1953 Bowman B&W

[Volod]

Definitely appears that Joe D's endorsement contract was limited to the color cards. Warren Bowman must have been hard pressed for cash by mid-1953 - or maybe just tight-fisted.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by Volod

Definitely appears that Joe D's endorsement contract was limited to the color cards. Warren Bowman must have been hard pressed for cash by mid-1953 - or maybe just tight-fisted.

Warren was already gone by then-he left in May of 1951. They had a new Board that had renamed itself Haelan Laboratories by '53 and then fairly soon after John Connelly (a corrugated cardboard mogul in Philly) somehow gained control, probably through a combination of populating the board with friendly faces and some stock purchases. Bowman was a division of Haelan by then.

Connelly is the guy that drove the sale of the Bowman Gum Division to Topps from what I know of it. He took his money and eventually formed one of the world's largest corporations (for a time)-Crown Cork & Seal.

Warren Bowman tried, among other things, to develop beachfront property in Florida and there is stretch on Sanibel Island called Bowman's Beach down there to this day that I'm pretty sure was his doing.

[mintacular]

My impression is that this partial set is not very collectible/popular for the most part, with the exception of Casey Stengel

[Chris-Counts]

"However, in the color set, there is an unexplainable duplication of Al Corwin with two different images. He appears on card #126 and again on card #149 ..."

Ted, I've long imagined that the second Corwin replaced a card that was pulled. I've seen a proof for a Ferris Fain card, so I've wondered if it was possible that his card was pulled because he got traded. The guy he got traded for, Eddie Robinson, shows up in the B&W set, so Bowman had more time to get a photo of him wearing an A's jersey. Curiously, I can't think of any White Sox players in the B&W series, so that might explain why Fain isn't pictured in his new jersey like Robinson. It's also possible Fain had an exclusive Topps deal that year. Since he was the defending A.L. batting champ, both companies no doubt would have wanted him in their sets. Have you ever heard any theories why there are two Corwin cards?

[tedzan]

Your Ferris Fain theory is quite interesting. Fain led the AL in batting in 1951 and 1952 while playing for the A's. The Bowman Gum Co. was based in
Philadelphia. So, Fain should have been in color or the B & W set.

If you compare the backs of the two Al Corwin cards there is a typo in the first one (#126). His birth month (December) is misspelled...."Recember".
They corrected this mistake on his Hi # card (#149). But, this is certainly not a big enough deal to issue a 2nd card of Corwin.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts regarding the absence of Fain in this set.


TED Z

[tedzan]

Here are the two Al Corwin cards in the color set that were mentioned in the prior post.

.......... #126 ................................................. # 149




TED Z

[ALR-bishop]

Very interesting observation Chris. Good looking cards Ted.

I am mostly only a Topps collector ( Fleer 1923 and 1959 to 1980 as well), but the Bowman color set has always tempted me, mainly because I am a Cardinals fan and that Musial is special.

[ls7plus]

Casey's card captures the essence of the entire era, and is consequently quite popular. Although the focus seems to vary quite a bit, it is probably made even more dramatic in black and white. If you notice the postings, it is usually missing from '53 B&W offerings. For me, it was a must-have amongst
'50's cards, but I have absolutely no interest in any of the other cards from the set.

Larry

[Volod]

Now, if Corwin had been in the B/W set as well, that would have made for some interesting speculation: George Moll's nephew?