Appease me, please....one more time T206/T213/T215?

[FrankWakefield]

Well said, Richard.

Bob, can you look at it from the other perspective, what proof would convince you that T213-1's and T215-1's should be as Mr. Burdick designated them, and not T206's???

[B O'Brien]

Frank,
Nice reply (and also the others, thanks), see my thoughts below!

Craig,
It is easy to see our different areas of work based on our replies! Hope all is well my friend.

I was once asked in a Lit class what Hemmingway had in mind when he wrote one of his short stories. My reply was (to this one instance), that he had nothing in mind, he was just writing to make a few bucks and pass some time. As much as I hate to say it, I am inclined to think that the ATC was marching to the same beat.

Our well loved T cards, produced by the ATC were just slinging material. There was no grand plan, as much as I wish otherwise. I think with the thin stock of the T213-1's, could have just as easily been used for a percentage of the 350 Cycles. I think they had a tiny run request from the Coupon brand manager (!) and just happened to have some crap stock on hand from the board vendor and ran the Coupons to run it out, being that the on hand stock was equal to the 350 series order requested by the boys in NOLA. After all the cards were going down to BFE LA, so who cares about quality control!

I have checked the replies to my last post and see plenty of beating around the bush. I am well aware of the reasons not to include the T213-1's, but what would make them T206's without question?

As always, bottoms up,
Bob

[judsonhamlin]

I come down firmly on the side of including T213-1 and T215-1 as part of the T206 family. The similarities, to my thinking, outweigh any of the differences in stock or team caption. Although I am not a non-sport collector, I think a useful parallel might be the R73 Indian Gum set. Despite the differences in the color of the banner ad at the bottom of the cards, background color changes and the various "series of..." reverses, all 400+ varieties were produced by Goudey in the '30's and all are called R73. Even the post-war version gets a R773 designation. Here, regardless of the brand advertised and the caption and stock, the cards we now call T206, T213-1 and T215-1 were all produced by ALC in the 1909-12 time frame. To me, the rationale seems to be similar. Why lump one set and not the other? I think Burdick got wrapped up in the brand/factory designations as the primary identifying feature of the cards and ignored or was unaware of the printing point of origin for these cards as being the overriding common denominator.

[B O'Brien]

I am also a no on the 215 card.
Bob

[ethicsprof]

Just got in after a lengthy class and must say that what i missed here seems much more interesting. Even though i taught the class.
Just had to say thanks Leon for the offer of free libations at the appointed time---and thanks Ted for the kind words of support.

all the best,friends

barry

[FrankWakefield]

I agree with Rhett's point about caption updates. And with Tim... And it is obvious t see that we all still think of this much as we did last time we thrashed with it.

I don't buy the idea of what if Mr. Burdick wrote the book in 1912... he'd have lumped them all together. To me that is an argument for separating them, how things can be better seen and understood with the perspective of time.

As for Ted's great scan of backs back there in post #35....

These bad boys bolster keeping Coupon's separate from T206s. All of those cards up there mention series 350, but for one. And that one is the one with those quotes. And that brand kept on with glossy front cards with the same images, blue captions with the same images, and updated captions years after T206 production. Those rascals seem different to me.


I think the Coupon cards and the Red Cross Cards were made by pilfering the artwork and style that had gone before with our traditional white border tobacco cards.

[novakjr]

"These bad boys bolster keeping Coupon's separate from T206s. All of those cards up there mention series 350, but for one. And that one is the one with those quotes. "

I don't really see what the quotes have to do with anything. Now If the quotes completely surrounded "Coupon (Mild) Cigarettes Baseball Series", then maybe I could agree that the quotes were relevant. But they don't. Now, I understand what you're trying to get at when it comes to Coupon's being the only one with that design to not have the 350. But it just seems too arbitrary to me. Now while not having the same advertisement design, the El Principe cards don't have any series designation, nor do they mention anything about "Assortments" either. Basically, every issue other than El Principe has a series designation or the simple use of the word Assortment(or assorted). Should that be considered a separate issue because it stands alone in that regard amongst the accepted brands?

Complete and total laziness in the design of the 1914 and 1919 series of Coupon seems to be the root source of all this mess. Although, the paper-stock with the type-1 is a damning issue all it's own. But that alone isn't reason enough to disclude Coupons from the Monster without more evidence against it.


Red-Cross to me still doesn't belong with the T206's.