 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
06-07-2010, 11:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
I come in on the side of T213-1 being part of T206. I believe that the overwhelming number of similarities outweighs the one difference that seems to exist. The obverse design is a 100% match. The border, font, framing and inking are identical. Not one T213-1 used a photo that was not used in T206, nor are there any cropping differences that I am aware of. The odds of that seem slim. Ted Z. has already posted the backs; the designs of which speak for themselves. And, Coupon was an ATC brand at the time.
That leaves the card's stock. It seems that Amer. Litho. stopped the presses (literally) and fed new, thin stock for the Coupon print run and then returned to the thicker stock for the rest of the T206 run. Did this represent a print run "between" the 150 and 350 series of T206? Was it an experiment by ALC for the ATC that was discontinued? Was it, as was suggested above, a matter of economy? Whatever the answer (and I don't mean that list to be exhaustive) the facts lead one to believe that T213-1 was printed at the same time as T206 by the same company, for the same company. Those facts lead me to the conclusion that Burdick may have erred. Hey, even Cope put the Elasmosaur's head at the wrong end - great expertise does not equate with infallibility. 
|
|
#2
06-08-2010, 08:33 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
It seemed for awhile that I was alone in this thread, but am heartened to see the calvary coming! Keeping my earlier posts in mind, here is the template for how the T206/1910 Coupon argument generally goes:
Person A: 1910 Coupons are not T206 because the paper they are printed on is thinner and I could pick them out among T206's blindfolded. Person B:That reasoning is flawed as this is also true of American Beauty cards which are classified as T206. Person A: ...well...Burdick said 1910 Coupons are not T206.
|
|
#3
06-08-2010, 09:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Chris - While I agree with you, I'm not sure that the American Beauty argument is the most persuasive. I think the best points are:
1) Made by the same company; 2) For the same ecompany; 3) At the same time; and 4) Using the exact same obverse and reverse designs as accepted T206 cards. There is a good analogy to the E92/E101/E102 set here also.
|
|
#4
06-09-2010, 04:29 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Would Factory designation on the T213-1's have played a role in Burdick's decision to not include them into the T206 classification (amongst other reasons) ?
Clayton
|
|
#5
06-09-2010, 04:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Last edited by judsonhamlin; 06-09-2010 at 05:08 PM. Reason: grammar
|
|
#6
06-09-2010, 06:14 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hi judsonhamlin-
I thought of those also, but EPDG Factory 17 was still out of VA, and it seems like a lot of the T206's were coming out of VA (and NY). Polar Bear Factory 6 I'm pretty sure was coming out of Ohio, therefore still being located more on the East Coast........ But Factory 3 LA is way down South, and I thought the regional thing could've played into why Burdick excluded T213-1's from the T206 classification (amongst his other reasons). Clayton
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| For Sale Or Trade Boston Store H801-8 Tough Type | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 1 | 01-28-2009 06:50 AM |
| S74 Collectors - Need help with theory regarding white version checklist | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 12 | 01-19-2009 03:09 PM |
| t213 type 2 coupon Speaker and Huggins | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 01-23-2007 04:22 PM |
| 5 Rare Backs lot, Coupon Type 1 & 2, Carolina Brights, AB and Cycle | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 4 | 12-15-2006 04:59 AM |
| T213 Type 2 Coupon Jennings For Sale - PRICE REDUCED | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 5 | 02-23-2006 08:49 PM |
Hybrid Mode
