cataloguing question
 

Hi docpatlv,

Would you be able to measure this item (pasted below) that you posted described as "large" to compare whether it could be the same issue that Howard posted on pg 39 post #389 and described as 7x9?

No problem, I’ll try to get a measurement later tonight.

Empty,

Mine measured 7x9. Hope that helps

I forgot to ask, was that b/c you don't care for Cracker Jack, or you had just acquired them before posting to thread and deemed that eating decade and a half old food would not be a wise move?

No, I purchased them in 2004, and bought more boxes than I care to admit. The Cracker Jack was a throwaway because I never really cared for the taste. Now if it had been Crunch n’ Munch, that’s a different story :D

I dug through my 71 Pirates mess to look for this one. Does anyone know how many of these were in the set? I have Stargell, Clemente, May, Hebner, Alley, Sanguillen, Grant, Oliver, Blass , and Cash. I noticed that the Clemente, Oliver, Sanguillen, and Stargell images were used to produce PM10 black box buttons.

this post about '69 pin reminded me of CU thread...
 

So, the pics above clearly show the difference b/w the original and the reprint pins: for one, Clemente's face is different and eyes are looking in a different direction for obvious sake...

Now, take a look at this CU forum thread where it was discussed that someone made a $5000 boo-boo when they purchased a reprint at auction that is slabbed as the sole PSA Mint 9: https://forums.collectors.com/discus...mment_11686941

The cert still shows active, for a PSA collector that has about 50 active sets, including the top MLBA Pin set for 2016-2017 (including the reprint item naturally). So either he doesn't know it's a reprint (which seems hard to fathom, since with so many others he should be a resident expert), or chooses to pretend not to know in order to compete higher toward the top spot?...Or, new theory, so many of his high-end pins are all reprints so much that he wouldn't actually know the difference between them??

Anyway, anyone have the know how and/or motivation to set PSA straight on it? (owner doesn't appear to compete in the Clemente registry so the reprint doesn't directly affect the ratings list, aside from reducing those who would otherwise have the highest rated real one) [I myself don't have any].

Well, at the very least, you would think that both PSA and the auction house should know better.

Strongly suggest not diluting this thread with PSA problems
 

The first and arguably most high profile card that PSA graded (the Gretzky Wagner) was trimmed by Bill Mastro - admitted under oath in court - PSA has never done a thing about it - everything after that - fruit from the poison tree. PSA imo has clearly shown in many cases they just don't care.
I have tried communicating with them in the past about getting things added/changed/deleted from the Clemente registry - always an uphill battle - they recognize transogram and bazooka boxes cut into pieces (single/panel/box/side panels, etc.), but choose not to recognize legitimate printing variations on the 1969 Nabisco (wide and narrow border variations), 1962 Salada coin (180/200 variants) and Bazooka box size variants (20 and 25 piece boxes)! They make their best guesses at the 1966-1971 color team issue cards (getting it wrong plenty), but will not slab a legitimate 1956 and other team issue photos. The 1967 Topps test giant standup is "optional" on all player registries EXCEPT for Carl Yastrzemski. I will not even get started with their grossly flawed weighting process. They would be better called PSI - Professional Sports Inconsistencies. So - fix a counterfeit pin that they slabbed when the owner doesn't care........good luck.

All done!
 

I finished the whole catalogue and will post it shortly, on the next page. Meanwhile, seeing as for the moment I'm the only one with a catalogue of what's already included in the thread and so can infer what can be added, I thought I would try one here:

I didn't know these were a thing until I can across one on eBay, and they're more modern so I'm sure not particularly scarce, but seeing as they seem to have had only the single print run? it was a more interesting memento than the more common yellow-postcard variety that is still readily available on the Hall site...