Possible newly discovered T205 variation

[egbeachley]

The biggest variation is not the missing quotes.....it's the giant words POLAR BEAR on the back!

Not a variation unless the same brand has it both ways.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

Not a variation unless the same brand has it both ways.

That theory is not consistent with the other established T205 variations.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

The biggest variation is not the missing quotes.....it's the giant words POLAR BEAR on the back!

Not a variation unless the same brand has it both ways.

Tell that to the T206 Demmitt and O'Hara collectors, which variations are only available on Polar Bear backed T206 cards.

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

Tell that to the T206 Demmitt and O'Hara collectors, which variations are only available on Polar Bear backed T206 cards.

I think they know it's a St Louis variation for front collectors. No variation for PB collectors.

Well, assuming they know there isn't a non-St Louis PB back.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

I think they know it's a St Louis variation for front collectors. No variation for PB collectors.

Well, assuming they know there isn't a non-St Louis PB back.

I'm a little confused --

All Polar Bear T206 Demmitts are the St. Louis variation. Purely from a printing variation perspective, how is that any different from all Polar Bear T205 Doc Whites not having the quotation marks?

[marcdelpercio]

I think the bottom line is that the text and image of the card was intended to be identical regardless of the brand advertisement on the back. I believe that any difference in the text or image of the card should rightfully and by definition be considered a "variation" regardless of whether this appears on only one back.

I think the example of the T206 Polar Bear Demmitt and O'Hara cards is perfectly appropriate here. What does it matter whether the "variation" appears on the front or back of the card? These cards appear with only one back advertisement so if the T205 Doc White Polar Bear card is not a variation, it is impossible to assert that the T206 Polar Bear Demmitt and O'Hara are variations.

There are several quite valuable variations in the T205 set that appear with only one back. To those who honestly do not believe that these are legitimate variations, I will generously offer to pay 150% of book value (of the lower priced variation) for all of your copies of these cards. If you truly believe what you are stating, the offers should begin rolling in pretty quickly.

[Wite3]

My thoughts on the mater....
The Doc White is a variation of the text. It is found on one advertiser.

The big differences here is the perception that it is somehow rare. It is not. It is common. Both ways are fairly common.

The Wilhelm was short printed greatly. This is what causes the value differences. Not the variations. (Same with the Demmit/O'Hara cards in T206s...it is not the variation that causes the value increase it is the print run). Many team, pose variations exist in the T206 and the value is the same for them unless they were short printed or rare.

I personally do not do the registry thing but I feel that if the T205 Matty or White is listed with the advertising type on the slip then that is all you will need. Sounds like people are trying to create value for their sets where none really exists.

Joshua

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Wite3

(Same with the Demmit/O'Hara cards in T206s...it is not the variation that causes the value increase it is the print run).

IMO with Demmitt & O'Hara it's exactly the variation that causes the value increase; there are many other Polar Bear T206s that are only printed in the laster series like the Demmitt and O'Hara and are equally as shortprinted, but carry little to no premium because their text is identical to their Piedmont version. People chasing the T206 master set drive the price of the Demmitt and O'Hara and likewise do/will with the T205 Wilhelm, Matty and to a lesser extent Latham and White when they are cataloged as part of a complete master set.

[marcdelpercio]

Originally Posted by Wite3

The Wilhelm was short printed greatly. This is what causes the value differences. Not the variations. (Same with the Demmit/O'Hara cards in T206s...it is not the variation that causes the value increase it is the print run).

Joshua,
You make some very good points and I certainly respect all of the research you have done on this set. I do have to slightly disagree with your analysis, however, that it is not the variation that causes the value.

To use the T206 Demmitt and O'Hara example, these cards had the same print run as all other Polar Bear 350 only series cards and are presumably equally scarce. If not for the variation (team change), these cards would be looked at as commons, just as the other PB 350 only series cards. Conversely, if it was only the print run that determined the value, all other PB 350 series T206's would command similar values as the Demmitt and O'Hara. Clearly, in this case it is strictly the variation that causes the increased demand and thus, higher value.

I think the same principle applies to some of the T205 variations. While I do not believe the T205 Doc White (no quotes) variation is very scarce or valuable, I do believe that it will command a premium as, by your own tracking numbers, it appears to be about 2-3 times as scarce in total as the other version.

[rdixon1208]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

The biggest variation is not the missing quotes.....it's the giant words POLAR BEAR on the back!

Not a variation unless the same brand has it both ways.

I agree....if all Polar Bear backs are the same, is it really a "variation", or just a PB back?

[Tcards-Please]

Based on a request to SGC on why the Cycle Mathewson wasn't listed on the Master Registry Set, this was their reply:

Hi Frank,

"We have not added it to the Master Set because all Cycle back Mathewsons come this way so it is more of an uncorrected error rather than a variation, but I will revisit that decision a little more in depth and get back to you if anything changes."

Thank you,

Brian

So based on that response from SGC, if all PB Whites are that way, then it would fall into that same category of the Mathewson (though not necessarily an uncorrected error).

My way of thinking is if it is different than the majority of cards, then it should be classified as a variation and listed accordingly in the registry.

Just my 2 cents.

r/
Frank

[Matt]

Frank - Aside from it being incorrect (how could it be an uncorrected error if it was corrected on other backs?) that's an inconsistent response from them as it's no different then Wilhelm suffered. My guess is that they haven't indicated it yet since it has yet to be included in SCD, but it will be shortly and then I'm sure the grading companies will follow.

[Tcards-Please]

Originally Posted by Matt

Frank - Aside from it being incorrect (how could it be an uncorrected error if it was corrected on other backs?) that's an inconsistent response from them as it's no different then Wilhelm suffered. My guess is that they haven't indicated it yet since it has yet to be included in SCD, but it will be shortly and then I'm sure the grading companies will follow.

Matt,
I agree with you completely that it is no different than the Wilhelm and do hope that it is included in SGC's Master Registry in the future. Not sure why SCD has to mention this before the grading companies acknowledge it. They know it exists, so why not include?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by T's please

Matt,
I agree with you completely that it is no different than the Wilhelm and do hope that it is included in SGC's Master Registry in the future. Not sure why SCD has to mention this before the grading companies acknowledge it. They know it exists, so why not include?

Historically, SGC has been very reluctant to include variations unless they are widely acknowledged. I believe they still don't indicate the "Over 300 Subjects" back variation on M116 cards although I'm hoping that changes as well when SCD includes the information.

One more thought for the naysayers here:
Had the error been caught in the middle of the PB press run, or in the middle of a later run (say Hassan backs) you all would agree it counts as a variation, but because the error was caught after the PBs were printed and before the other backs were printed it doesn't count?

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by T's please

My way of thinking is if it is different than the majority of cards, then it should be classified as a variation and listed accordingly in the registry.

The Doc (no quotes) White is different than the majority of cards. The difference is that it has a Polar Bear back. A master set of all front/back brand combinations already has this card.

Same thing with the Mathewson. Not a variation either.

And how is SCD going to list this differently? They already acknowledge the White comes with a Polar Bear back.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

The Doc (no quotes) White is different than the majority of cards. The difference is that it has a Polar Bear back. A master set of all front/back brand combinations already has this card.

Same thing with the Mathewson. Not a variation either.

And how is SCD going to list this differently? They already acknowledge the White comes with a Polar Bear back.

And Wilhelm, which is already acknowledged by everybody as being a variation? The fact that they went in and fixed the back text makes it a variation. It may not be more rare then any other card with Polar Bear back, but Doc White clearly has cards printed with 2 different versions of the back. I don't see how the fact that they caught the error after the PBs were printed and before the other backs were printed makes it not a variation.

[rdixon1208]

I think the best made point is that this card is already covered in the master checklist. If it were a new variation, it would need to be added to the checklist.

[Tcards-Please]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

The Doc (no quotes) White is different than the majority of cards. The difference is that it has a Polar Bear back. A master set of all front/back brand combinations already has this card.

Same thing with the Mathewson. Not a variation either.

And how is SCD going to list this differently? They already acknowledge the White comes with a Polar Bear back.

By virtue of the Cycle Mathewson and PB White being different than the others should be the reason for inclusion on the Master Registry. Don't care if they call it a variation or not, but it is different, so it should be listed.

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by T's please

By virtue of the Cycle Mathewson and PB White being different than the others should be the reason for inclusion on the Master Registry. Don't care if they call it a variation or not, but it is different, so it should be listed.

It is already on the Master Registry. The 37-1 Mathewson is called a Cycle Mathewson and the no quotes Doc White is called a Polar Bear White.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

It is already on the Master Registry. The 37-1 Mathewson is called a Cycle Mathewson and the no quotes Doc White is called a Polar Bear White.

How many cards are in a T206 set in your world?

Let's clarify something else. There are two types of Master sets when it comes to many of the T-card issues. A "master set" which includes all player related textual/image variations and a "true master set", which includes that plus all possible front/back advertising combinations. The first definition is what we are discussing here and that is what is commonly called a "master set" as that is what is within reach for collectors; you seem to be arguing about the second kind of checklist.

Using these commonly held definitions, the White is a variation deserving of a spot in the "master set."

[Tcards-Please]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

It is already on the Master Registry. The 37-1 Mathewson is called a Cycle Mathewson and the no quotes Doc White is called a Polar Bear White.

I'm not sure you and I are on the same page. You are talking about a Master Checklist and I'm talking about a Master Registry. No where in the SGC Registry does it list the Cycle Mathewson. I also included an email a few posts up from SGC stating that they will address listing it in the future.

r/
Frank