Hey, pennant guys

[perezfan]

Yes you're right, Greg...

Those two Yankees pennants are much closer than I had remembered. It's the difference in the paint they used, more so than the design. The Trench knockoffs lean more towards an opaque "neon" quality than the deeper, more traditional paint used by Trench. And Trench had a higher quality screening process. The Trench graphics have superior definition and the registration is much more crisp and well-defined, with less bleeding.

Some examples of same design/different paint/inferior screening below...

In the Pirates example, the Forbes Field artwork is identical (although AdFlag changed the Pirate quite a bit- note his body, arms and hands are identical, but the head is different). And note AdFlag's blurry face, mound and foul lines.

In the Reds example, AdFlag copied both Crosley Field and Mr. Red verbatim. You'd think there would be legal consequences, but perhaps the intellectual property laws were different back then. And note how much more precise / better defined the face and stadium are in the Trench version.

[perezfan]

On second look, I do see one difference in the AdFlag Reds Pennant.... The puff of smoke at the end of the bat is bigger.

Comparing these pennants is a lot like those "Find the Difference" pictures in Highlights Magazine.

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by perezfan

On second look, I do see one difference in the AdFlag Reds Pennant.... The puff of smoke at the end of the bat is bigger.

Comparing these pennants is a lot like those "Find the Difference" pictures in Highlights Magazine.

Those are also some of the better knockoffs ... I like Mr. Red’s blonde mustache better!

[ooo-ribay]

Awesome article, Kyle! I also enjoyed the previous musings of the heavy hitters

[Domer05]

Glad you all enjoyed that piece. Mr. Storm is a terrific guy and we should all be grateful that he took the time to share his insight with us.

Of course, the collector in me was a bit surprised (disappointed?) to hear how little he valued the products his company made--and especially the work that went into making them. I simply wasn't expecting that.

BUT, if you're a businessman, then your business is staying in business; and that means you have to be willing to look at your operation in a critical, objective, and emotionally discharged fashion. He also had 300 employees to think about. They depended upon him to make difficult business decisions that would keep the plant running, and their paychecks coming.

I really couldn't fault the guy for putting the business ahead of all other concerns. Had he continued making pennants the old fashion way, Trench would have likely folded by the 1980s, as plenty of other pennant makers had.

Anyway, I appreciate the positive feedback. I'm happy I could share his story with you all.

[perezfan]

Good points Kyle...

I wonder what Mr. Storm thinks of Mitchell & Ness knocking off so many of his classic pennants. Perhaps he's not even aware of it, since he's not a collector... But it certainly is a testament to his company's legacy and their contribution to the hobby.

[icollectDCsports]

Originally Posted by Domer05

Glad you all enjoyed that piece. Mr. Storm is a terrific guy and we should all be grateful that he took the time to share his insight with us.

Wow. That article explains so much. Thank you.

[perezfan]

All right... we need a confession here.

Who got the seller of the oversized teens Pirates pennant to end his auction and sell it outright? That was the best pennant to hit eBay in a loooong time.

[Domer05]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Yes you're right, Greg...

Those two Yankees pennants are much closer than I had remembered. It's the difference in the paint they used, more so than the design. The Trench knockoffs lean more towards an opaque "neon" quality than the deeper, more traditional paint used by Trench. And Trench had a higher quality screening process. The Trench graphics have superior definition and the registration is much more crisp and well-defined.

Some examples of same design/different paint/inferior screening below...

In the Pirates example, the Forbes Field artwork is identical (although AdFlag changed the Pirate quite a bit). And note AdFlag's blurry face, hands and foul lines.

In the Reds example, AdFlag copied both Crosley Field and Mr. Red verbatim. You'd think there would be legal consequences, but perhaps the intellectual property laws were different back then. And note how much more precise / better defined the face and stadium are in the Trench version.

I spoke to Mr. Storm last month about Trench's screen printing process; and, how he felt about other makers stealing their designs. His answers were very surprising....

https://pennantfever.weebly.com/blog...torm-interview

[perezfan]

Great article, Kyle....

It's interesting that Mr. Storm had so little reverence for the actual product they manufactured. Seems almost unthinkable that he was solely focused on profits, to the point that he cared so little for the product itself. Obviously he was 100% businessman, and 0% collector. The CEOs of today routinely tout and purport to love the products that their companies put out.

It's also amazing that he said Trench employed only two artists, and pretty much downplayed their work, to the point of just tracing photographs. It's a shame that he could not come up with either of the artists' names, as their work was so well executed, and was such an influential part of so many childhoods.

Anyway, I learned a lot, and really appreciate the time and effort you put into gathering this information (which would otherwise be lost to time and undocumented). Great job as always!

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by Domer05

I spoke to Mr. Storm last month about Trench's screen printing process; and, how he felt about other makers stealing their designs. His answers were very surprising....

https://pennantfever.weebly.com/blog...torm-interview

Great article! I agree with Mark, your research is a real asset to the hobby.