softs I've seen have been 8 counts)

- The soft packs I have seen did not match the factory and district numbers for the AB cards.

- Many AB cards would show OBVIOUS signs on wear because of the relative lack of protection that the soft pack affords.

- I do have a 1910 AB slide and shell pack - exact same size as other slide and shell packs (including the 1905 ones). The factory and district codes DO match the cards. I'll post a picture of this pack later.

- All other "categorized" T206s were packaged in hard packs, not soft packs. The only exception to this would be Coupon, if you believe Coupon is a T206. However, Coupons did not offer any other configuration other than soft pack (so there was no alternative). The cards were much more brittle and the Type 1s that exist display the wear that would be typical for cards coming from soft packs.

In the end, I can neither prove nor disprove the soft pack theory. However, I do believe the reason for the thinner ABs does not have to do with packaging...

[canjond]

1910 slide and shell...

[canjond]

1908 ABs

[tedzan]

Jon stated the all-important factor in determining which American Beauty cigarette packs contained T206's....
"I do have a 1910 AB slide and shell pack - exact same size as other slide and shell packs (including the 1905
ones). The factory and district codes DO match the cards. "

Conversely, Jon said......
"The soft packs I have seen did not match the factory and district numbers for the AB cards."

This clearly spells it out, guys. It was a violation of Federal Law to mix tobacco advertising premiums (T206's)
with differently labelled (Factory's) tobacco products.


TED Z

[FrankWakefield]

Ted, I've seen sufficient reason here to doubt the "smaller package" theory as for why AB cards aren't as wide. But I've not seen anything anywhere about any federal law about cigarette inserts. Where did you get that? I'd have thought the factory and district numbers were in there because American Tobacco wanted it, not because of some federal law. What would have been the harm in Piedmont putting a Piedmont back on the cards they distributed without any factory or district designation? Red Man tobacco cards don't have such a designation, do they? I don't think Worch tobacco cards have that. Where did you get this federal law thing? Just because they did or didn't do something doesn't mean it was because of a federal law....

[canjond]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

Ted, I've seen sufficient reason here to doubt the "smaller package" theory as for why AB cards aren't as wide. But I've not seen anything anywhere about any federal law about cigarette inserts. Where did you get that? I'd have thought the factory and district numbers were in there because American Tobacco wanted it, not because of some federal law. What would have been the harm in Piedmont putting a Piedmont back on the cards they distributed without any factory or district designation? Red Man tobacco cards don't have such a designation, do they? I don't think Worch tobacco cards have that. Where did you get this federal law thing? Just because they did or didn't do something doesn't mean it was because of a federal law....

Frank - I'm away on vacation but yes, there is a federal law. I'm sure Jamie Hull will post the citation before I get home to look it up, but regulations were such that inserts had to state the factory and district numbers for the packages in which they were contained.

[jimonym]

Jon,
I'll post the statute later this afternoon.

Frank,
Factory and district info were required for two reasons: concern about illegal lottery schemes and concern about the distribution of indecent material. Factory and district info would allow the authorities to trace any improper inserts to their source.

[tedzan]

I love my AMERICAN BEAUTY pack, too.

Tell me ole buddy, should I light-up one of those cigarettes ?



TED Z

[ethicsprof]

i've got a full pack,too, ole buddy and i say we'd better not touch them!!!
on the other hand, i have an unopened polar bear pouch on the way from
Jon C. and i'm tempted to chew a bit!!
but jon and my wife both say----No Way!!!

best,
barry