View Single Post
  #34  
Old 07-01-2008, 10:31 AM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default Let's continue the T213-1 debate....are they really T206's ?

Posted By: Matt

"So far NOT ONE PERSON has been able to confute the fact these were classified by mfg and, as such, done correctly. I rest my case....."

Leon - I think Jon C made an attempt to address your argument in the previous thread:
"So, the fact that Coupon produced two more "sets" (Type 2 and Type 3) after the 1909-1911 distribution of the T206 set should not have played a role in Burdick's decision to not include Type 1's in the T206 set although I agree with you that it probably did. Piedmont, for example, produced the art stamp series in 1914 - well after the break-up of the ATC and after the T206 series was over but this didn't stop Burdick from deciding that Piedmont should not be included with the T206 set. Sure, you can argue that Piedmont T206's look nothing like the art stamps - but Type 2's and 3's look nothing like Coupon Type 1's!"

Reply With Quote