Why I think Cobb wasn't printed with a Brown Hindu back

[atx840]

Pat are you thinking early sheets did not have a 50/50 split with 17 subjects on the top and 17 subjects on the lower half? We have seen a few of the 649 subjects with different subject names on top. Good example is Jamie's Lake/Pastorius card.

[Luke]

This is awesome Pat. Thanks for posting it.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by atx840

Pat are you thinking early sheets did not have a 50/50 split with 17 subjects on the top and 17 subjects on the lower half? We have seen a few of the 649 subjects with different subject names on top. Good example is Jamie's Lake/Pastorius card.

Chris, from the two name and vertical miscuts I knew there were at least two vertical subjects on the 150 back sheets when I first started doing the research on the plate scratches and I actually expected to see that when I started trying to piece them together but as the sheets started to come together I realized that wasn't the case and that they were printed with the same vertical subject all the way up the sheet. I can't say exactly how many plate scratch cards I've seen but it's in the thousands at one point I owned over 500 myself and while I've seen two name plate scratch cards I've never seen one with two different names and from the size of the plate scratch sheets if there was another section on top of one of the plate scratch sheet the size of that sheet would be massive.

Here's how I feel the sheets were printed as far as vertical subjects for each series.

150 backs - a mix of 2 vertical subjects and 1 vertical subjects with a higher % of 1 vertical subject.

350 backs - likely all 2 vertical subjects

350/460 backs - likely all 1 vertical subject

460 backs - likely all 1 vertical subject


Here's a Powell with a plate scratch that SGC put in the holder upside down. I wish it was an upside down back but it's a name at top.
[IMG][/IMG]

[Pat R]

I'm adding this here from the other thread. This new Old Mill Ad is enlightening at least to me I always thought the Old Mill brand was Older but the T206's
were a promotion in them as a new brand.

Originally Posted by Pat R

Bumping this thread because I found another Old Mill ad/newspaper clip to go along with the first ad I found and I think it adds credence to the pages in the ATC Ledger.

Here's the Ad From a July 30th 1909 Charlotte NC newspaper

[IMG][/IMG]

These dates line up perfectly with an Old Mill page in the ATC ledger.

[IMG][/IMG]

The top of the page is missing but I was pretty sure it was about the Southern League players and now I think we can say it is for certain because it lines up perfectly with the Old Mill Ad and newspaper clip.

We now know that they packed and shipped the Old Mills with the Southern League subjects on August 7 1909 but we can't be sure when they started printing them but it was probably in June or July 1909.

Below that it says began packing Nat'l player like those in Piedmonts packing Jan 8 1910 shipping Jan 9 1910 so the printing for the Old Mill Major League subjects probably started in November or December 1909.

and under that it states began one Nat'l and 1 Southern League picture
began packing 3/15/1910 shipping 3/17/1910
I think this is when they switched over and the group 1 150/350 subjects with the Piedmont 350 backs were inserted in the packs. If that's the case then the
printing of the Group 1 subjects with Piedmont 350 backs probably began in January or February 1910.

It also states that they discontinued packing the Old Mills on 12-10-1910 so that must be when the packing of the 460 only Old Mill major League subjects ended.
This is probably when they started packing the T210's.

[IMG][/IMG]

[atx840]

Fantastic work as always Pat.

Wish we had more of this error out there, wondering if a brown OM sheet was used as a test later on for the 649s. Need to spends some time looking into your timelines.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I'm adding this here from the other thread. This new Old Mill Ad is enlightening at least to me I always thought the Old Mill brand was Older but the T206's
were a promotion in them as a new brand.



[IMG][/IMG]

Very interesting. Especially the entry noting the discontinuance of the Old Mill T206 cards as of 12/15/1910. I'm wondering if this likely ties into the switch from the insertion of T206 cards in Old Mill packs to the inclusion of S74 silks instead, and is further proof that the S74-1 white silks were, at their earliest, a late 1910 issue? And if so, it also helps confirm that the S74-2 colored silks were definitely a mid to late 1911 issue, at their earliest, as well.

With the exception of Old Mill cigarettes, the T206 cards and S74 silks do not share distribution in any other brands. The only other cigarette brands S74 silks were distributed in were Turkey Red, Red Sun, and Helmar. So the timing of the discontinuance of T206 Old Mill cards with the emergence of S74 Old Mill silks makes logical sense.

But what about the issuance of the T205 cards? They are now considered exclusively as a 1911 issue, and also distributed with brands that never included T206 cards either (Hassan, Honest Long Cut, etc.). But unlike the S74 silks, T205 cards were most commonly issued in the same two brands that were also the most commonly issued with T206 cards as well, Piedmont and Sweet Caporal. So is there evidence to possibly show that T206 cards stopped being distributed in Piedmont and Sweet Caporal packs so as to transition to just distributing them with T205 cards instead? I've always considered T206 cards as being distributed from 1909 through 1911, but never really thought about when that distribution actually ceased in 1911. Or were both T206 and T205 cards being distributed with Piedmont and Sweet Caporal cigarettes simultaneousl in 1911?

We often talk and debate on this forum about when a card issue actually first came out and was distributed, but not so much about when a card issue actually ended and it's distribution ceased. Especially when the cessation of one issue's distribution could point to and tie down the actual starting distribution date of a different issue that takes over a particular cigarette brand.