VCBC is stronger than it ever was!

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Lawrie

I finally got tired of all the shots at Don Betz over VCBC's quality and the periodicity of release. A few points:

First, the delay in the most recent issue was purely my fault. I promised Don the article on Alpha Photos, and it took me much longer to write and research than I anticipated. As it was, I failed to get him a number of images that would have made the article a better piece. He intended for this issue to be out immediately after the last issue (within weeks), but I kept holding him up.

Second, Dennis Purdy never published a monthly journal, and if you go back and check the release dates, they were very sporadic as well. Possibly even worse. Don has just recently made VCBC his full time commitment, putting much of the operations of his card business in the hands of others.

Third, Purdy could not make a go of the journal financially. For multiple reasons, Don Betz has the journal on much better financial footing than it ever was in the past. These include significantly increased subscription base, much higher sponsor interest, and Don's own commitment to the publication. He doesn't make money on it, but does it because of his interest in vintage cards. Purdy never paid authors either. If that is the kind of journal that is desired, the subscription prices or the advertising prices would have to increase significantly. Plus he has added color without increasing prices.

Fourth, I spent a few hours speaking with Don after Dennis Purdy announced the discontinuation of VCBC, and we batted around the idea of Don purchasing the journal. I thought it was just an esoteric conversation. Several months later he surprised me by buying the thing! There was no profit motive in it at all - purely a strong interest in vintage cards and in the hobby itself. (He does have a strong interest and knowledge of vintage cards - he got me hooked on Old Judges and the 1890s Baltimore Orioles.)

Fifth, I'm not a big fan of the Good Guy awards either, but I do know that he has significantly more requests for full-page color and other prominent dealer advertising than there is room. He has the luxury of picking and choosing which ads to include, and part of that screening includes hobby reputation. He has declined to run some dealers' ads based strictly on their questionable ethics. Multiple other factors also go into which ads are included (a particular location in the journal may already be taken by past contracts, there may be no room a particular month, etc.), and so a particular vintage dealer may not be included strictly because of factors other than reputation. But there are certain dealers from which I will never purchase cards, and I am certain that their ads will never show up in VCBC. So if his Good Guy selections include primarily advertisers, well at least they have had been screened to some extent. (Though some dealers that I personally dislike, but with solid hobby reputations, still appear, lest anyone think I have any influence in this department; Don is very well in tune with the collectors in the hobby.)

Sixth, I found that Purdy's sarcastic attacks on some of the hobby's problems and poor dealers detracted from the legitimacy of the publication. He went way past rationale discussion or evidence-based arguments into emotional, sarcasm-infused tirades. Editors can be hard-hitting while maintaining their objectivity. Purdy did not do that.

Please e-mail me with questions/comments. I am a long-time customer of Don's and consider him a good friend, but I have no financial ties to his business or VCBC (I'm not paid at all in money or trade).

Tom Lawrie

[Archive]

Posted By: scott (runscott)

Don is always a pleasure to speak with, and he's very accessible. I also agree with you about all the pot-shots taken at people during the early issues. It was entertaining, but sometimes seemed to go overboard. Don will have better success at keeping subscribers happy if he makes it clear that it is not a monthly publication. You can blame it on the subscribers if you'd like, but many customers have left because of the sporadic publication.

Finally, I've only been in this hobby for 2 years, so if you are one of the pillars of the hobby (you know, with all the "years" of experience and credentials,etc..), please feel free to rest on your laurels and ignore me. I get complaints all the time about my "inappropriate" posts, or my posts that "waste the time" of the readers. Oddly, most of the complaints come from people who have been in the hobby forever, but choose to sit on their butts and not contribute anything constructive to the board. I think some people are afraid that if they share their knowledge that others will benefit - duh!! But they have no problem with sharing rules of etiquette. Gimme a frikkin break. At least I'm playing the game.

"Teach a kid how to be a good loser and that's what he'll grow up to be" - Scott G's Dad

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Lawrie

any editing problems with the Alpha article in this issue (footnotes in particular) are strictly my bust, as I literally gave Don only a few hours to read and format the article. He had absolutely no time for making corrections. I had also promised him all of the images that I referenced, but I was too technologically inept to produce usable scans. I figured this out too late in the game to redo the article. Hopefully I can produce some usable pictures for a later issue.

[The images that did appear in the article were done by Dan McKee and Don on VCBC's computer equipment several weeks earlier.]

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

You said in the "Alpha" article that Allegheny and Fan Craze cards were printed on paper stock; they aren't. Fan Craze is printed on an elegant thin cardboard. Allegheny cards are printed on inelegant medium-thick cardboard.You said Alphas were unlike the other two in that they didn't have gloss. Fan Craze cards are glossy, but Allergheny cards are not.

Otherwise, great article! I can't get over how much the Alpha backs look like the National Game backs--but I don't think that makes a case for a (much) later publication date.

I'm very happy with VCBC, especiaslly since I started getting it priority mail (Betz' idea--I sent him a check after he said he was sending mine priority ).

[Archive]

Posted By: scott (runscott)

Definitely card stock

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Lawrie

I expressed my thoughts poorly in the article. I meant Alleghenys in general appearance only; with the gloss/paper v. cardboard comment, I was referring only to Fan Craze (but I neglected to make that distinction) and to decks of playing cards in general.

As for Fan Craze and cardboard, I consider the Alphas and Alleghenys to be thin cardboard stock. What is the difference between "elegant thin cardboard" of the Fan Craze and thick paper? I am not familiar with the paper industry definitions, but Webster defines cardboard in terms of "pasteboard," which is defined as a "thin firm board made of pressed paper pulp or sheets of paper pasted together." When comparing that to the definition for "paper," the word "firm" seems to be the major difference. I viewed the Alphas as firm and the Fan Craze less so - which is why I used the term "thick paper." I don't know if this difference is important or only semantics. Regardless, the Alphas are definitely thicker and less glossy than the Fan Craze.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Lawrie

After rereading VCBC, I failed to include my argument for why Keeler and Clarke were likely produced. The argument basically is that they appear on almost every other image derived from the original Perkins photos, with a consistent picture in each (e.g. the Betz cabinet, Guy's Pennant Souvenir, the Baltimore American 30 September 1894 team portrayal, etc.) Both players were on the team previous to the 1894 campaign, and both played in subsequent years for the Orioles. There is no logical reason that substitutes and last-minute pitchers would be included, yet Clarke and (especially) Keeler would be excluded. Why produce 14 and not all 16 players? No good explanation other than they were made but have not been located.

[Archive]

Posted By: scott (runscott)

for thin or thick paper - they are card stock. If you refer to them as thick paper, you should also refer to modern baseball cards as thick paper, because they are about the same.

--------------------------------------------
Disclaimer
I apologize in advance if the above post has in any way offended anyone other than a specifically identified target. I also apologize in advance if reading the above post has been a waste of time for someone whose time is worth more than mine.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

Paper is like M101-2s. You cannot shove a piece of paper in a semi=-soft to transport it; you can shove (gently put) a Fan Craze in a semi-soft to transport it.

I have 6 Fan Craze--5 N.L. and one A.L. I've had most of them for at least ten years. If they were paper...I hate to think what condition they would be in.

Speaking of which, my 1882 Harper's woodcut (half-page) of the Providence grays (DEFINITELY paper), has developed a stain, or something, running up one side of the border. The page has already been cut from the magazine at the top (on the back, you can see ads that begin in the middle). The "stain" is right on the edge (nside Mylar)--suppose i were to cut it off/ That border is wider than the other one,, anyway.

You don't suppose my smoke is getting through my linen tablecloths?

[Archive]

Posted By: scott (runscott)

Julie - I know you are very serious about protecting your collection, so that's kind of odd. Sounds like that woodcut is a good candidate for matting and framing.

--------------------------------------------
Disclaimer
I apologize for the previous disclaimer, but that is in no way an admission of guilt or intention to pay reparations for mental damages that may have been suffered while reading my disclaimers.

[Archive]

Posted By: David

Julie, you can trim the woodcut without effecting the integrety or reducing the value.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

...

[Archive]

Posted By: Brueso

Well, those are some compelling reasons to explain a late issue. But as someone who wanted to subscribe but has read the horror stories about subscribers never getting any issues even after being told repeatedly via phone that they are "going out the next day", or getting issues very late compared to other subscribers, I again reiterate- why should I take a chance on a publication that seems to have so many problems putting issues in the hands of subscribers? If only one person had posted such a problem, I might write it off, but there have been several. I wouldn't care if an issue didn't come out monthly- but right now VCBC seems like an E-bay seller who has quite a few negative dings on its record- and that includes regarding the delivery of issue #30. How do most of us respond when we see that kind of feedback?

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

I never really expected a monthly; Dennis Purdy announced in one issue (close to the end) that he was trying to go monthly, but that never really materialized.

I do have one little nit to pick, on the issue of muckraking. Now, speaking as a muckraker of sorts, I have to be up front with my personal prejudice. I like it. Academic analyses of card sets are all fine and well, but they are (a) repetitive of earlier works, especially for popular sets, (b) quickly exhausted as to subject matter, and (c) do not address some of the most pressing issues in the hobby. The muckraking done by VCBC in the past has played important parts in counteracting the cheery goodfeel pablum in ad rags like SCD. People need to know about the idiot ripoff artists preying on collectors as much as they need to know about the cards themselves. One bad deal, after all, can send a new collector running for the exits. Also, judging from the content of this board, it is the scammers who capture our attention and demand an inordinate amount of our time. That information needs to get out there. I credit VCBC with essentially driving Alan Hager underground by putting together the pieces on his activities and laying it out there for the public to see. You simply do not get that kind of journalism anywhere else and I hope it stays as a part of VCBC. Speaking of which, still no issue #31 here in L.A.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Since there is really no other publication like it and we now know they get shipped whenever they are ready, why give up on it? Old addages usually ring true....better late than never.....I am still waiting for #31 in Texas (actually they might not be able to find my igloo)....regards all

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom

in KY.........still no #31...........

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

STILL WAITING FOR 31..... IN NC


BRIAN

[Archive]

Posted By: Brueso

according to a prior thread, even after repeated assurances it was on its way- AFTER others had received theirs weeks earliar. That's the kind of thing that makes me reluctant to even get started.

[Archive]

Posted By: scott (runscott)

but he's right - there is no other publication like it in our hobby. If the wait starts getting to you, just call Don Betz and gripe a little - so far, it has worked for me. Not that I get my issues any quicker - I'm still waiting for #31 also.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cy

From the sounds of the people on the board, not only is there no other magazine like it, there is no magazine, period.

Frankly, would any of you collectors truly put up with this in any other venue of card collecting? Would you allow SGC to send you your cards 4 months late when they promised 7 days? Would you allow Mastro to start a new auction before sending you your items from the previous auction?

The owner of VCBC may be a very nice man, but this is a business and in any business, one needs to come through on promises that he made or what good is the credibility.

Instead of griping and not making a solution, let me try to give a little assistance. It appears that VCBC is impossible to put out monthly. That being said, why not publish the magazine as a quarterly publication where time is not such a premium and tell the people that it IS a quarterly publication. By doing this the publisher has more time to put out a quality product and the buyer has a realistic expectation of when he or she will receive his or her product.

Just my two cents.

Cy

[Archive]

Posted By: David

I agree on all points with Cy. If it's coming out every three monthes, why not just call it a quarterly or even 'occasional' and everyone will be happy. If, when I had bought it, it was advertised as a quarterly, I wouldn't have any gripe.

[Archive]

Posted By: petecld

Now Cy - don't go confusing people with common sense.

As much as I admire Tom for taking the heat for the delay of the latest issue of VCBC I would think that the publisher would have had some sort of "Plan B" just in case an article doesn't come through on time so subscribers wouldn't have ANOTHER late issue.

In my work I have clients who publish company newsletters and one who puts out a magazine and I know what it takes to put together a publication so I know it isn't easy but with proper palnning, it can be done.

VCBC has NEVER hit the stands at a set schedule. When it first heard of the magazine I went to every news/magazine stand in Chicago looking for it. I was told in EVERY case that they won't carry the magazine because of it's sporatic publication dates. Consumers are creatures of habit, they won't go back every few days to see if an issue has finally come in let alone weeks later.

I see hundreds of magazines at the stands that get published on time be it weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually - why can't VCBC do the same?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I agree with you that it is a business and as such it/they need to live up to their promises. As you also pointed out it is supply and demand. Since there are no competitors (supply), and quite a bit of demand, we are sort of hostage. The auction houses have much competition so have to give great service or folks go elsewhere to consign/buy. Bottom line for me is that I know I will eventually get it so I just forget about it and when I do get it I am pleasantly surprised....no, it's no way to run a business but it's just a small annoyance that I forget about...There are so many other bigger problems....(no, I am not a defeatist either)....regards all....

[Archive]

Posted By: petecld

Does anyone know what the circulation figure is for VCBC? How much of a demand is there?

Just curious.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Does anyone out there understand why a magazine that theoretically ships the same day takes so long to get to certain places? I mean, how is it that month (well, couple of months) after month the mag drags for weeks before filtering into so many areas? Any postal wonks out there willing to take a shot at it?

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

how long it takes PSA, sometinmes, to get you your cards back?

JEEZ, guys, read my lips: PRIORITY MAIL!

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Obermeyer

I understand what Julie is saying with regards to Priority Mail - it certainly will get the issue to you faster, especially on the West Coast. However, it also increases the cost significantly... the new rate for Priorty Mail is $3.85. Add that to the subscription price of almost $6 per issue ($68 for 12 issues), and you're looking at a cost of about $9 per issue. That's a lot.

The other problem in my eyes with Priorty Mail is that it doesn't speed up anything but the mailing... and mail speed has not been the cause of publication delays. If there are delays in producing the issue, Priority Mail is of no help at all.

I've supported VCBC for a long, long time. I was on the mailing list for the first issue, and I've been a subscriber since issue #2. I've run some classifieds in there with varying success, and I've written articles and letters. I want the magazine to succeed as much as anyone out there, but to be honest with you I'm surprised it's lasted as long as it has. I hope that it has turned the corner and will be on a more or less regular schedule... but without more quality articles I don't know if it will make it.

Jeff

[Archive]

Posted By: scott (runscott)

...

--------------------------------------------
Disclaimer
I apologize for the previous disclaimer, but that is in no way an admission of guilt or intention to pay reparations for mental damages that may have been suffered while reading my disclaimers.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Lawrie

I buy my copy of VCBC in person, so I haven't had the pleasure of waiting for weeks for delivery. Issue #31 actually carries a Letter to the Editor discussing that very gripe. Here's the letter and Don's response:

"Does VCBC travel by pony express?

I'm glad to see VCBC again and hope it continues for many more months. My biggest complaint is the delivery time. I live in California and it takes 2-3 weeks for me to receive my issues of VCBC. There has to be a better way! What can be done about this nagging problem?

ed: Timely delivery of VCBC is a big problem. We ship presorted first class which is a new name for 'bulk mail.' Every subscriber copy is mailed the same day from the Baltimore, Maryland post office. Some people receive their issue on the west coast as quick as 3 days from mailing while others take 3-6 weeks. We've been told that the time of eventual delivery is up to your individual post office, some treat 'presorted' as regular first class mail while others treat it as 'junk mail' and it can sit in a corner for weeks. We recognize the problem and we're taking steps to resolve the problem. Hang in a little longer!"

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

VCBC #31 Made it to NC. I look forward to diving in.

be well brian

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony

#31 made it to West L.A. last nite, thought I was always the last (SCD often arrives 3-4 weeks late, but then there's rarely anything in there worth reading anyway). Seemed like Don has a renewed bit of energy in regards to the magazine- can't wait for the next issue.

[Archive]

Posted By: scott (runscott)

after all, I won this nostalgic blast from the past this morning: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1842484007

[Archive]

Posted By: Kevin Cummings

Is it just me or are others still waitng for the latest issue, too?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Obermeyer

VCBC arrived in Seattle on July 15.

Jeff

[Archive]

Posted By: Jaime Leiderman

Not Yet

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

It arrived in Southern California yesterday, July 17th.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike Williams

anxiously!

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

back to the
"cardboard" "paper" argument. T202s are even cardboard--the thinnest, finest cardboard imaginable.

I live in a small town (Berkeley) in California, and I got my VCBC on July 1, priority mail. I rest my case.

Yes, it's a lot of money, unless you compare it to a common Goudey.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Arrived in Texas.....to my igloo today....regards all

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim Sedlock

What I do not understand is why does it take several weeks (over time) for everyone to (finally) get their copy when it is supposively sent out at the same time? This has happened to the last couple issues and there are still people who have not received it. Why?

[Archive]

Posted By: Brueso

to subscribe to this magazine.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Still not here yet. Must be out with OJ looking for the true killers. I feel so alone. . .

[Archive]

Posted By: scott (runscott)

Most of us have had one or more magazine subscriptions at some point in our life and it is quite common for them to arrive in a timely manner, without any special shipping requests on our part. It is completely reasonable for subscribers to expect VCBC to be able to do this as well, once they get their ducks lined up in a row - the big question is how long will it take?

--------------------------------------------
no disclaimer - temporarily taking responsibility for my actions

[Archive]

Posted By: John(z28jd)

i tried getting a subscription from them about 2 years ago,and never got it after waiting 6 weeks so i would say,it takes at least 2 years(so far). I dont care how good the magazine is,i would never recommend anyone ordering a subscription to this,just way too many bad stories.youre right it shouldnt take more than a few days difference between the time everyone gets their magazine. best solution is to split a subscription with a few other people,whoever lives closer get it sent to them first,and then read it,copy it,and pass it along,and the last person would still get it sooner. judging by some peoples delivery time,the magazine will be vintage by the time they get it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

which is why I fell in with Betz' suggestion that he send VCBC priority. VCBC is the only magazine which I totally FAILED to get, December before last. I'd always bamed it mainly on the postoffice: "oh. a white envelope. Not very important. We'll deliver it sometime." Even my SCD comes in the most random order!
Never know from one week to the next what the date at the top will be; all I know is that Alan Rosen's puss will be under it...

WHATEVER the reason for the delay, priority mail seems to take care of it.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Besides the normal mail for a busy law practice, I get SCD, Sports Illustrated, Time, Vanity Fair, Travel & Leisure, Food & Wine, and three legal journals, and yet none of them arrives late. I also get scads of pre-sorted first class junk every day. I could paper my house with the credit card offers alone. It ain't the mails.

[Archive]

Posted By: David

All my bills arrive on time, though they're sometimes late leaving.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

sometimes david? no wonder why you have to dress in 3x5 index cards.....did you find the ralph erickson autograph for me?

[Archive]

Posted By: john(z28jd)

sometimes i remember to sign my name to my posts

[Archive]

Posted By: David

If you win the current 3x5 lot, I will do my best to make sure a Ralph Erickson is in there. Otherwise, you'll have to settle for a Roky Erickson.