"Old Cardboard" #2 has begun to arrive!

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

Wonderful articles (great photos!)on the puzzle backs of the 1935 Goudeys and early (EARLY) baseball! Beautifully done magazine--the article on the big silks is also very nice (they show--in full color, of course--other issues, including the leathers--that used the same images, and then there's a whole page of little full-color copies of all the big silks). The military stuff goes only through WW1, and there're some nifty photos of players in uniform.

The elderly Uncle Sam swinging a bat on the cover is great.

The first class mail (going to all subscribers this issue) must have cost a BUNDLE...

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

I was a little disappointed to find that my issue arrived today as well. I had grown to enjoy the anticipation...

[Archive]

Posted By: Bill Cornell

Hats off to the Hardemans. I like the new one as much as the last. Look at the "Collector's Dugout" - Tim N., Glen V., the Clarkes (JC is yet again confirmed as the mere brawn, as we suspected) and George Vrechek, who wrote the definitive aricle on the Burdick collection (searchable on the http://oldbaseball.com/ site).

Bill

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

I got mine yesterday! They ave a much better track record with shipping than VCBC.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike McGrail

Long weekend alone ahead and what falls into the mailbox on Friday morning?

Edition 2!

Perfect timing

Ciao for now,

Mike

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

These are two totally different publication formats - "Old Cardboard", at least the one issue I have received so far, focuses on interesting esoteric card issues, while VCBC has more main-stream stuff and also a lot of history and non-card items related to baseball.

I think if "Old Cardboard" included a few articles on mainstream cards that the less affluent collectors can identify with (t206s, t205s, Cracker Jacks, e95s, Goudeys, etc.), VCBC would disappear...if it hasn't already.

[Archive]

Posted By: david

i too am a little disapointed with the selection of articles so far. i would like to see an update article of barry sloates 19th century type issues and maybe a comprehensive update of the oj set using lipsets work as a starting point

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I have spoken with the publisher of OldCardboard at length and can tell ya'll that your desires are already noted. Give 'em some time. They are already far more reliable than VCBC ever was. It's only been 2 issues and I think they are doing a great job. Your voices are being heard......best regards (how bout those E94's with the narsty writing on the backs .....I think if I take my Mars Plastic eraser to them I might be able to get 'em off)

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

too........quality was VERY nice........wish I'd seen that full sheet of silks when they stopped for a while in Lexington, KY.......

[Archive]

Posted By: tbob

No gripes with distribution. I, too, would like to see a couple of articles on M116s and the really "hot" caramel card sets, E94s and E98s, though, and a little less on the esoteric stuff.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

We finally get a puplication that is printing on time and you guys bitch about "esoteric" content? Be happy we seem to have a reliable publication, instead of sounding ungrateful that your favorite set didn't get featured.

If all they do is feature "popular" sets and ignore "esocteric" sets, then pretty soon you have a nothing left to write about except little known sets. They need spread out the the publication of articles on popular sets to maintain readership. Yes, cover hot sets would be a good thing, but this requires someone writing these articles and too many people on this board seem to think that articles magically appear out of no where.

If you want to see a certain set featured, write the article yourself. Even if you don't think you are an expert, get the experts to collaborate with you. Writing an article about a set will teach more about set then you ever imagined.

Suggestion for articles are great, but don't sound ungrateful for the publication when doing it.

Jay

Wow upside down is Mom. Mom upside down is what dad wants to see.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

...

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Scott, I'm not being a dick, I'm getting tired of everyone bitching about VCBC and now Old Cardboard because it isn't the "perfect" publication in their eyes. They should be happy that we even have anything like this to read, and if they really want to read about certain sets, get off their duff and write article. And if they won't write the article, at least make the suggestion for articles be jsut that, rather making sound the publication is worthless if those sets are written about.

Most people seem to be pleased overall, but there is still a group of people that it appears you just can't please. Personally, I love the fact that they are covering the essoteric sets. These are the sets I know little about and want to know more about. There is already plenty of info out there on mainstream and "popular" sets.

Jay

Wow upside down is Mom. Mom upside down is what dad wants to see.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

My apologies - I should have ignored this

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

...

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

scott, I don't have a problem with people having an opinion. My problem is the ungratefulness that some people show towards these publications. If you want to offer up constructive criticizism, then doing it in a good way. Don't sit and bemoan the fact that the magazine didn't have eveything you wanted in it and say it would be the better if you only catered to my taste. There other readers out there too. Why not say, great publication, keep up the good work. and by the way, it would be really cool if you wrote an article about (insert your favorite set here).

As an editor/publisher you want to see that. But wouldn't you start getting a bit disheartened if all you heard were people whining about you didn't write about my favorite set? There is a good way and a bad way to go about it.

Maybe we are so used to being setting for disappointment by VCBC and bad mouthing VCBC that we don't know how to respond properly to a publication that seems to be doing things right.

Jay

Wow upside down is Mom. Mom upside down is what dad wants to see.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

...almost

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

I can't believe I got baited into this

[Archive]

Posted By: tbob

Jay- I'm one of the bitchers. I am glad the magazine is coming out on time but I STILL would like to see more articles about sets that are more mainstream. If that's bitching, so be it. BTW, I DID write an article for VCBC about the T207 set, which was published, and I would happy to write one for Old Cardboard too if I could write about the Sporting Life (M116) set. I'll leave the other sets to those who have more knowledge and insight (caramel cards).
Bob

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

I also wrote articles for VCBC and discussed possible OC articles with the Hardemans and also with Leon. The Hardemans welcome our feedback, both the accolades and the suggestions for changes.

I will continue to make suggestions, and if someone doesn't like it, well you know how this sentence ends...

[Archive]

Posted By: Lyman Hardeman

OK, Bob. We'll take you up on your offer to write about the M116 Sporting Life set. Please let me know your thoughts about what would make an interesting article--hopefully with a different slant than has been written before. The pastel cards are very attractive and could fit well with the all-color format of Old Cardboard.

I believe it would also be interesting to tell a little about the motivation for the Sporting Life promotion (with perhaps a sample ad from the publication and image example(s) of the envelope wrappers used for distributing the cards). I can help here if you like.

We could also consider running a set checklist with columns that identify the team of each player as shown on the cards and the Sporting Life Series number in which the card was distributed.

I look forward to getting your ideas and to working with you in developing a first rate article. Thanks much for your offer.

Regards,
Lyman

Lyman Hardeman, Editor
Old Cardboard Magazine
5511 Merrywing Circle
Austin, TX 78730

editor@oldcardboard.com
512-231-9594

PS: With your lead, perhaps we can now get Scott Forrest to come up with a mainstream article of his choice. --LJH

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

I'll give you a call - thanks!

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark Holt

I got mine and read it cover to cover tonight. Enjoyed the Goudey write up and the article on silks. Also nice job by Chris on the bball players in the military.

These articles are from collectors like us (except they write better than me). For all you critics I suggest submitting articles on your favorite topics.

[Archive]

Posted By: tbob

I've agreed to do an article on the Sporting Life set for OC. I am starting a thread requesting data and info from M116 collectors and hope anyone out there who could provide assistance will.
Thanks,
tbob

[Archive]

Posted By: Bill Cornell

Bob-

I want answers on this set:

1. Why don't I have red hair? Looking at M116's, every person in 1911 was, um, blessed this way. Am I some genetic freak?
2. If blue backs are "rare", how come every other M116 on eBay has one?
3. Did the entire store of M116's go into an attic and emerge 80 years later? An EX copy of this card is now a red-headed (oops) stepchild; the rest of them are NR-MT.

Bill

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Bill, if they are all NM, then why do my m116s keep coming back as 60s? I've gotten one 70 and that's it. And mine look pretty darn good.

Jay

Wow upside down is Mom. Mom upside down is what dad wants to see.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

Do any of you know the difference between a "critic" and someone who is making "suggestions"? In the context that you are using the word, it refers to someone who is judging "harshly" - I don't think that's actually the case with any of the posts on this board.

I'm going to drop out of this thread at this point, as I think the majority of board members not only welcome "Old Carboard" and any other hobbyists attempts to disseminate information, but also understand that we will all see more enjoyable publications if we voice not only our approval for what we like, but also suggestions for other things we would like to see...and like Bob and myself, I'm sure many of us will continue to submit articles to VCBC, and will also send articles to OC, as appropriate.

Exit stage left.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

I am..practically SPEECHLERSS...with disbelief that you even SAID that...

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

I'm talking about any posts in this particular thread, not the entire board. Certainly we are often very harsh.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

You need to be VERY nice to me - I have something you want, but you don't know it yet

[Archive]

Posted By: qualitycards.com

Lyman - I'm willing to take a stab about the T3 Turkey Red Set, I have a few w/ 4 of the 5 different backs and a redemption coupon. I'll shoot you an Email...jay

[Archive]

Posted By: Lentel

What does VCBC stand for? Is this the Vintage beckett magazine? I thought they discontinued publishing it?
thanks for any help

[Archive]

Posted By: Robert

check out vcbc.com

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

I was thrilled to receive my second issue. The magazine is beautiful and well produced. And they are certainly much more professional than VCBC. It is a service to the hobby. I agree; I would love to see articles on more mainstream issues like on some of the carmel sets: E93, 94, 95, 96, 98, N28, 29, N162, etc., though I do appreciate the research on obscure issues. I would also love to see some letters to the editor. Collector profiles are nice. My only complaint about the current issue is the article on baseball players in military service. While I understand it is a legitimate topic, I am really sick of all the "ra, ra, go militarism" sentiment in our country in the past few years and would like to think I could escape those politics a bit in this hobby, as subtle as they may be. Overall, I love what I see with OC magazine and think they are doing a great job. I am just venting here.
Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott

Just finished reading issue #2 - I thoroughly enjoyed it, more so than #1. Especially liked the short write-up on Leon's rare-back collection and also the military article. Got me wanting to see a check-list of all players who served in WWI, not just HOF'ers (although that was very interesting) - could be an interesting "set" to collect.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

was surprising, since I'm a pacificst, and thoroughly enjoyed it. The photos were great. Military men always stand so STRAIGHT!

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris S.

Quote:
----------
While I understand it is a legitimate topic, I am really sick of all the "ra, ra, go militarism" sentiment in our country in the past few years and would like to think I could escape those politics a bit in this hobby, as subtle as they may be.
-----------

I don't remember any political bias in that article. In fact, I specifically avoided the topic when I wrote it. I was under the impression that our hobby is a fine woven fabric of all political bents...much like our country itself. The article was meant to pay tribute to players who served.

Julie, as for the fact that ther article stopped with WW1, I did that for two reasons. First, the article I submitted ended up being 8 pages long. Had I continued through WW2, it would have been either too long or would have forced Lyman to edit much of it. Secondly, the "continuation" into the WW2 years is still in the works and may be in a later edition if Lyman wants it.

My final point...if anybody here thinks the article selection is poor, feel free to send in something you'd like to see. Lyman is more than happy to get content and I'm betting that he'll love to consider it. Keep in mind, the magazine is still in its youth and its "staff" is still learning the ropes of the business. Though I've been happy with OC so far, I think that it can definitely improve.

And I say that as a good thing.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lyman

Chris, I like the part of your post where you manage to get "youth" and "Old Cardboard staff" into the same sentence. Thanks again for contributing a really interesting feature article. --Lyman

[Archive]

Posted By: Gilbert Maines

The impact of military responsibilities on the history of baseball is significant. Chris' Old Cardboard article provided additional insight into the activities of ballplayers while away from the game and defined a tribute to those who were most adversly affected through helping our Country during these times of conflict.

I found it to be a welcome, informative, insightful treatment of a subject which many consider to be a negative reality.

To others, the negative reality includes the fact that players such as Ted Williams may have been able to put even more astounding numbers in the books, if we did not need him to be militarilly engaged.

For those of you who are unaware, Shufflestreet produces an e-mail baseball card periodical which he offers free upon request. It is a great read.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

.