1927 E210 York Caramel Types

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot

.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim Newcomb

First, thanks for beginning this York thread. I'd like to learn more about them.

My question has to do with capitalization. Check out the scans below.

I bought five Yorks recently that I had assumed were Type 1 from the description in the SCD book.

The backs do face in the same direction relative to the fronts as your Type 1 examples.

However, all of mine have fully capitalized names like your Type 2 example.

What do we know about the capitalization issue? Is this another type?

Thanks!

Tim

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot

.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jorge

Scot, do you know if if the SCD is going to change the type II date back to 1927? They currently have it listed as 1928. SGC is also placing a 1928 date on the type II's as well.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot

.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot Reader

Hi Scot,

I have Reuther that looks like a York on the front but has a blank back. At first I thought it might be a W502 but it is definitely machine-cut and has light stains on the front and back that look like caramel stains. Plus, SGC thinks it's a York.

What do you think? Should a Type III be added for blank backs?





(Leon, Sorry about the large scans. I still haven't figured out how to reduce them).

Scot

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot York

Scot,
Your card appears to be a 1928 W502 blank back. Based on photo quality and lack of toning alone. You should compare the paper stock and thickness to another E210. It's really hard to tell from a scan to be sure. Could be Ice Cream stains as well. Here's an E210 Reuther to compare.

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

Are you sure the 1928 date is wrong for Type II? I always assumed that the Type II's were issued a year after the Type I's, or at least some time after the Type I's.

In Type I, Herb Pennock is shown in a Red Sox uniform, but in Type II he is in a Yankee uniform. He hadn't played for the Red Sox in about 5 years, so it made sense to me that York Caramel was a little embarrassed by the old picture and chose to change it the following year.

Also, Wilbert Robinson and Eddie Collins were dropped in Type II. Both were at the very end of their career. This also seems to suggest that Type II's were issued after Type I, possibly even a full year after.

None of this is definitive, but what is the reason to believe both sets were issued in 1927?

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot York

.

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

Very interesting. So it looks like there were three printings. I would have to believe that Pennock with Red Sox came out first; Pennock without Red Sox came second; and the Type II's came third. And all in 1927. Very strange. I wonder why they ever issued the Type II's.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot

.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot

.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot Reader

Scot,

I'm not sure what the thickness is of E210s and W502s but my Reuther is on thick stock. To the best of your knowledge, is there such a thing as an E210 blank back, or are all blank backs in this genre by definition W502s?

Scot

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot

.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay wolt

Scot - Thanks for all the info. & scans.
This is a set (type I) I am collecting as well.
Email to follow...jay

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot

.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot Reader

Scot, Thanks for the information. By tapered lettering, are you talking about a slight tilt upward from left to right on Reuther's last name? If so, I see what you mean. Scot

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot York

Scot,
Yes, The letters in Reuther taper down in size from left to right.