View Single Post
  #157  
Old 05-22-2021, 10:13 PM
oldeboo oldeboo is offline
Trey
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigfanNY View Post
My Statements About Curtiss and Ruth really dont have anything to do with your sign which is labeled as coming from General Gum, Not Curtiss Candy. Aside from the fact that your sign lists an address known to be used By Curtiss Candy. But to date no proof exists that General gum did in fact have offices at that address in 1934/1935.
To date proof DOES exist that Paul's item is connected to a CURTISS CANDY COMPANY BUILDING, plant #3 to be more specific.

Keep bringing completely bogus theories to the discussion. Everything that you bring up keeps adding to the overwhelming evidence and facts because everything you've said has been the exact opposite of reality. Without your help we wouldn't know as much as we now do, I'm sure many appreciate that. You've been a great help in validating this item and creating serious doubt in regards to Butterfinger having much to do with R310 at all.

The following is from a very specific publication that spells it out rather clearly:
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 337e.jpg (36.1 KB, 226 views)

Last edited by oldeboo; 05-22-2021 at 10:18 PM.
Reply With Quote