[Kutcher55]

I am messing around with Excel, trying to determine the relative scarcity of #49-72 vs 1-48. If both the first printing in 1941 and the second printing in 1942 was the same size in total, based on an estimate that the '@ 1941' comprise ~60% of the total final population of 1-48 (using the above 3 data points to estimate this), this would imply that overall 49-72 is 2.5x more scarce than 1-48 (inclusive of the "@" and "@1941" population). However, we only could conclude that if we make the very big assumption that both print sizes were the same.

But we have another piece of data: Based on the pricing of commons in various price guides I have seen, the 49-72 series doesn't provide that level of difference in value -- typically from what I have seen the later series commons sell for 1.25x to 1.5x that of 1-48. Which would suggest that the second printing (the "@" only cards in 1942), which contained 1-72 might have been somewhat larger than the initial printing of 1-48.

I guess I would conclude that the second printing was between 1 and 1.5x as big as the first printing. If it was more than 1.5x bigger we would have more '@' in the 1-48 population during our informal survey because it would overcome the fact that there were 50% more cards to print (1-72) in the second printing.

This all assumes that they printed a uniform # of each card # in each printing and there were no SPs.

Clearly I have too much time on my hands on a rainy Wednesday.