Quote:
Originally Posted by Volod
Thanks for the legal history, Dave. I had not read about Topps using the paintings in '53 specifically to do an end run around "photos" in the Bowman ruling. That would pretty much explain the whole '53 approach. On the other hand, I don't see how any of the transpositioning of cards from one series to another would have resulted in greater profit for Topps, simply because there were no checklists. Kids spending their nickels in '53 might have figured out that five cards were missing from a series, but probably not before the next series was issued - and then there they were. How much extra profit could that have produced? Afterall, kids then were searching for players, not numbers.
|
The skip numbering ploy was started in the 1930's and I guess it worked to a degree. Some kids collected the whole series for sure. How much extra could Topps wring out of it? Not too much I'd say, but that never stopped them from doing something. Their early approach was to issue few big sets, sell a bunch of gum and then add lots of little things that added up to a bigger thing.