![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Give me an American Beauty and any other T206 and I can tell you which is the AB with my eyes closed.
JimB |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Frank,
A Fatima card would not meet any of the criteria I mentioned for a T206. They were manufactured by a different company (Liggett & Myers, post-breakup), released in a different timeframe (1914), feature entirely different artwork and design (glossy photo fronts and completely different back designs) and were produced differently (not lithographs, significantly different size). Coupon Type 1's, however, meet all of the criteria I mentioned for a T206. I am not in any way advocating including sets that do not meet these criteria, only those that do. My point is that there are several accepted T206 brands (EPDG, Polar Bear, AB) that feature different unique characteristics not found on any other brand. Yet all of these brands still meet the criteria I suggested, as do Coupon Type 1's. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
E93, can you do that while holding one card at a time???
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
A blind man can tell T213-1 from T213-2 and -3 as well. A blind man can tell a T206 piedmont from a t206 AB just as well.....I am also working on evidence that all T206 brand cardboard may have had differences in cardboard stock--thickness, density, composition, etc....
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I come in on the side of T213-1 being part of T206. I believe that the overwhelming number of similarities outweighs the one difference that seems to exist. The obverse design is a 100% match. The border, font, framing and inking are identical. Not one T213-1 used a photo that was not used in T206, nor are there any cropping differences that I am aware of. The odds of that seem slim. Ted Z. has already posted the backs; the designs of which speak for themselves. And, Coupon was an ATC brand at the time.
That leaves the card's stock. It seems that Amer. Litho. stopped the presses (literally) and fed new, thin stock for the Coupon print run and then returned to the thicker stock for the rest of the T206 run. Did this represent a print run "between" the 150 and 350 series of T206? Was it an experiment by ALC for the ATC that was discontinued? Was it, as was suggested above, a matter of economy? Whatever the answer (and I don't mean that list to be exhaustive) the facts lead one to believe that T213-1 was printed at the same time as T206 by the same company, for the same company. Those facts lead me to the conclusion that Burdick may have erred. Hey, even Cope put the Elasmosaur's head at the wrong end - great expertise does not equate with infallibility. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
It seemed for awhile that I was alone in this thread, but am heartened to see the calvary coming! Keeping my earlier posts in mind, here is the template for how the T206/1910 Coupon argument generally goes:
Person A: 1910 Coupons are not T206 because the paper they are printed on is thinner and I could pick them out among T206's blindfolded. Person B:That reasoning is flawed as this is also true of American Beauty cards which are classified as T206. Person A: ...well...Burdick said 1910 Coupons are not T206. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chris - While I agree with you, I'm not sure that the American Beauty argument is the most persuasive. I think the best points are:
1) Made by the same company; 2) For the same ecompany; 3) At the same time; and 4) Using the exact same obverse and reverse designs as accepted T206 cards. There is a good analogy to the E92/E101/E102 set here also. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
T206 are not T206.
They're different brands of tobacco premiums issued over a period of three years. The issue that we know as T213-1 also fits into that model. Hi Frank. Is the only reason you disagree because of the paper difference? Do you also think E97 black and whites should be called something different? How about the two different E107 types? Both have clearly different paper types (one thinner). I'm sure we can think of some more. The really funny thing about the thin paper argument is that TYPE 1 COUPONS ARE ALSO THINNER THAN TYPE 2 AND TYPE 3! They have more in common with several T206 brands then with the other coupon brands. I don't really care to tell you truth if "T213-1" is known as "T206." Those labels shouldn't really mean much to folks that collect the cards in my opinion. By the way, I've "held" a couple dozen type 1s. I like em! Happy collecting everyone. Rob Last edited by caramelcard; 06-06-2010 at 10:02 PM. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Give me one of Jim's E93s and anyone else's E93 and I can tell you which one is Jim's with my eyes closed.
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
For Sale Or Trade Boston Store H801-8 Tough Type | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 1 | 01-28-2009 05:50 AM |
S74 Collectors - Need help with theory regarding white version checklist | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 12 | 01-19-2009 02:09 PM |
t213 type 2 coupon Speaker and Huggins | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 01-23-2007 03:22 PM |
5 Rare Backs lot, Coupon Type 1 & 2, Carolina Brights, AB and Cycle | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 4 | 12-15-2006 03:59 AM |
T213 Type 2 Coupon Jennings For Sale - PRICE REDUCED | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 5 | 02-23-2006 07:49 PM |