1947 BOND BREAD and its "imposters"....show us your cards ?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by CharleyBrown

Hey Michael. I appreciate the shout out. Will send you a private message response later tonight. I'm going to post this in my original thread, but as Michael mentioned, I've been doing more research on the set of 13 Bond Bread series. I'm not sure if this will post properly, but here's a newspaper article from July 1947. This article shows that the original Facsimile card was distributed for free to the majority of Black families in Harlem, NY prior to July 1947. In July 1947, it was distributed in promo packages with 2 slices of bread. ANYBODY that wrote to General Baking / Bond Bread was given for free a copy of the card. While I am still researching, this article also indicates that other "picture cards", which I now believe to be the other six attributed to 1947 were distributed at newsstands, candy stores, ice cream stands, etc. At the end of the article, it states clearly that this issue was not limited to NY, but rather distributed in other cities with large Black communities, including but not limited to Philadelphia, Washington DC, Baltimore and Detroit. This covers essentially all the MLB cities in 1947, indicating that this issue was not regional as it was once believed to be.

Great info, thanks for sharing it. (and the others up the thread too)

[abctoo]

I will soon be posting detailed information about the die-cutting of the 1947 Bond Bread package insert cards, the Sports Star Subjects and Screen Star Subjects cards.

These sets were manufactured by the Meyercord Company of Chicago, well known for decades by that time as a major producer of decals and specialty signs. Meyercord is known to sports collectors for its 1952 Star-Cal Baseball decals in red packages of various sizes, though it concurrently issued similar Star-Cal Movie Star decals in blue packages.

Copyright 2020, by Michael Fried, P.O. Box 27521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

[abctoo]

This thread started in 2009 showing the backs of a Bond Bread package insert card next to a Festberg remainder showing original Bond Bread package inserts had "white" backs while Festberg remainders had "brown toned" backs. That was a very easy way to distinguish those cards one from another.

However, a simple "white" back and "rounded" corner definition for a Bond Bread insert is insufficient to distinguish Bond Bread inserts from the look-alike cards in the Sport Star Subjects set. Both can appear to have the same "white" backs and "rounded" corners (die-cut corners).

Many selling cards as "1947 Bond Bread" inserts don't care about the difference between genuine Bond Bread package insert cards and the "look-alike" Sport Star Subjects cards. Sport Star Subjects cards were issued in little boxes and are often found in better condition than Bond Bread package insert cards. These better condition Sport Star Subjects cards command significantly higher prices when called "Bond Bread" insert cards instead of Sport Star Subjects cards. In actuality, Bond Bread inserts are not readily available in the higher grades that Sport Star Subjects cards are more often found.

The issue of the difference between the 1947 Bond Bread package inserts and Sport Star Subjects cards is a current plague that has impacted many, including those who don't specifically collect "Bond Bread" cards but collect cards of Jackie Robinson, Ted Williams, Stan Musial and many others who have cards in both sets.

It's been over a decade since Ted Zanidakis started this thread to clear up the mislabeling of many cards as "Bond Bread" ones when they were not. Even he often does not like what I write. But if you are serious about cards and ending scams on collectors, let's get the job done. Each of you who may have a 1947 Bond Bread insert and a Sport Star Subject card - - and it does not matter if it is of the same player or not - - post a quality scan of the "white" backs of both cards side-by-side so that distinctions can be made between them. Please don't be apathetic about posting or not post because you don't like the personalities involved. Make a posting and help all of your fellow collectors out.

Again, each of you who can post a scan of the backs of a 1947 Bond Bread package insert pictured along side that of a Sport Star Subjects card, please do so. Many, many readers would truly like to see the difference.

Thank you,
Mike

[clydepepper]

My only:

1947 Bond Bread - Jackie Robinson.jpg

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

My only:

Attachment 413519

Thanks for so quickly posting your Jackie Robinson card. Your heart is in the right place as it expresses the issues with these cards that have caused so many problems. There are several different sets with cards that have the same picture of Robinson as your card. That goes to the heart of the matter many want to resolve. If it's his "rookie" card, just how high does its value go? If it's not, then what's it worth? Perhaps, you're just like me and say it's an early Jackie Robinson card and I'm just glad I have one.

As you know, the card has "square" corners. Cards actually inserted into Bond Bread packages have die-cut (rounded) corners and "white" backs. While all of the Sport Star Subject sets were printed on white cardstock (have "white" backs), not all sets were issued with "round" corners. A few sets had only "square" cornered cards (no die-cut corners).

And then, there's the 1970s-1980s Festberg find of over 3,000 sets of 24 different (including a Jackie Robinson card) with "square" corners, all of which have a "brown tone" back, not a "white" back.

By not showing the back, you've made the point better than i could about the need to see scans of the backs of Bond Bread and Sport Star Subjects cards to help tell them apart.

Please, each of you who has a Bond Bread package insert card and a Sport Star Subjects card, post a scan of the backs side-by-side so that we can see the difference between those two sets. The cards do not have to be of the same player, just from the different sets. The more people who post, the better we all can see the difference.

Robbie, I really do appreciate you posting your card and hope someday you get your Jackie Robinson rookie.

Mike

[abctoo]

On 03-30-2007, a new thread was started on net54 baseball. It is called "WTD 1947 Bond Bread Cards" and has only one posting, which reads:
"Posted By: TONY
Buying 1947 Bond bread Cards
Need Most cards if Graded
Raw cards, need all single prints
prefer NM or better"

People were not thinking about the Sport Star Subjects set as having cards that looked like 1947 Bond Bread cards. I hope the past 13 years since that posting have been lucky for many. During that time, the card grading services have mislabeled many cards as "Bond Bread" ones. Many of the Sport Star Subjects cards in better grades have also been sold as "1947 Bond Bread" cards.

The identification and grading problems still exist.

If anyone has the ability to post a picture of the backs of a 1947 Bond Bread package card and a Sport Star Subjects card along side each other, please do so. Perhaps we can eliminate the misidentification of Bond Bread cards in "NM or better" condition?

Thanks,

Mike

[68Hawk]

Hey Mike,

Don't want you to think that no-one is reading your posts...
My collection is out in Palm Springs and I head out that way in a couple weeks.
I've got a 47' BB Jackie (or so I hope ) out there slabbed by SGC that I can take a photo of back and front and then post.
No comparison Sports Star card unfortunately, but at least another copy you can have an image of for analysis.

All the best,
Daniel

[todeen]

Picked this up ungraded. Took a risk.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[abctoo]

Thanks all for starting to post your cards, whether individually or side-by-side with another from the different set. We need to see the backs of any "rounded" (die-cut) corner cards, especially if you can identify it to being a card from the Sport Star Subjects set. The more we get of Bond Bread and Sport Star Subject images, the better we can all see the difference. Even if you have a card that you're not sure is a Bond Bread insert or a Sport Star Subjects card (regardless of how a grading company may have classified it), we may have enough to tell the difference. Thanks again, Mike

[Picklepete]

[IMG]2020-08-19_11-21-13 by Pete Defino, on Flickr[/IMG]

So I'm going to assume this is a 1947 Bond Bread ?

Back..
[IMG]2020-08-20_12-58-53 by Pete Defino, on Flickr[/IMG]

[68Hawk]

Managed to get to mine today and take some pics......sorry for the pink cast, I'm no so good with the camera.
I took them on a white granite with gray fleck, I was trying to give a comparison in shade of stock. I'd say overall minus the pink cast - if you imagined 2 shades lighter for actual briteness of stock you'd be in the park. Definitely NOT a grey toned back, any flecking and pattering on the white back is more light caramel in hue.
Hope these close ups show the cuts well enough, as well as some vagaries of printing...

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by 68Hawk

Managed to get to mine today and take some pics......sorry for the pink cast, I'm no so good with the camera . . ."

Your pictures are fine. The obvious question is whether it is a Bond Bread package insert or a card from the "Sport Star Subjects" set.

If you're willing, let's put it to the grading service. What I'd do is send them an e-mail saying you received back this card (give them their graded card number) and ask how do they know it's a 1947 Bond Bread insert card and not a card from the "Sport Star Subjects" set. I'd also attach to the e-mail the scan below (or a similar scan) of "Sport Star Subjects" boxes so they have no excuse for not knowing what you are talking about. [The scan was provided in Post #280 above on 06-11-2020 by member "tim"].

I think we all would like to know what they say. Will they say both of those sets are Bond Bread sets, or they don't know what the "Sport Star Subjects" set is, or something else? If they ask you any questions, bring them back here and we all can help answer them. Be well, Mike



P.S. They might say the card submission form said a "Bond Bread card." Even if it did, that's no excuse for a grading service. They should never take a submitter's definition at face value, and should authenticate any card before they put their label on the slab. Good luck!

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by abctoo

Your pictures are fine. The obvious question is whether it is a Bond Bread package insert or a card from the "Sport Star Subjects" set.

If you're willing, let's put it to the grading service. What I'd do is send them an e-mail saying you received back this card (give them their graded card number) and ask how do they know it's a 1947 Bond Bread insert card and not a card from the "Sport Star Subjects" set. I'd also attach to the e-mail the scan below (or a similar scan) of "Sport Star Subjects" boxes so they have no excuse for not knowing what you are talking about. [The scan was provided in Post #280 above on 06-11-2020 by member "tim"].

I think we all would like to know what they say. Will they say both of those sets are Bond Bread sets, or they don't know what the "Sport Star Subjects" set is, or something else? If they ask you any questions, bring them back here and we all can help answer them. Be well, Mike



P.S. They might say the card submission form said a "Bond Bread card." Even if it did, that's no excuse for a grading service. They should never take a submitter's definition at face value, and should authenticate any card before they put their label on the slab. Good luck!

Uhm, Mike, I was just offering up some pics.
Do with them as you will for your research but I'm not co-sponsering. Ok?

[Cmount76]

Any help on this one would be appreciated.

[griffon512]

To start, if one can't definitively say whether a card is coming from a bread package or a Sports Star Subjects box everything else that follows is irrelevant. So where is this going? Are we going to get a bunch of random pictures of rounded cards and square cards, pretend we know what packaging they originally came from, and then draw likely arbitrary conclusions about what differentiates them when any differentiating factors may be completely random or specific to the impact of the environment on the cards from the decades that followed their manufacturing, and then call this research?

Ted and Shaun have captured a lot of great background info on late 40's bread cards from their own personal experience and verifiable data coming from contemporaneous publications. Ted took the right approach when he dropped out of what is happening now when the process stopped becoming valid and reliable versus anything resembling academic research standards. In all likelihood the vast majority of distinctly rounded corner cards that have specific color/toning/contrast on the front and back are period to the late 40's. Yes, someone can try to imitate at least the front of these cards through cutting a square cornered card in a similar fashion and no third party grading service is going to get it right all of the time. It is what it is.

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by griffon512

To start, if one can't definitively say whether a card is coming from a bread package or a Sports Star Subjects box everything else that follows is irrelevant. So where is this going? Are we going to get a bunch of random pictures of rounded cards and square cards, pretend we know what packaging they originally came from, and then draw likely arbitrary conclusions about what differentiates them when any differentiating factors may be completely random or specific to the impact of the environment on the cards from the decades that followed their manufacturing, and then call this research?

Ted and Shaun have captured a lot of great background info on late 40's bread cards from their own personal experience and verifiable data coming from contemporaneous publications. Ted took the right approach when he dropped out of what is happening now when the process stopped becoming valid and reliable versus anything resembling academic research standards. In all likelihood the vast majority of distinctly rounded corner cards that have specific color/toning/contrast on the front and back are period to the late 40's. Yes, someone can try to imitate at least the front of these cards through cutting a square cornered card in a similar fashion and no third party grading service is going to get it right all of the time. It is what it is.

The primary difference between 1947 Bond Bread package insert cards and cards from the Sport Star Subject set is in the intensity of the brightness of the white cardstock. Both were printed by Meyercord Co. from the same initial half-tone and on the same white card stock used throughout the months of printing.

Cards inserted into the bread packages lost some of that brilliance from being there. Cards in the Sport Star Subjects sets initially retained the cardstock brightness in their boxes, but as removed and handled the brilliance diminished.

In his first post at the beginning of this thread, Ted stated: "A recent find of many of these SQUARE cards (BB and Movie Stars) suggest a 1949 issue date since Walker Cooper is depicted in this collection as a NY Giant (Cooper was traded to Cinci in the Summer of '49)." While he called it an "unknown set," he obviously was referring to the "square" corner cards of that version of the Sport Star Subjects sets not issued with "round" corners. He was mistaken though in assuming Walker Cooper was in the set. Thus from the beginning of this thread, he was unaware of a Sport Star Subjects set with "round" corners.

Ted saved many from mistakes by brilliantly distinguishing 1947 Bond Bread package inserts from Festberg remainders with his white-back, round-corners vs. brown-toned back, square-corners definition. We all got it and we're all past that.

Ted indicated he has withdrawn from participation in this thread. He leaves unanswered the confusion his long used, catch-all phrase created as it unwittingly encompasses the "round" corner Sport Star Subjects cards. They are not Bond Bread package inserts.

68Hawk's 08-20-20 Post #311 above, gave us an opportunity to hear what a grading card company would tell its customer about how it distinguishes Bond Bread cards from Sport Star Subjects cards. That question has been asked several times in this thread. From his pictures, it cannot be said which one of these two sets his card came from. At the present it is true though, that a card a grading company has authenticated as a Bond Bread insert has more value than identified otherwise. But remember, there are a couple of old timers who participated early on in this thread who said they obtained their Sport Star Subjects sets in 1947.

You ask why post all of the pictures. On 04-04-2009 in Post #8 above, Ted posted the backs of a Bond Bread insert and a Festberg remainder side-by-side showing their distinctive "white" or "brown-toned" backs. Ted complained about the recent picture I posted showing the backs of a Bond Bread insert verses a Sport Star Subjects card. He will not post his own picture. The pictures now being posted by others will help fill in the gaps as an alternative resolution. This is not an exercise in futility nor a "take-sides" issue. Rather, we all can learn if we participate. Keep posting your pictures of the backs of Bond Bread inserts and Star Star Subjects cards.

I am seeking a set of Sport Star Subjects cards in their original unopened boxes for two reasons. First, it will help establish the order of arrangement of the cards inside since most boxes were opened, the cards taken out, and often put back inside in a random order, not the original. Second, the full brightness of the white cardstock should be retained.

Copyright 2020, by Michael Fried, P.O. Box 27521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

[griffon512]

"intensity of the brightness of the white card stock." I give up. I'm waving the white flag (a more intense white than typically seen in homogenized bread cards, must be a sports star subject flag from 1947 with rounded corners). I hope others do the same.

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by griffon512

"intensity of the brightness of the white card stock." I give up. I'm waving the white flag (a more intense white than typically seen in homogenized bread cards, must be a sports star subject flag from 1947 with rounded corners). I hope others do the same.

What we see is the perceptional result of light radiating on our eyes from the visible region of the spectrum. In 1931, the Commission Internationale de L’Éclairage (CIE) adopted standard curves for color that specify how the various wavelengths of light coming from an object (its radiance) can be transformed into a set of three numbers that specify a color (its “spectral power distribution” or SPD). The eleven basic color categories are white, black, red, green, yellow, blue, brown, purple, pink, orange, and gray, but each color has tens of thousands or more variations.

The CIE defines “brightness” as “the attribute of a visual sensation according to which an area appears to emit more or less light.” CIE defined a numerically standard curve to measure such luminance. Integrating the set of three numbers that specify a color (the SPD) with the measured “brightness” of an object results in a specific CIE luminance number for the object. For more details, see http://poynton.ca/ColorFAQ.html

In other words, we can measure the differences between the brightness of the Bond Bread cards after they came out of the packages against the brightness of cards fresh from a Sport Star Subjects box. The referenced website article above also provides guidance on how to adjust any scans that get posted here to a uniform standard so that one can be compared against another.

I don't know which “white flag” you are waving. Is it a Bond Bread one or a Sport Star Subjects one? Providing more scans of cards is better than giving up.

I do know that for more than 10 years, many people insisted in this thread the Festberg remainders were nothing more than reprints printed after 1980. My Post #194 above of 05-07-2020 (only a little more than 3 months ago, less time than it took to print the cards) provided scientific evidence to establish otherwise. Below is one of the pictures from that post, a Festberg card on top of a strip of new white paper taken under ultraviolet light.



The card itself does not glow because it does not have the chemical “brighteners” that have been added to paper since 1951, while the white strip underneath glows bright, an indicator of added brighteners.

Perhaps my May 2020 posting was confusing because here and there I used terms like “brighteners” and “brightness.” We will be able to measure the actual difference in luminance between Bond Bread and Sport Star Subject cards using a less rudimentary technology than an ultraviolet light (used here only to determine whether or not chemical brighteners had been added).

Of course, it's easy to give up if you really don't care about the differences between 1947 Bond Bread package insert cards and cards of the Sport Star Subjects set. It may be easier to just spend four or five figures on something called a “rookie” card rather than actually know what it is. It is not reasonable to discourage those who might want to know because you do not care.

Keep on posting the backs of Bond Bread cards and Sport Star subject cards for those of us who care.

Thanks,

Mike

Copyright 2020 by Michael Fried, P.O. Box 27521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

[GeoPoto]

I have tried to follow this thread. (I am not actually interested in either of the two sets discussed. My interest is in the related Jackie Robinson set, which hasn't been addressed.) I have a couple of thoughts.

It is hard not to admire Mike's "camel in search of water" doggedness. But, we have followed this saga through numerous sand dunes and yet the horizon continues to show endless sand in all directions.

I have to agree with Griffon that the quest appears doomed. Not only is the "water" proving hard to find, it seems extremely unlikely that the provenance of any cards that may be posted will be solid enough to justify drawing any useful conclusions.

Like Griffon, I have lost interest. I hate to abandon Mike in the desert, but I really can't see how he is going to achieve any meaningful results. Good luck to Mike in proving me wrong.

[griffon512]

Don't confuse indifference with what is obvious: this has been a bridge to nowhere and will continue to be so because the research process is unreliable, random, and invalid. It would not pass muster to even a hint of academic research scrutiny. As I said before -- though I recognize that any objective points will likely never be digested -- if one can not even verify which cards are coming from Bond Bread packages and Sports Star Subject packages everything else is irrelevant. That should be obvious but apparently it isn't. If one is doing a scientific experiment and they can't even identify who is in the control group and who is in the experimental group any results that follow are irrelevant. Clear enough? Probably not.

In Ted's Post 298 -- comprised mainly of Homogenized Bread cards he got when he was a kid in 1947 with the exception of two cards he identified as in later years -- it is clear that there is no material difference in the "intensity of the whiteness," the key differentiator in your words, between the backs of his cards and the supposed Sports Star Subject back you often use in your post.

If you want to blacklight every card you can gather from the Festberg find and compare them to Homogenized Bread cards, go for it, no one is going to stop you.

If people want to waste their time contributing to this "research" that's their choice. I've wasted enough time reading these posts.

By the way, I'm pretty confident there is nothing legally binding about slapping on a copyright on a Internet forum post. Not that anyone of rational mind would have the slightest interest in reproducing the information in this thread.

Copyright: Me, dumbass who spent too much time on this thread

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by griffon512

Don't confuse indifference with what is obvious: this has been a bridge to nowhere and will continue to be so because the research process is unreliable, random, and invalid. It would not pass muster to even a hint of academic research scrutiny. As I said before -- though I recognize that any objective points will likely never be digested -- if one can not even verify which cards are coming from Bond Bread packages and Sports Star Subject packages everything else is irrelevant. That should be obvious but apparently it isn't. If one is doing a scientific experiment and they can't even identify who is in the control group and who is in the experimental group any results that follow are irrelevant. Clear enough? Probably not.

In Ted's Post 298 -- comprised mainly of Homogenized Bread cards he got when he was a kid in 1947 with the exception of two cards he identified as in later years -- it is clear that there is no material difference in the "intensity of the whiteness," the key differentiator in your words, between the backs of his cards and the supposed Sports Star Subject back you often use in your post.

If you want to blacklight every card you can gather from the Festberg find and compare them to Homogenized Bread cards, go for it, no one is going to stop you.

If people want to waste their time contributing to this "research" that's their choice. I've wasted enough time reading these posts.

By the way, I'm pretty confident there is nothing legally binding about slapping on a copyright on a Internet forum post. Not that anyone of rational mind would have the slightest interest in reproducing the information in this thread.

Copyright: Me, dumbass who spent too much time on this thread

It obvious from your response that you did not read the reference, http://poynton.ca/ColorFAQ.html, which primarily concerns reconciling the difference with digital images. Had you done so, you would have recognized that a pool of pictures being sought does not produce research that is unreliable, random, or invalid. In fact, it provides guidance for taking random pictures and modifying to a standard normal for computer use. Regardless of the pool of pictures we obtain, all can be adjusted to the same color standards we set for Bond Bread and Sport Star Subject cards. From Ted we have original Bond Bread inserts and I have some of the Subjects cards, on which to establish such standards. It is a complex and detailed process I am not yet willing to do unless I have enough pictures to apply it to.

I see you have apparently lost interest in finding out just what is actually a Bond Bread or a Sport Star Subjects card. For some reason you chose to delete most of the content of your postings in this thread prior to the one quoted above.

It seems you did not like the direction I was going in pointing that high grade cards of the lookalike Bond Bread and Sport Star Subjects sets primarily come from Sport Star Subjects sets. Obviously you do not agree that placing a single card inside a bread package to be handled as it will by the recipient will cause cards to have more wear than those being placed in a protective box from which one did not have to take any cards out.

I also noticed that on 05-29-2020 you started a Post, which you have now changed the title to “no longer for sale -- 1947 Homogenized Bond Bread SGC 7.5 Jackie Robinson RC.” There, you were offering an SCG graded 86 NM+ card that SCG had labeled as a “1947 Bond Bread Jackie Robinson” for over $3,500.

I am duplicating your pictures from your thread below.





If you are really interested in knowing whether your card is accurately authenticated by SCG, then asked them how they know its not a Sport Star Subject set card. The rest of us would like to know the answer. Do you?

I'm sorry I have not been fully disclosing all of the information I have. I first wanted to address the compelling questions raised for years in this thread that may cause some to misinterpret the facts I have uncovered.

For example, in the scan of the back of the SCG card above, the lower right corner of the picture shows the round die-cut ending but with the remaining bottom end of the card not in direct alignment with that die cut. The cards from a stack of sheets were first cut with a straight knife blade to make stacks of individual cards. Then two adjoining sides of a stack of card were die-cut, then the cards rotated 180 degrees to die-cut the other two sides. The opposite corners of a card were cut by the same die-cutter. While parts of the opposite corners show cuts from part of the same die-cutter, they are usually not an exact match. I have several examples of such die-cutting.

The cards were printed on sheets with no space between cards. Even today, straight-edge cutting of cards is not an exact science. Otherwise, “centering” would be of no concern. I will be providing in my article detailed information about the die-cutting, including pictures of the cuts different die-cutters used so you see which your card matches up with.

Griffon512, I own copyrights. I appreciate your attempt at humor in the “copyright” notice you added at the end of your post. I understand for a Copyright to be valid, it must say “copyright” or have the © symbol, the date, and the name and address of the copyright holder. I don't think yours meets that test. Even if it did, the fair comment I've made above about your post would be protected from copyright infringement. I make no claim to the intellectual property of anyone else.

Be well,

Mike

Copyright 2020 by Michael Fried, P.O. Box 27521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

[griffon512]

1. No I did not delete most of the comments of the posts I've made in this thread. I've added some content to my comments so they will show up as edits but feel free to log every single edit I've made if you are able to see that. Not sure where you are going with that insinuation but whatever.

2. My Homogenized Bread Jackie was sold so it is no longer available. Masterful sleuthing. What that means is even if someone were to want to insinuate that I'm talking my cards up there is no basis for it. I don't have any Homogenized Bread Cards, Sports Star Subject cards, Festberg cards, etc. I'm guessing you have a number of Festberg cards or other cards like them, but I will not questions your biases. Again, you are confusing indifference with an obvious bridge to nowhere or a likely blanket of erroneous information presented as fact.

I do care that people are not completely misled by pseudo-research that a junior high schooler could gather presented as substantive information, and that is my only compelling interest in responding to this dead-end (or worse) thread. Ted took the right approach in not responding anymore when pushing on a string, and I will too.

3. Your point about copyright law is wrong and some lawyers on this thread can correct you, but I can't blame them for not participating.

I'm sure we're all waiting with baited breadth for the article!

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by GeoPoto

I have tried to follow this thread. (I am not actually interested in either of the two sets discussed. My interest is in the related Jackie Robinson set, which hasn't been addressed.) I have a couple of thoughts.

It is hard not to admire Mike's "camel in search of water" doggedness. But, we have followed this saga through numerous sand dunes and yet the horizon continues to show endless sand in all directions.

I have to agree with Griffon that the quest appears doomed. Not only is the "water" proving hard to find, it seems extremely unlikely that the provenance of any cards that may be posted will be solid enough to justify drawing any useful conclusions.

Like Griffon, I have lost interest. I hate to abandon Mike in the desert, but I really can't see how he is going to achieve any meaningful results. Good luck to Mike in proving me wrong.

It's true, I've posted little on the 13 cards of the Bond Bread special Jackie Robinson set. member Charleybrown has been researching that issue far beyond belief for years and has posted extensive, useful information in the thread entitled, " OT: Revisiting the D302 Jackie Robinson Bond Bread Release Date " and elsewhere.

In one of his July 2020 posts, Charleybrown indicated he was going to write a more detailed article fully exploring those cards. You should look forward to reading it as I do once it gets published. He has broken a lot of myths about those cards, even those that have existed for over 60 years. The hardest ones of those myths are the dates that each of the individual cards were issued.

He has conclusively proven, including from the 1946-1949 dates of the original, underlying wire service photos used to create the Robinson pictures on the cards, that not all were issued in 1947. Rather, they were issued from 1947 through 1949. Other than my little reference to those Robinson cards (such as in Post #290 on 07-03-2020), I would be redundant to attempt to add anything to Chareybrown's outstanding efforts. I will say, the grading card companies appear to be ignoring reality and are still dating all of these 13 cards on their labels as 1947. That's very misleading for those seeking only "rookie" cards.

GeoPoto, distinguishing Bond Bread cards from other lookalikes is not an endless process. I've only been at it for a little more than 3 months.

Already, we have found the pictures used in the Bond Bread insert set come from ACME Newspictures Service. That also establishes that the Team Photo Packs sold in ballparks (that contained some of those photos) were made up of pictures from ACME.

We've found that cards generally attributed as "Bond Bread perforated dual sided cards" are actually an Elgee Product, not associated with Bond Bread. We date the release date to 1947-48 because a few of the pictures of action shots of Cowboys in the set come from the movie "Red River," which though filmed in 1946, was released in 1948. ACME distributed movie studio pictures to more than 900 clients including over 700 newspaper groups. Since all of the rest of the Cowboy photos come from Cowboy movies released in 1947 or before, it is possible that "Red River" did release movie shots for advance publicity in 1947. If so, that would put the set as a 1947 set and not a 1947-48 one.

We've found that the 1947 Bond Bread insert cards, and the round and square corner cards of the Sport Star Subject sets and the Screen Star Subject sets were manufactured by the Meyercord Co. of Chicago. You fear the distinction between the Bond Bread inserts and the rounded-corner Sport Star Subject cards may take forever to resolve.

Actually, we're not far off from that. While it is a complex issue, as time permits to do so, an extrapolation of the digital image information in http://poynton.ca/ColorFAQ.html will answer your question. That should satisfy your concerns about the provenance of cards posted.

We tried to make the distinction another way -- by comparing the wear on individual die-cuts used for the photos on Bond Bread cards and Sports Star Subjects cards. That would have been very easy if Ted had provided a uniform scan of each of his proven original Bond Bread card to use for comparison. He refused.

We also established as untrue the opinion that the Festberg remainders were reprints made in the 1980's. Our ultraviolet light test proved they were printed on cardstock made before 1951.

We've also shown the fallacy of attempting to distinguish cards by how close one part of an image is to the edge vs. the closeness of the image to an edge of another card. That issue arose because people forgot to apply their knowledge about cards in general. The uncut cards in the sheets of Bond Bread and Sport Star Subjects had no space between each other and would trim just like any other cards, often with a little shift to the left or right, or up or down. We all see what happens during such shifts, and its called "centering," an issue that still plagues the hobby today.

Don't give up! We're working on it and have gone a long way in less than 3½ months. Post your pictures of the backs of Bond Bread and Sport Star Subjects cards, and please continue making comments. It all helps us focus on the actual issues troubling our readers.

Stay healthy,

Mike

Copyright 2020 by Michael Fried, P.O. Box 27521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by griffon512

1. No I did not delete most of the comments of the posts I've made in this thread. I've added some content to my comments so they will show up as edits but feel free to log every single edit I've made if you are able to see that. Not sure where you are going with that insinuation but whatever.

2. My Homogenized Bread Jackie was sold so it is no longer available. Masterful sleuthing. What that means is even if someone were to want to insinuate that I'm talking my cards up there is no basis for it. I don't have any Homogenized Bread Cards, Sports Star Subject cards, Festberg cards, etc. I'm guessing you have a number of Festberg cards or other cards like them, but I will not questions your biases. Again, you are confusing indifference with an obvious bridge to nowhere or a likely blanket of erroneous information presented as fact.

I do care that people are not completely misled by pseudo-research that a junior high schooler could gather presented as substantive information, and that is my only compelling interest in responding to this dead-end (or worse) thread. Ted took the right approach in not responding anymore when pushing on a string, and I will too.

3. Your point about copyright law is wrong and some lawyers on this thread can correct you, but I can't blame them for not participating.

I'm sure we're all waiting with baited breadth for the article!

Griffon512, I appreciate we all have opinions. Here are some facts on which you should base your opinions taken straight from the Nolo Press website:

"Form of Copyright Notice

There are relatively strict technical requirements as to what a copyright notice must contain if it is to serve its purpose of preventing people from claiming in court that they were "innocent-infringers." A valid copyright notice contains three elements:

* the copyright symbol ©, or the words "Copyright" or "Copr."

* if website is published, the year of publication, and

* the name of the copyright owner.

It is not required that these elements appear in any particular order in the notice, but most notices are written in the order set forth above. The purpose is to give unequivocal notice of the copyright protection, so that the would-be thief cannot claim as a defense that he or she did not know about the protection."

The Nolo Press webpage from which the above comes is:

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...%20%22Copr.%22.

Stay healthy,

Mike

P.S. I received my Doctor of Jurisprudence degree in 1997 at age 52.

Copyright 2020 by Michael Fried, P.O. Box 27521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

[Clutch-Hitter]

Interesting. What did these sell for in the early &0s? Seems like a lot of trouble to find old paper to reprint these Bond Bread cards. And we find some of the movie star cards suspicious too?

[Clutch-Hitter]

Same person?

https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=61226

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by Clutch-Hitter

Interesting. What did these sell for in the early &0s? Seems like a lot of trouble to find old paper to reprint these Bond Bread cards. And we find some of the movie star cards suspicious too?

I was first introduced to "these" sets in the early 1990's when a friend bought the 24 cards of the Festberg remainders for a card of a player he was collecting. He sold me the other 23 for $25 including the Jackie Robinson card.

Long term collectors have always been suspicious of the Festberg set and they put no value to it. In 2009, Post #49 above noted that a complete Festberg set of 24 sold at auction for $102. Another responded that he saw the auction but didn't think anything of it, but had he known it was only $102 he would have bid.

Today, Festberg sets are seen offered on eBay as "Bond Bread" sets generally for around $500 to $1,000, though some have sold for as little as $250 while others over $1,000. Again, these are all usually described as "Bond Bread" sets. A Jackie Robinson card from the Festberg remainders, if offered in a slab of a card grading service that identifies it as a "Bond Bread" card, have sold for over $1,000. Generally, though, an ungraded Robinson from the Festberg remainders can be picked up for $50 to $100.

In my Post #203 OF 05-10-2020 above, I pictured four of the Festberg remainder cards I had asked SCG to grade shortly after I have received it. Three cards were slabbed and labeled as "1947 Homogenized Bond Bread" cards. SCG would not grade the fourth card, the Jackie Robinson, saying it had been trimmed.

Unwittingly, SCG may have given us an answer to the cause of the brown toning on those cards. Many are likewise "trimmed." If you look at the edges of some of them, you can see a heavy dark brown mold much deeper in color than the more uniform brown toning on the back. The set was highly promoted in the 1980's and apparently the over 3,000 sets found sold out. It is not unreasonable to assume that the more severely damaged cards of the find had their edges trimmed to remove the more obvious mold when the supply of sets decreased.

The unanswered question not yet addressed in this thread is what effect did that brown mold have on the cardstock of the Festberg cards. People have been just looking at them as a toned something and assumed they were always thinner than Bond Bread and Sport Star Subjects cards.

In May 2016, Kevin O'Gara asked what are real Bond Bread cards worth. Leon replied in June, "Generally speaking it's not an expensive set relative to others." From the information Griffon512 has recently provided, the Jackie Robinson round corner card he was offering at over $3,500 has been sold. The card had been identified by SCG as a "Bond Bread" card and given a high grade.

It will remain difficult to say what are realistic prices for actual 1947 Bond Bread package inserts until clear guidelines distinguishing them from round-corner Sport Star Subject cards are generally acceptable. There is little question today that anyone would damage a high-grade round-corner Sports Star Subject card so that it would appear to have the wear and tear s) would have.

Recently, a dealer on eBay offered 9 separate auction lots of individual Bond Bread cards with a starting bid of 99¢. While only in "average" condition (cards not especially cared for over the years), only one had a crease. I was the only bidder on 8 of the lots. The ninth I won at a one bid raise over $5. So what are Bond Bread inserts worth?

Also on eBay is a dealer offering a complete set of Screen Star Subjects cards at $249.95.

I arrived here at this thread a few months ago looking for information on what I thought were Bond Bread cards. My eyes glossed over trying to understand the so many different sets the thread had virtually passed on by mere reference. I do understand Ted's concerns. The world was trying to tell him that the actual cards of his childhood memories were something they were not.

Looking at the subject with "fresh eyes," I saw that while these many "imposters" (impostors) were a challenge to Ted, they too were also ignored. The bulk of the cards were not widely known in collector circles, and where known, more often than not, little of anything else about was known.

Clutch-Hitter, I'm not sure I'm going in the direction you sought.

Like most of us, you probably have seen your fill of modern cards and their manufacturer created limited print "rarities." Hundreds of millions of Bond Bread cards were inserted into bread packages. Where are they? It is virtually impossible to complete a set in average condition, but you can complete a set of what are called "Bond Bread" cards in near mint or better condition.

I'm sure that Charleybrown has spent many enjoyable years just trying to gather sufficient information to accurately date and describe the 13 cards of the Bond Bread special Jackie Robinson set. And that's what it's all about, learning new things and having fun.

My 1988 1st edition of the Standard Catalog puts the special 13 card Jackie Robinson set at $3,150 NM, with all of the individual cards at $250 NM each, except the Robinson Portrait Card (with facsimile autograph), which it values at $150 NM. Today, you couldn't touch a single NM card of the set for the 1988 price of the complete set (and probably could not find a complete in that condition offered for sale back then).

The 1988 Standard Catalog does not mention Bond Bread package insert cards. What has caused much dispute recently in this thread is a set of cards called Bond Bread cards in high grade that was sold along with a complete set of the four Sport Star Subjects boxes in May 2020 on eBay for over $4,500. Many old-timers believe the cards to be genuine 1947 Bond Bread cards with the Sport Star Subject Boxes an add-on. Others, like myself, believe the cards are from those Sport Star Subject boxes.

It has yet to be explained why so many cards have turned up in recent years in high grade that are called "Bond Bread" cards, when the actual package insert cards old-timers acquired back then are not now in the same high condition? Would the actual population of high grade cards make a true 1947 Bond Bread insert graded 7 more valuable than a Sport Star Subjects card graded 7.5, 8 or 9?

I looked in some old 1990 Sport Collector Digest (SCD) and other 1990 card newspapers I have and could find no ads (not even classified ones) mentioning Bond Bread insert cards. New issues were the big thing.

PSA's website shows they have graded some 52,816 1985 Topps #401 Mark McGwire Olympic "Rookie" cards with 42,426 of them at PSA 8 or better. In 1990, the McGwires in PSA 8 were being sold above $200 and touted as investments. Today, PSA's on-line price guide puts that PSA 8 McGwire at $15. But a lot of people had a lot of fun in the late 1980's just trying to find one.

Sport Star Subjects cards will never see such a dramatic shift in price. But that is the fear many have if their cards are not identified as Bond Bread inserts. Sport Star Subjects cards are highly collectible and in short supply. While most do not believe they were issued before 1948-49, some inconclusive evidence suggests otherwise.

The very nature of card collecting, where more people seek individual cards than try to complete sets, underlies an investment demand that drives a large part of the card business.

This past week, I looked through several cardboard boxes containing some of the sorted plastic card boxes of non-sports cards I've had in storage since 1990. One of them contained 65 different cards from the 50 card Jack Rose Little Cigar back subset of the T59 American Tobacco Company "Flags of All Nations" set (a complete set with all front and back variations totals over 7,500). There are 4 Jack Rose back varieties for each of the 50 front designs or 200 cards in that subset. That's more different cards of any of the T59 subsets I have.

With about a third of the Jack Rose subset, I thought should I complete it and work on the rest of the set? I put the plastic box back in order in the cardboard box and said to myself, "No." Since my interests in the Bond Bread like and related cards went beyond the 1947 Bond Bread inserts, I would have enough to do addressing the more than a couple of dozen of its lookalike and related sets. That was consistent with my efforts to reconstruct the Elgee perforated dual-sided sheets, the cards ow which are routinely mislabeled as "Bond Bread" cards.

Clutch-Hitter, if you are a serious collector looking for something impossible to collect, try starting and putting together the 48 card set of "Page's Pittsburgh Milk Co. cards." These are identical to the Bond Bread package inserts, with “rounded” corners, but are rubberstamped on the back in either purple or black ink: “PAGE'S / PITTSBURGH MILK CO. / The Sweetest Milk Ever Sold”.

Some have discounted the "Page's Milk" set as merely remainders of Bond Bread cards. It's true, Page's Milk did obtain remainders after the Bond Bread promotion was over. Page's Milk believed in extensive promotion of its products and its home-delivery service.

When Page's Milk cards were brought up in this thread years ago, a responder was misunderstood when pointing out the intensity of Page's Milk promotional capabilities and the extent it went to to promote its name. Page's milk had a long run radio show widely broadcast. A singer on that radio show named Patti was always introduced as Patti "Page" (the Page's Milk singer). She adopted that name for use throughout her long and famous career that followed.

But that does not end the story of the Page's Milk cards. In 1949, Page's Milk made an extensive card promotion all their own. Page's Milk especially distinguishing their overprinted cards from the old Bond Bread ones. Like many milk companies across the United States, Page's Milk was regularly home-delivered. It was to that large milk buying market that Page's applied its cards. Below is a scan of a Page's Milk offer that uses its overprinted cards to keep home-delivery customers coming back for more and a scan of the back of a card with Page's overprint.





Or you might try something even more difficult. Work on the London Dry London Dry Beverages (including gin) cards. Those few known have identical pictures to Bond Bread package inserts, except have “square” corners. They are rubberstamped on the back: “Compliments of / LONDON DRY / TRADE MARK REGISTERED / The Topper of all Drinks (with logo in between) / BEVERAGES.”

Very little is known about the London Dry cards except that in the late 1940s, some were released in New York City (the same city where the Festberg remainders were found 20 years later). It will be difficult to find one, but once you find the right track, it will lead you to more. (And keep me in mind if you find any duplicates.)



I may be have been rambling on too long.

So, be well, Mike

Copyright 2020 by Michael Fried, P.O. Box 26521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

[abctoo]

I just found this in Post 1 of a 01-22-2002 thread entitled "Festberg Warning." I would post a direct link to that thread if I knew how to do so.

Originally Posted by Archive

Posted By: Lee Behrens

In the last few months I have won 2 festberg auctions, a T202 lot which was fine, and a T206 45 card lot, here's where the problems start. In the description there was 3 HOFers, 2 two I suspect are reprints, waxy finish. It described 8 EX/EX+, one falls close to that category it was one of two cards pictured, there were 4 cards that I think were suppose to fall into that category that are trimmed. 5 VG/EX, I could find any to fall into that category. I did get the one interesting Tolstoi card that I posted. The lot in no way comes close to the description.

I have attempted to email him two seperate times with no response. This is why I am know posting to STAY AWAY FROM FESTBERG AUCTIONS he just wants your money and does not care about the product. I did have a few members warn me, but my first experience was alright, but this second one is TERRIBLE.

JUST ONE FINAL WARNING STAY AWAY FROM FESTBERG AUCTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!

Any other questions fell free to email me.

Lee

On 01-31-2002, Post 12 reads:

Originally Posted by Archive

Posted By: Lee Behrens

After 20 days I finally received a reply from Dave Festberg, this is the whole message.

Hi Lee, I'm back, sorry about my new grader should I fire him. Will take care of next auction. best wishes, Dave.

Know here is someone really concerned about his customer absolutely no reference to the transaction or trying to work out the problem.

There will be NO next auction for me and I hope that none of you are even tempted to bid on his auctions.

Lee

Relevant paragraph from the 01-22-1993 Sports Collectors Digest article on the Festberg remainders (posted a few years ago in this thread):

Originally Posted by abctoo

My 1988 1st edition of the Standard Catalog puts the special 13 card Jackie Robinson set at $3,150 NM, with all of the individual cards at $250 NM each, except the Robinson Portrait Card (with facsimile autograph), which it values at $150 NM. Today, you couldn't touch a single NM card of the set for the 1988 price of the complete set (and probably could not find a complete in that condition offered for sale back then).


So, be well, Mike

Copyright 2020 by Michael Fried, P.O. Box 26521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

Interesting to note that the White Border Portrait w/ Facsimile Auto is now the card in highest demand and market value as CharleyBrown's research was able to conclusively prove that it was the first of the set of 13 released and even pre-dates the 1948 Leaf Jackie Robinson by at least a year.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Gobucsmagic74

Interesting to note that the White Border Portrait w/ Facsimile Auto is now the card in highest demand and market value as CharleyBrown's research was able to conclusively prove that it was the first of the set of 13 released and even pre-dates the 1948 Leaf Jackie Robinson by at least a year.

Sorry to correct you, Dan. The LEAF BB cards were issued in 1949. I'm not faulting you (or others on this forum), who refer to this set of BB cards as 1948.
The fault is with PSA, who has perpetuated this myth.

Originally Posted by tedzan

ROOKIE card.....issued Summer 1947 .…..……………..….....……. 1948 ....……..…...…..…....… 1948
.





Early Spring 1949 ..………...………...................…...………. Mid Spring 1949

. .
.

TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[GasHouseGang]

I take it that you're implying something from this quote:

"...the London Dry London Dry Beverages (including gin) cards. Those few known have identical pictures to Bond Bread package inserts, except have “square” corners. They are rubberstamped on the back: “Compliments of / LONDON DRY / TRADE MARK REGISTERED / The Topper of all Drinks (with logo in between) / BEVERAGES.”

Very little is known about the London Dry cards except that in the late 1940s, some were released in New York City (the same city where the Festberg remainders were found 20 years later). It will be difficult to find one, but once you find the right track, it will lead you to more."

Are you implying that maybe the Festberg cards were actually London Dry Beverage Card leftovers that never got rubber-stamped? I couldn't find the checklist for the London Dry cards, so I can't tell if that's even a possibility.

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

I take it that you're implying something from this quote:

"...the London Dry London Dry Beverages (including gin) cards. Those few known have identical pictures to Bond Bread package inserts, except have “square” corners. They are rubberstamped on the back: “Compliments of / LONDON DRY / TRADE MARK REGISTERED / The Topper of all Drinks (with logo in between) / BEVERAGES.”

Very little is known about the London Dry cards except that in the late 1940s, some were released in New York City (the same city where the Festberg remainders were found 20 years later). It will be difficult to find one, but once you find the right track, it will lead you to more."

Are you implying that maybe the Festberg cards were actually London Dry Beverage Card leftovers that never got rubber-stamped? I couldn't find the checklist for the London Dry cards, so I can't tell if that's even a possibility.

GasHouseGang, You're just like me. I been searching for a long time for a checklist on the internet. I can't find one either. It's almost impossible to find any references to the cards. I did find a couple of wantlists that included the London set but no specific players were mentioned. I've also only found three pictures of different cards (Bob Feller, Stan Musial and Ralph Kiner) and
no others. The pictures on those cards are identical to the player pictures on Bond Bread cards. These three are the few I was able to find. If anyone knows of any others, let us know.

A couple of months ago while using a friend's computer, I found an unidentified magazine page on-line with a large ad for London Dry Beverages. The page had a 1949 date and the ad indicated a non-specific sports card was available at bars and restaurants. Printed at the bottom of the ad was "London Dry / New York City." I could neither copy, print, download or otherwise transmit a copy of the ad from its webpage.

I had always associated "London Dry" with gin so assumed the advertiser was a gin distiller. To respond to your inquiry, I started a search for the ad so I could post it in reply. Along the way I found out that "London Dry" is not a brand name for a gin, but a generic name for a particular process of distilling gin. M any brands of gin include "London Dry" in their product name.

So I then thought, how could the card say that "London Dry" was its registered trademark? I searched the website of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and found many companies have limited trademark rights to the words, "London Gin."

Along the way, I found the following picture of a wooden crate using the same typeface for "London Dry" and artwork used on the cards.



This led me to the following from the USPTO:



It's a 1960 trademark renewal of one first granted first issued in January 1938 to London Dry Ginger Ale Co. of Wilmington, Delaware, for use with Carbonated Beverages sold as Soft Drinks and for use as Mixers. I had associated "London Dry" with gin and that is exactly what London Dry wanted me to do. They're not a gin maker, but the maker of the various mixer that can go into it.

Now to your real question. Earlier today I suggested above how it might be interesting to try to do what seemed impossible - - to collect London Dry cards. While writing that, I realized that London Dry cards and Festberg remainders were both in New York City, both were about the same size, both had square corners, and the three players I knew of on London Dry cards were the same as pictured on the Festberg remainders.

So I swung at the ball with the information about both being in New York City. It wasn't actually an implication. I thought I had only popped up the ball so we could see where it landed. And GasHouseGang, you sure caught it.




* * * * *

Regardless, we can all dream of finding that old restaurant or bar, perhaps in New York, that still may have a London Dry card or two stuck in the back of an old drawer and hasn't been touched for years.

Stay healthy,

Mike

Copyright 2020 by Michael Fried, P.O. Box 27521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

Originally Posted by tedzan

Sorry to correct you, Dan. The LEAF BB cards were issued in 1949. I'm not faulting you (or others on this forum), who refer to this set of BB cards as 1948.
The fault is with PSA, who has perpetuated this myth.






TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Ted,
I thought there was some debate as to the exact release date of the 48/49 Leaf product. Not arguing your point, there may be evidence it was never released in 1948. The larger point I was making is that the white bordered portrait w/ facsimile autograph was released a year or more before the Leaf card, which would probably be closer to a year and half if Leaf cards weren’t released until 1949.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Gobucsmagic74

Ted,
I thought there was some debate as to the exact release date of the 48/49 Leaf product. Not arguing your point, there may be evidence it was never released in 1948. The larger point I was making is that the white bordered portrait w/ facsimile autograph was released a year or more before the Leaf card, which would probably be closer to a year and half if Leaf cards weren’t released until 1949.

Dan

There is NO debate amongst veteran hobbyist regarding the 1949 LEAF BB set's issue date.

There is evidence that the 1949 LEAF BB cards were NEVER issued in 1948. Before I present it, here....I collected these LEAF cards in my youth.
I clearly recall that they were first available in early Spring of 1949 (coincident with the start of the BB season). Old-timers in this hobby (who
also collected these cards in their youth) totally agree that these LEAF cards were not available in 1948. We were still collecting LEAF FB and
Boxing cards in 1948.
Here is the evidence printed in the bio of the Lou Boudreau card......

.


Lou Boudreau's MVP Award was announced in mid December of 1948.


Here is an uncut sheet of the 1st Series cards issued in early Spring of 1949.




Furthermore, check-out my 8-page story on the 1949 LEAF set in the OLD CARBOARD Magazine (Issue #9). You'll find it very informative
and very interesting.....http://oldcardboard.com/misc/issue09/issue09.asp.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[tedzan]

Just to show you guys how absolutely IGNORANT both PSA and SGC are regarding the 1949 LEAF set, take a close look at the date on the flips of these graded
1949 LEAF HOFer Premiums. WOW ! they are identified as.....1949 ! !
Ten HOFer Premiums were available at our corner candy stores. Each 24-count waxpack box contained one Premium inside the bottom of the box. Sometimes, a
generous store manager would reward a kid with a HOFer Premium, when that kid purchased the very last waxpack (or waxpacks) in a given box.
Kids would usually acquire a Premium by giving the store manager ten LEAF wrappers and requesting a certain HOFer.

Obviously, both PSA and SGC absolutely contradict themselves by having these Premiums dated 1949, but have the LEAF BB cards dated 1948. And, there is no
hope that PSA, nor SGC, will ever correct the date on their graded LEAF cards to reflect the true date of 1949.


Here are 2 of my HOFer Premiums.....Babe Ruth and the Lou Gehrig.



.


HOFer Premiums Checklist

Babe Ruth (light background, no text)
Babe Ruth (blue background, no text)
Babe Ruth (dark background, text)
Grover Cleveland Alexander
Mickey Cochrane
Lou Gehrig
Walter Johnson
Christy Mathewson
John McGraw
Ed Walsh



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[GasHouseGang]

That's good information Ted. I always assumed that the kids had to send away for those premiums. I didn't realize they were actually in the box with the cards.

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by tedzan

There is NO debate amongst veteran hobbyist regarding the 1949 LEAF BB set's issue date.

Ted is absolutely correct.

I believe that those who continue to foist the misidentification of cards upon the unsuspecting have no interest in being honest, especially when it affects their pocketbooks.

Card grading services know they generate a significant portion of their revenue from identifying cards people believe are "rookie" cards. Many dealers take advantage of this, especially with higher priced cards, because they can say its a genuine card authenticated by such-and-such grading company.

Over a month ago, I contacted PSA about helping them resolve the issues of incorrectly attributing cards as "Bond Bread" ones.

I even proposed simple solutions to make correct attributions that did not require them to recall their slabs with wrong identifications.

Simply put, first start identifying the cards correctly.

They already have population reports, price guides, set registry reports and a myriad of other information on their website about these misidentified cards.

They can change the title of those sections to the correct identification AND include a note in each of the corrected sections saying something like, "Information we have obtained tells us that those cards previous labeled as "Bond Bread ****" should be correctly attributed as a card belonging to this set. They are not "Bond Bread *****' cards."

The links that were titled with the old "Bond Bread ***** information should not be renamed, but when clicked should jump to the webpage with the correct identification. Of course, just like any other listing, new links with the correct name will have to be included where appropriate.

I even suggested ways to relabel the old slabs if the owner wanted them relabeled.

That may not remove many of the misidentified cards from the market place, but it's a start. Hopefully, the new information on the website will give some concern to those who may want to pass off the misidentified cards.

At least new slabs misidentifying cards as "Bond Bread" will no longer appear.

Mike

P.S. Can you guess what was PSA's response?

Copyright 2020, b Michael Fried, P.O. Box 27521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by abctoo

When Page's Milk cards were brought up in this thread years ago, a responder was misunderstood when pointing out the intensity of Page's Milk promotional capabilities and the extent it went to to promote its name. Page's milk had a long run radio show widely broadcast. A singer on that radio show named Patti was always introduced as Patti "Page" (the Page's Milk singer). She adopted that name for use throughout her long and famous career that followed.

To clarify the misunderstanding. Page's Pittsburgh Milk did have a regular widely-distributed radio show, featuring the likes of Guy Lombardo and many more. But that's not the Page's radio show of Patti Page.

Corporate Artists at http://www.corporateartists.com/patti_page.html (accessed 08-27-2020) states about Patti Page:

"Born Clara Ann Fowler in Claremore, Oklahoma, one of her earliest recollections is walking barefoot to school and saving her one pair of shoes for Sunday dress-up. With a unique talent and sheer perseverance she has become a sophisticated and sensitive performer with a solid career spanning nightclubs, concert halls, the musical comedy stage, motion pictures, radio and television.

"With a scholarship in the art department at Tulsa University in the offing, Clara Ann thought the promise of a job in the art department of KTUL in Tulsa seemed more practical than four years of study. At the time, KTUL had a fifteen minute sustaining program sponsored by the local Page Milk Company called "Meet Patti Page." When the regular girl who performed as the fictitious "Patti Page" left the program, Clara Ann put her natural singing talents to work and got the job... and with it a new name. Soon she was starring on several shows on KTUL.

"In 1946, Patti sought greener pastures in Chicago working many dubs and small theaters. Several appearances on ABC Radio's popular network show, "Breakfast Club," hosted by Don McNeil led to Patti securing a program of her own on the CBS Radio Network."

Copyright 2020 by Michael Fried, P.O. Box 27521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

That's good information Ted. I always assumed that the kids had to send away for those premiums. I didn't realize they were actually in the box with the cards.

David M (GasHouseGang)

The LEAF album and the Pennants were obtained by mailing in LEAF wrappers.

Read all about it in my 8-page story on the 1949 LEAF set in the OLD CARBOARD Magazine (Issue #9).
You will find it very informative and very interesting.....http://oldcardboard.com/misc/issue09/issue09.asp.


Here is my other Babe Ruth Premium. I'm still looking for the blue background version (it is a tough one).




TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[GeoPoto]

I apologize in advance for asking a question that might be addressed somewhere in prior discussions, but could Ted Z. (or anybody else) confirm that there are 2 different Jackie Robinson Portrait Facsimile Signature Bond Bread cards:
(1) a Bond Bread JR card (Portrait Facsimile Signature) with rounded corners like the others in the Bond Bread set; and
(2) a Bond Bread Jackie Robinson set Portrait Facsimile Signature card with white borders and square corners like the other cards in the Bond Bread Jackie Robinson set.

And that the former (1) was issued earliest (as part of the Bond Bread Set) and the latter (2) was subsequently issued as the first card in the Bond Bread Jackie Robinson Set.

Do I have it right? Thanks for any response.

[Pat R]

I don't understand why people keep blaming the grading companies for having the year wrong on the Leaf cards.
They were referred to as 1948 Leaf long before the grading companies existed.

PSA won't grade any card that isn't cataloged and they refer to the catalogs
for the year of issue. What are they supposed to do with the thousands that
are already graded as 1948?

: What types of cards and tickets does PSA authenticate/grade?
A: PSA will grade most items that are cataloged in major publications including, but not limited to, the Sports Market Report (SMR) and the Standard Catalog by Krause. PSA also grades major sporting event tickets such as those from the MLB regular season, All-Star games, Playoffs, World Series, NFL regular season, Super Bowl, NBA regular season, NCAA Finals, etc. Since entertainment tickets are serviced on a case-by-case basis, please contact Customer Service to confirm if we can grade the item you wish to submit. We will not grade high school tickets, audit or gate stubs, fan tickets issued after the event, or Ticketmaster-issued sporting event tickets.
Back to list

Some of the standard catalogs still list them as 1948 in their index this
is the 2016 edition

DSCN2624.jpg

DSCN2626.jpg

[tedzan]

Jim Beckett contacted me in 1997 regarding the 1949 LEAF set. Jim started identifying this set as a 1949 issue in
his 1998 BECKETT Baseball Card Price Guide,.
Prior to 1998, Beckett listed this set as a 1948/1949 issue.

The STANDARD CATALOG of VINTAGE BASEBALL CARDS (by Bob Lemke) identifies the 1949 LEAF as a 1949 issue.


I don't understand what your problem is ?


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I don't understand why people keep blaming the grading companies for having the year wrong on the Leaf cards.
They were referred to as 1948 Leaf long before the grading companies existed.

The SCD catalog was edited by Bob Lemke until he passed away in 2017. Lemke was no stranger to net54baseball and even praised the work of many here.





It cannot be said he didn't know about Ted's 2009 research into the Leaf cards. Lemke's blog often talked about Jackie Robinson cards, but he carefully avoided discussing anything about whether the Leaf set was issued in 1948 or 1949. The catalog he edited for years initially called it a 1948-49 set.

To see just how far SCD is concerned about Jackie Robinson and the Bond Bread issue, see its August 2, 2020 post at https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...ines-1947-set/

Catalogs often contain mistakes which they should correct, but often merely repeat the same wrong information they had been publishing in prior editions. They might modify prices in a listing, but often that is merely a simple percentage of increase or decrease to the value of common cards. They don't want to go the expense of making corrections. Most catalogs have a disclaimer that it's merely a guide and they do not guarantee the accuracy.

But you a correct, erroneous catalog information does significantly hurt the hobby.

On the other hand, grading card services claim to authenticate cards. Many obscure cards they identify aren't even in a catalog. There is a difference between catalogues that let you know they may contain inaccuracies and companies that claim to be experts.

The pictures of the SCD catalogues above were previously posted in another net54baseball thread in January 2017 as part of a tribute to Bob Lemke when he passed on.

Copyright 2020, by Michael Fried, P.O. Box 27521, Oakland, California 94602-0521

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by abctoo

It cannot be said he didn't know about Ted's 2009 research into the Leaf cards. Lemke's blog often talked about Jackie Robinson cards, but he carefully avoided discussing anything about whether the Leaf set was issued in 1948 or 1949. The catalog he edited for years calls it a 1948 set.

WRONG !....and, do I have to go and dig up Bob Lemke's Standard Catalogs to prove to you (and the other naysayers) that Bob listed the LEAF BB set as a 1949 issue for many
years now ?
For example (off the top of my head), I know for sure that the 2011 edition identifies the cards in this set as an 1949 issue.

I've known Bob Lemke since 1981, when he published mine and Ralph Triplette's 1949 BOWMAN article in his Baseball Cards Magazine. An article which enlightened the hobby on
the complexity of this BOWMAN set.

Subsequently, Bob published 5 more of my articles regarding BOWMAN BB and FB sets (1948 - 1953).

So, I don't need you to lecture me regarding Bob Lemke. Bob and I were great friends, who kept in touch with each other for many years.

GOD Bless Bob's soul.



.



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[ALR-bishop]

I have not kept my oldest versions of the Standard Catalog but do keep the 2011 issue because it was the last one that included post 80 issues. As Ted mentions it does list it as a 49 issue. My newest Catalog is 2014, which may have been the last print edition, edited by Tom Bartsch. It also lists it as 49

I lost a good friend and and hobby lost a great resource when Bob Lemke passed

[abctoo]

Originally Posted by tedzan

I've known Bob Lemke since 1981, when he published mine and Ralph Triplette's 1949 BOWMAN article in his Baseball Cards Magazine. An article which enlightened the hobby on the complexity of this BOWMAN set.

Subsequently, Bob published 5 more of my articles regarding BOWMAN BB and FB sets (1948 - 1953).

So, I don't need you to lecture me regarding Bob Lemke. Bob and I were great friends, who kept in touch with each other for many years.

GOD Bless Bob's soul.

Ted, my 1st edition of the Standard Catalog edited by Dan Albaugh says its a 1948/49 Leaf set. See scan below.



You're screaming at me when you missed the key point of what was written.

If you had looked at my reference to the 2020 SCD article on Bond Bread cards (https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...ines-1947-set/), you would have seen an article that started out looking good. But if you had read a little further, you would see it saying Bond Bread insert cards come with both round and square corners. That's not Bob Lemke's public legacy.

I'm not lecturing you on Bob Lemke. He did a tremendous amount to preserve and protect the hobby . . . and is missed.

I am not diminishing his extensive efforts by pointing out that in a couple of his blogs he asserted that Bond Bread cards were made by AARCO, the playing card company, basing on his assertion that playing cards have round corners and so do Bond Bread package inserts.

Did you read the printed text next to the inscription Bob Lemke wrote to Leon on the inside cover page of Lemke's catalog pictured a little above?

It says:

"To never changed any of his opinions, never correct any of his mistakes:
and he who was never wise enough to find mistakes in himself,
will not be charitable enough to excuse them in others." -- Anonymous

There's a lot of cards out there besides those people associate with Bond Bread. But am I wrong in pointing out that he called the perforated dual sided cards "Bond Bread" and "Hess Shoe" cards when we all have learned they are an Elgee product?

Your beef is not with me. The question is, what can we all do together to get the grading card company experts from calling all the lookalikes as Bond Bread cards?

Mike

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by abctoo

It cannot be said he didn't know about Ted's 2009 research into the Leaf cards. Lemke's blog often talked about Jackie Robinson cards, but he carefully avoided discussing anything about whether the Leaf set was issued in 1948 or 1949. The catalog he edited for years calls it a 1948 set.

Why did you change this date (1948) on your original statement in your Post #343 ? ?

You clearly stated 1948, which tells me you don't know what you are talking about !

Bob Lemke and I discussed a lot of BB (and FB) card sets over the years since 1981.
Bob agreed with me regarding the 1949 issue date of the Baseball LEAF set, after
I pointed out that the Lou Boudreau card stating his MVP award in it's bio. Which
occurred in mid-December of 1948.

Furthermore, I pointed out that LEAF switched to GRAY cardboard stock in 1949 for all their Sportscards.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[abctoo]

Ted, I do not have a beef with you. But have you lately seen what Old Cardboard says about "1947 D305 Bond Bread" cards?

Today the website reads:

Set Summary

Produced in 1947 by Homogenized Bond Bread
Unnumbered, borderless set printed in black and white
Facsimile autograph is only labeling on each card front
Originally distributed with rounded corners and blank backs
Large stash found in 1980's with square corner variations
Cards (both rounded & square) often found in high grade
Compare Vern Stephens cards for each variation below

[showing both round (die-cut) and square corner cards]

https://oldcardboard.com/d/d305/d305.asp?cardsetID=1003

If you click on the links on that webpage to the Gallery, you see both round and square corner cards intermittently pictured. And they don't address the question of Sport Star Subjects cards that exist today.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Jim Beckett contacted me in 1997 regarding the 1949 LEAF set. Jim started identifying this set as a 1949 issue in
his 1998 BECKETT Baseball Card Price Guide,.
Prior to 1998, Beckett listed this set as a 1948/1949 issue.

The STANDARD CATALOG of VINTAGE BASEBALL CARDS (by Bob Lemke) identifies the 1949 LEAF as a 1949 issue.


I don't understand what your problem is ?


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

I have not kept my oldest versions of the Standard Catalog but do keep the 2011 issue because it was the last one that included post 80 issues. As Ted mentions it does list it as a 49 issue. My newest Catalog is 2014, which may have been the last print edition, edited by Tom Bartsch. It also lists it as 49

I lost a good friend and and hobby lost a great resource when Bob Lemke passed

The pictures I posted are from my copy of the 2016/17 SCD catalog

[ALR-bishop]

Pat— Have there been editions subsequent to that one ?