Wacky Packages Forum
Wacky Packages Discussion => General Wacky Packages Discussion => Topic started by: mcuddy17 on May 17, 2016, 07:02:34 PM
-
For a while I've been wanting to combine all of the information that you can find on websites and this forum with all of the different scans of boxes, wrappers, etc. for each of the series that I could print out and have a nice reference. I took a lot of the information for each series from Greg Grant's site along with scans from there as well as this forum as I saw them. As I kept finding more scans and thinking of more things to add, the total length from Die Cuts to 16th series is almost 500 pages! I've attached links to the pdfs for each section below. If anyone would like to take a look and let me know what you think or anything else I should add or remove, let me know.
Thanks,
Mick
Die Cuts https://app.box.com/s/hxw64wqce5hu6dppcvv13g1hexbk3g3i
Wacky Ads https://app.box.com/s/uor3hn2gg3jjyhp2s6zeoqku36095ygy
Cloth Series https://app.box.com/s/esddazcdnv7mmhgzu4k3t0eiodktcnxw
1st Series https://app.box.com/s/cwrqfw0ty4nvmjf0r2gmjafue9hrxdsh
2nd Series https://app.box.com/s/6cmujjbde2jboewhf3rc8sfuyv5ye9vo
3rd Series https://app.box.com/s/ui1lcxjbhqp0qh705er6lpwthdxrauvu
4th Series https://app.box.com/s/qxc1e1235gpzxh53ss3zboqr54le2cii
5th Series https://app.box.com/s/grau0dyg2wil2jlctuxpjpfem0x6dtrz
6th Series https://app.box.com/s/4il0iitzfl2dpf6keso1wiyqbjx8m9yq
7th Series https://app.box.com/s/4yh4u3522dkg29rgdruirs2d0ysdbth4
8th Series https://app.box.com/s/5mls47u3fgvjs9d0zrlmyc71v2zodijv
9th Series https://app.box.com/s/4ekstugaa5oh7ipnai9guppqd5d73byg
10th Series https://app.box.com/s/qff7bhumnidt0hwizf7w7fdyqjfhqgrr
11th Series https://app.box.com/s/dgz2nmfa9j69gczrpm3z3k1y4biu1pxn
12th Series https://app.box.com/s/z8havb17fvss5xdn764vuj33y7qtfa1c
13th Series https://app.box.com/s/npei8zee9yrgesjj1ek6nosi281t2l8k
14th Series https://app.box.com/s/sqfek4jfzt5s19wt592x3osebyxbs59i
15th Series https://app.box.com/s/q5dixtzetmylr6417yztcibir9sqzvll
16th Series https://app.box.com/s/3yg0zas2c45j37l7of4uf7cb2ya6n6t7
-
Nice work!!! Thank you for this valuable reference guide!
-
This is pretty amazing. Thanks for all the hard work and effort that must have gone into this.
-
So this is a culmination of many websites worth of stuff cobbled together in a logical manner? Very nice!
-
Very impressive! Nothing jumps out off the top of my head as to what's missing. This looks very complete. However, it would be great to keep this and add to it as any new info comes to light or people think of things to add.
Nice work!
-
Nice job, I would just add that not all the information you've included is factual. Some of it is speculation, though it is presented as fact.
-
the 'w/copyright' uncut sheet for the 16th is another pic of the 'without copyright' sheet
-
Thanks for the feedback everyone. I have changed the picture the the correct scoot uncut sheet. You can sort of see the copyright now though pictures of both sheets are pretty bad. Paul_Maul, I believe you are referring to the 1972 test series and how the first series sheet came about? I will change those to say that these are just theories. Is there any others that I should make note of?
Thanks!
-
Primarily the 1972 test material. The 1st series sheet evolution (which I wrote) is pretty much fact.
-
Impressive! I love all the hard work put into this guide. :great:
-
Thank you very much for posting this mcuddy17, for me it's an excellent way to school myself even more and study all this stuff!! :great: 8)
-
Definitely, and thanks to all the people who figured out all this stuff way back when (Greg Grant, Jeff Weiss, Paul Argyropolous, Phil Carpenter, Terry Gomes, Scott Broberg, John Mann, Patrick Zimmerman and so many others)!
-
AWESOME! Time for a new ream of paper!
Thank you VERY much for YOUR hard work!
Richard
-
Hey all,
I wanted to see how this would look as a printed book so I went to Lulu.com and Createspace.com to have it printed. Lulu can print 8-1/2 x 11 hardcover book and createspace can do same size in softcover. I received the hardcover version today and have some pictures below. Lulu charges $100.45 to print this as it is full color and 480 pages long. You can find discount codes online or sign up for emails from them. You can get codes for 10 - 30% off. Current code is NEWJUNE25 for 25% off, but expires at end of day. Pictures came out very sharp for all the high resolution pictures that I had, a little blurry on the others.
-
Hey all,
I wanted to see how this would look as a printed book so I went to Lulu.com and Createspace.com to have it printed. Lulu can print 8-1/2 x 11 hardcover book and createspace can do same size in softcover. I received the hardcover version today and have some pictures below. Lulu charges $100.45 to print this as it is full color and 480 pages long. You can find discount codes online or sign up for emails from them. You can get codes for 10 - 30% off. Current code is NEWJUNE25 for 25% off, but expires at end of day. Pictures came out very sharp for all the high resolution pictures that I had, a little blurry on the others. Here is direct link to lulu:
Nice, i am looking forward to volume two. Will it have ANS I'm it
http://www.lulu.com/shop/mick-cuddy/wacky-packages-reference-guide-volume-1/hardcover/product-22709890.html
The softcover is due to arrive next week and cost $36 + shipping. I'll post photos of that when it arrives. Also I've called it Volume 1 since I've started compiling info on wonder bread, hostess pairs, 1979 reruns etc, for Volume 2.
(http://s33.postimg.org/8ojsnkg17/IMG_5092.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/8ojsnkg17/)
(http://s33.postimg.org/4gp0eteln/IMG_5093.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/4gp0eteln/)
(http://s33.postimg.org/k3g9s6sdn/IMG_5094.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/k3g9s6sdn/)
(http://s33.postimg.org/hiap4o2zv/IMG_5095.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/hiap4o2zv/)
-
Nice, i am looking forward to volume two. Will it have ANS I'm it
I think ANS would be a volume 3. There are so many cards and backs and variations and bonuses that it deserves it's own volume.
-
Damnit Man! I am going to have to give up SOME of my alcohol budget this month!!!
Looks WackyFabulous! Thank you again so very much for all your hard work!!!!
-
I'll definitely be ordering one.
mcuddy17, I hope you get a cut from each order for all that hard work!
-
I'll definitely be ordering one.
mcuddy17, I hope you get a cut from each order for all that hard work!
Nope, that is the actual cost of printing. As PaulMaul stated above, all of the research, scans, etc. were done by others so it isn't mine to profit off of. I just wanted to share something that I enjoyed doing and thought others might like as well.
-
I think that this is a really cool package.
However, now that these files are being disseminated publicly and people are planning on printing them out in book form, it does concern me that all of this material is being used without any credit or permission. The more people that print it out, the more a situation is created where a standalone storehouse of wacky information is available without any credit to those who created it.
I acknowledge that assigning proper credit within a tome of this size would be difficult, but I think this issue merits consideration.
-
It will also be interesting to see how long it takes for someone to create one of these and put it on eBay.
-
I'm kind of surprised that any company would print a book like this, what with the images all officially belonging to Topps.
-
I was GOING to print it, but it would take a lot of paper, toner and drum wear, worth the professional look, I have already ordered mine - EXCITED!
-
Cool book! Anyone know how much the softcover would be? I do like the idea of having a physical copy of information rather than a website, but $100 is a bit steep (though I know a lot of work has gone into this).
-
I JUST got mine today via FedEx Ground - F**KING AWESOME!!!!!
$100 is a lot of loot, BUT - it is IN COLOR, so now upgrade from Laser, paper, toner and ink to Inkjet (lower quality) and fancy paper for better resolution.
WELL WORTH IT!!!!
Sometimes you have to treat yourself, this one is wellll worth it!
-
I JUST got mine today via FedEx Ground - F**KING AWESOME!!!!!
$100 is a lot of loot, BUT - it is IN COLOR, so now upgrade from Laser, paper, toner and ink to Inkjet (lower quality) and fancy paper for better resolution.
WELL WORTH IT!!!!
Sometimes you have to treat yourself, this one is wellll worth it!
Is there a link to order the book?
-
Is there a link to order the book?
I tried the link above in the quoted message and it said the book was no longer available. If you find a working link, pleae let me know!
-
Marc, the link to the book was in the first post but has mysteriously disappeared. It's still showing in jleonard1967's post about half way down the page but, when I clicked on the link a minute ago, it said something about the product not being found. Not sure what the deal is. Maybe mcuddy17 can chime in.
-
Is there a link to order the book?
There used to be...
Wouldn't be surprised if there were copyright issues with topps or Abrams
From the Lulu site:
you may not publish or post content that you do not own or have permission to publish. We take allegations of copyright and privacy violations very seriously
-
There used to be...
Wouldn't be surprised if there were copyright issues with topps or Abrams
That didn't take long................ I wonder how many they printed?
-
My order is in transit. Supposed to be here by Tuesday.
I'm jealous Richard......You got yours first. >:D
-
What happened to the links to the pages? (Not the book)
-
What happened to the links to the pages? (Not the book)
Mick took them down temporarily to fix/add some things, they will be back.
-
Links to each pdf are back in first message.
-
Links to each pdf are back in first message.
Did you change a lot? Maybe add some credits?
-
Links to each pdf are back in first message.
Is there no longer a hardcover book? :sad:
-
Anyone know what changed between the first PDFs and the second PDFs?
-
Anyone know what changed between the first PDFs and the second PDFs?
Credits for the text sections were added and a few typos that I found were fixed.
Is there no longer a hardcover book? :sad:
I have to get it uploaded with the above referenced credits.
-
Credits for the text sections were added and a few typos that I found were fixed.
I have to get it uploaded with the above referenced credits.
Adding the credits was a very good idea!!
-
It will also be interesting to see how long it takes for someone to create one of these and put it on eBay.
Yeah, I imagine that someone will. This is very cool./ I printed out the pages and put it in a three ring binder. Not as nice as the one bound, but it is still pretty cool
-
Credits for the text sections were added and a few typos that I found were fixed.
I have to get it uploaded with the above referenced credits.
The credits according to who? The various books by Paul and Phil were fairly accurate with credits, not so much elsewhere.
-
The credits according to who? The various books by Paul and Phil were fairly accurate with credits, not so much elsewhere.
Just the credits for specific passages of text taken directly from Greg and Rusty's sites.
-
Just the credits for specific passages of text taken directly from Greg and Rusty's sites.
Are Greg and Rusty the authors of all passages on their sites? Is it passages or credits on findings or coclusions you are concerned with the credits? Are Greg and Rusty championing this need or is it your mission on their behalf? If I have followed along properly, you seem to feel much of what is on Rusty's site is unfounded speculation. Have you discussed this directly with Rusty to be sure it is speculation?
-
Are Greg and Rusty the authors of all passages on their sites? Is it passages or credits on findings or coclusions you are concerned with the credits? Are Greg and Rusty championing this need or is it your mission on their behalf? If I have followed along properly, you seem to feel much of what is on Rusty's site is unfounded speculation. Have you discussed this directly with Rusty to be sure it is speculation?
I don't think "much" of what's on Rusty's site is speculation, I know that some of it is speculation. Which is fine, as long as it is presented as such.
As for the rest of your post, I'm not sure what you're talking about. I offered an opinion that I think it's a nice idea to obtain permission and include credit for material taken directly from another source. I'm not championing anything.
-
I don't think "much" of what's on Rusty's site is speculation, I know that some of it is speculation. Which is fine, as long as it is presented as such.
As for the rest of your post, I'm not sure what you're talking about. I offered an opinion that I think it's a nice idea to obtain permission and include credit for material taken directly from another source. I'm not championing anything.
Do the websites you refer to include credit for the material on their sites? I ask all of this as I think you unnecessarily complicated a pretty cool project that now has to thoroughly provide credits or not bother at all, half way is no man's land, so I think my questions are fair. You definitely are championing this on their behalf, no big deal, just calling it what it is.
Declaring something as indisputable fact in regards to wacky packages from the 1960s and 1970s is pretty bold. New wrapper/series combinations are uncovered, ToppsVault validates and invalidates things all the time. Let's not get carried away saying one site has "some", "much", "lots" "little" speculation(not interested in semantics here) and other sites are 100% sound in facts and completeness.
-
I think that this is a really cool package.
However, now that these files are being disseminated publicly and people are planning on printing them out in book form, it does concern me that all of this material is being used without any credit or permission. The more people that print it out, the more a situation is created where a standalone storehouse of wacky information is available without any credit to those who created it.
I acknowledge that assigning proper credit within a tome of this size would be difficult, but I think this issue merits consideration.
This sounds like more than you saying it is a "nice idea" to add credits.
You made this sound like a legal issue "material being used without permission or credit". I am a big fan of calling it what it is. Are you a lawyer with expertise in public domain material? Are you sure the websites you are championing haven't already used material without providing credit? Let's go all the way on this or not at all.....I prefer to allow a cool project like this to move forward without overcomplicating it but that is just me.
-
Greg provides credit to a ton of people on his site. http://www.wackypacks.com/credits.html
And states that: * All text on this domain copyright Greg Grant © 2000-2009, unless otherwise specified.
I don't recall Rusty indicated credit to anyone else when using other's images.
Just because something is on the internet, it does not make it 'public domain' material that anyone can use without copyright violation.
-
Declaring something as indisputable fact in regards to wacky packages from the 1960s and 1970s is pretty bold. New wrapper/series combinations are uncovered, ToppsVault validates and invalidates things all the time. Let's not get carried away saying one site has "some", "much", "lots" "little" speculation(not interested in semantics here) and other sites are 100% sound in facts and completeness.
Rusty has fabricated his own images to go along with an extensive story of the 1972 Die Cut set.
That is speculation.
The core theory of the 1972 Die Cut set was posted by me on Greg's old forum and is just something Rusty 'borrowed' and ran with.
-
I prefer to allow a cool project like this to move forward without overcomplicating it but that is just me.
Well, fortunately Mick is more reasonable than you.
-
Do the websites you refer to include credit for the material on their sites? I ask all of this as I think you unnecessarily complicated a pretty cool project that now has to thoroughly provide credits or not bother at all, half way is no man's land, so I think my questions are fair. You definitely are championing this on their behalf, no big deal, just calling it what it is.
Declaring something as indisputable fact in regards to wacky packages from the 1960s and 1970s is pretty bold. New wrapper/series combinations are uncovered, ToppsVault validates and invalidates things all the time. Let's not get carried away saying one site has "some", "much", "lots" "little" speculation(not interested in semantics here) and other sites are 100% sound in facts and completeness.
I'm not sure where all your anger is coming from. It appears to me that Dave is offering his opinion about credits since he is familiar with many of those that participated in the original research on the websites & thinks they deserve mention. I happen to agree since we have all greatly benefitted from the information over the years and I appreciate their efforts, as well as mcuddy's efforts to organize everything together.
Dave is not unnecessarily overcomplicating a cool project by adding credits, he has nothing to do with the project. He's offering his opinion, which others, including myself feel has some merit. People that don't agree with his opinion are free to ignore it, including mcuddy, the person who assembled the project, however, he seemed all but happy to add the credits.
If offering an opinion to include credits is championing a cause on someone's behalf, on whose behalf is the cause you are championing NOT to include the credits, since the project editor has no problem with it?
-
Rusty has fabricated his own images to go along with an extensive story of the 1972 Die Cut set.
That is speculation.
The core theory of the 1972 Die Cut set was posted by me on Greg's old forum and is just something Rusty 'borrowed' and ran with.
Dave says that he is the author of the 1st series sheet evolution. Doesn't that include the 1972 die cut set?
"Primarily the 1972 test material. The 1st series sheet evolution (which I wrote) is pretty much fact."
I can't keep track of who should be credited for what but if you guys want to play traffic cop, pretend to be lawyers and enforce non official or expired copyrights and stuff, go for it! I am fairly certain I am the one who called out the knights move but I couldn't give a rats ass if someone else wants to claim to be the author of that info. I coined the phrase Scoot No/copyright(as obvious as it is yet it was undiscovered nor documented in any previously issued price guides) too. Certainly someone writing that info down on their website gives them no privilege to it whatsoever so I sorta see where Tom is going with this. Websites covered with pictures of Topps products also gives them no privilege to it as technically Topps owns those images.
-
I'm not sure where all your anger is coming from. It appears to me that Dave is offering his opinion about credits since he is familiar with many of those that participated in the original research on the websites & thinks they deserve mention. I happen to agree since we have all greatly benefitted from the information over the years and I appreciate their efforts, as well as mcuddy's efforts to organize everything together.
Dave is not unnecessarily overcomplicating a cool project by adding credits, he has nothing to do with the project. He's offering his opinion, which others, including myself feel has some merit. People that don't agree with his opinion are free to ignore it, including mcuddy, the person who assembled the project, however, he seemed all but happy to add the credits.
If offering an opinion to include credits is championing a cause on someone's behalf, on whose behalf is the cause you are championing NOT to include the credits, since the project editor has no problem with it?
I am with you, I wouldn't "mind" getting credit for stuff but I am reasonably sure the lineage of who actually deserves credit for many things has been muddied over the years so I am fairly certain the crediting job will be incomplete. I have never found Dave to be one who settles for incomplete, he is as thorough as thorough gets but I think he signed up for something here he won't be able to deliver in completeness.
-
Ernie...I wrote the 1st series sheet article (then edited by Greg)...I have nothing to do with anything written about the (hypothetical) 1972 die cut set.
It's not really feasible for credit to be assigned for every bit of research/discovery at this point. As you point out, not all of that is well enough established.
However, when entire articles/text pages are used verbatim from a website, it seems reasonable that the source be credited, that's all.
-
Mick took them down temporarily to fix/add some things, they will be back.
What does this mean in the series 1 section?
Moron -> Jolly Mean -> Maddie Boy
-
That describes the progression of titles that were numbered 21.
-
That describes the progression of titles that were numbered 21.
...but it reads as replacements on a sheet as opposed to number replacements and the numbers aren't referenced. Just an opportunity for improvement.
-
...but it reads as replacements on a sheet as opposed to number replacements and the numbers aren't referenced. Just an opportunity for improvement.
Well, the article is about the sheet replacements that led from the die cut sheet to the 1st series sheet. So, in that context, it indicates that Moron Salt on the die cut sheet was replaced by JM, which was later replaced by MB. The numbers really aren't relevant in this context.
-
Well, the article is about the sheet replacements that led from the die cut sheet to the 1st series sheet. So, in that context, it indicates that Moron Salt on the die cut sheet was replaced by JM, which was later replaced by MB. The numbers really aren't relevant in this context.
yeah, the disconnect is that there is no Jolly mean 21 sheet represented in the article to visually support the write up so my thinking is the support is in the numbers. I guess no such sheet turned up?
-
I'm not sure where all your anger is coming from. It appears to me that Dave is offering his opinion about credits since he is familiar with many of those that participated in the original research on the websites & thinks they deserve mention. I happen to agree since we have all greatly benefitted from the information over the years and I appreciate their efforts, as well as mcuddy's efforts to organize everything together.
Dave is not unnecessarily overcomplicating a cool project by adding credits, he has nothing to do with the project. He's offering his opinion, which others, including myself feel has some merit. People that don't agree with his opinion are free to ignore it, including mcuddy, the person who assembled the project, however, he seemed all but happy to add the credits.
If offering an opinion to include credits is championing a cause on someone's behalf, on whose behalf is the cause you are championing NOT to include the credits, since the project editor has no problem with it?
Anger? Sorry no anger here, just knew something didn't sound right as Paul Maul kept changing his tone on this. Throwing out worries about "permissions"(scare tactic) is not the same as "nice gesture"(good will), just a simple fact so it made me wonder about motive. That is my opinion and as you said, we are allowed to offer our opinions. Mine just happens to be supported with actual posts and words used. Now that we see Paul Maul got his credit, the motive and words used here align, all is right with the world.
I am not a big fan of razzle dazzle, instead, say what you mean, mean what you say, stand behind what you say. Leave smoke screens to the politicians.
In terms of accuracy. I see reference to Norm Saunders doing all of the series 1 art in the copyrighted "factual" "credit laden" section of text. Is that a fact? I have heard otherwise and anyone who knows anything about art will see a marked difference in the series 1 art versus mid series art. Some of the series 1 art is subpar. I bet when you dig deeper, you will find other artists were involved and Norm had to brush up their work to try to save it for die-cut series by trying desperately to add 3D rendering and such. My theory is that when they realized how much better Norm was than the others, Norm started doing 100% of the pieces as opposed to touch ups.
I don't know this guy Rusty but it seems there is quite a bit of hubris of the folks who keep saying "much", "some", "any" of his stuff is speculation but zero percent of their conclusions are "speculation"...perhaps I could be accused of Championing for Rusty, a person I know nothing, it would be a fair accusation :P
-
Can we just get back to how awesome a book this is? Mine was waiting for me when I got home today and I must say it's pretty amazing. Kudos to Mick for putting this together. Can't wait for the next installment.
-
Can we just get back to how awesome a book this is? Mine was waiting for me when I got home today and I must say it's pretty amazing. Kudos to Mick for putting this together. Can't wait for the next installment.
Thank you Raven!! And looking forward to seeing the link, once available, to where we can once again purchase the hardcover book.
-
Can we just get back to how awesome a book this is? Mine was waiting for me when I got home today and I must say it's pretty amazing. Kudos to Mick for putting this together. Can't wait for the next installment.
Agreed, no more credits, no more permissions, let the presses roll!
-
In terms of accuracy. I see reference to Norm Saunders doing all of the series 1 art in the copyrighted "factual" "credit laden" section of text. Is that a fact? I have heard otherwise and anyone who knows anything about art will see a marked difference in the series 1 art versus mid series art. Some of the series 1 art is subpar. I bet when you dig deeper, you will find other artists were involved and Norm had to brush up their work to try to save it for die-cut series by trying desperately to add 3D rendering and such. My theory is that when they realized how much better Norm was than the others, Norm started doing 100% of the pieces as opposed to touch ups.
David Saunders, an authority on his father's work and a professional artist himself, states that Norm painted all the die cuts.
So you're saying series 1 art is subpar compared to mid series art? Please do elaborate.
-
yeah, the disconnect is that there is no Jolly mean 21 sheet represented in the article to visually support the write up so my thinking is the support is in the numbers. I guess no such sheet turned up?
I don't think anyone knows exactly what die cut sheets exist because it's unclear when titles were replaced. Some number variations seem rarer than others, so there are likely a ton of intermediate die cut sheets that have never been found.
-
David Saunders, an authority on his father's work and a professional artist himself, states that Norm painted all the die cuts.
So you're saying series 1 art is subpar compared to mid series art? Please do elaborate.
Let's take it off line, the group wants merriment here and focus on these cool books and this cool collection of data.
-
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE AT THIS POINT! (HAHAHAHAHAHAH I HAD to get that in here!!!!!!)
#BurnTheWitch
Back to your regular programming.......
I LOVE my book - I do not have to print two sided and hope all works out well, toner, and drum, etc.
AWESOME Job, GREAT REFERENCE and incredible tool for making sure your collection is spot on!
-
Ernie...I wrote the 1st series sheet article (then edited by Greg)...I have nothing to do with anything written about the (hypothetical) 1972 die cut set.
It's not really feasible for credit to be assigned for every bit of research/discovery at this point. As you point out, not all of that is well enough established.
However, when entire articles/text pages are used verbatim from a website, it seems reasonable that the source be credited, that's all.
Any idea why greg seems to think the only label code on series 2 box is NEW SERIES 5-438-46-01-1? Mine is NEW SERIES 5-438-46-01-0. Now we are about to see another label/Box variation that doesn't "fit" previously documented info.
-
Any idea why greg seems to think the only label code on series 2 box is NEW SERIES 5-438-46-01-1? Mine is NEW SERIES 5-438-46-01-0. Now we are about to see another label/Box variation that doesn't "fit" previously documented info.
Seems to be a typo, as the box image he has shows a -0 like yours.
Rusty also oddly lists the code as -1, even though he has a much better resolution photo that also clearly shows -0
(http://www.lostwackys.com/images/original-series/boxes/2nd-front.jpg)
-
Seems to be a typo, as the box image he has shows a -0 like yours.
Rusty also oddly lists the code as -1, even though he has a much better resolution photo that also clearly shows -0
(http://www.lostwackys.com/images/original-series/boxes/2nd-front.jpg)
so likely his 3rd series box label info is also incorrect?
-
Seems to be a typo, as the box image he has shows a -0 like yours.
Rusty also oddly lists the code as -1, even though he has a much better resolution photo that also clearly shows -0
(http://www.lostwackys.com/images/original-series/boxes/2nd-front.jpg)
Looks like a lot of opportunity for cleanup here, typos and missing data. Series 8 orange box label is known as I have one.
-
so likely his 3rd series box label info is also incorrect?
no idea.
I can't tell well enough from the image of the purple box on Greg's site and Rusty doesn't mention the purple box at all.
if someone has that purple 3rd, the unknowns of Greg's listing could be filled in.
"3rd SERIES 5-4??-46-01-2"
As you mention, the 8th series on Greg's site is also incomplete. I do have that one, on a green box, and the full number is:
8th SERIES 5-465-46-01-4
-
The 3rd series box sticker is most likely to be 5-432-46-01-2, as that is the code used for the 3rd series 1972 baseball box, which is where this sticker was likely borrowed from.
(https://s19.postimg.org/j08djukyr/image.jpg)
(https://s32.postimg.org/cbj52sbit/image.jpg)
-
The 3rd series box sticker is most likely to be 5-432-46-01-2, as that is the code used for the 3rd series 1972 baseball box, which is where this sticker was likely borrowed from.
(https://s19.postimg.org/j08djukyr/image.jpg)
(https://s32.postimg.org/cbj52sbit/image.jpg)
Looks like 3rd series wackys were also found in the "new series" stickered boxes according to the $2000+ auction on ebay right now, another wrinkle in the documentation.
-
Looks like 3rd series wackys were also found in the "new series" stickered boxes according to the $2000+ auction on ebay right now, another wrinkle in the documentation.
I was assuming those were really 2nd series.
-
I was assuming those were really 2nd series.
He is pretty adamant that these are series 3
-
He is pretty adamant that these are series 3
Does he have evidence of that? I notice the partial box has a mix of 21 and 85 fold packs, so it's not really a "partial box."
-
Looks like 3rd series wackys were also found in the "new series" stickered boxes according to the $2000+ auction on ebay right now, another wrinkle in the documentation.
Now up over $7,000!?!
-
I notice the partial box has a mix of 21 and 85 fold packs, so it's not really a "partial box."
Oh, sure it is. Part of that box and part of another box. :-\
-
Does he have evidence of that? I notice the partial box has a mix of 21 and 85 fold packs, so it's not really a "partial box."
I traded numerous messages with him. He first claimed he felt these were 3rd series because pack(s) pulled open and he saw titles and determined they were 3rd series. I asked him what titles he saw so I could confirm, he then responds that he took pictures of the back and front so people can tell the series(which of course we cant). He also adds the crazy stupid disclaimer that these might be some other series but tough luck to the buyer. Once the bidding this crazy thousands of $, I again said it behooves him to be sure what he is selling and I again offered to help. No response. We know for sure the packs were slopped together into at least the one box. Will be interesting to see what these turn out to be.
-
$10,657
Crazy.
-
That breaks down to about $222 a pack!
-
That breaks down to about $222 a pack!
If they turn out to be series 1 packs, will be a bargain for the buyer, this seller doesn't seem to have any clue on what he was selling nor did he care based on the feedback from one of the posts above. The display box is worth a couple hundred so that knocks off like $5 per pack. Imagine if these are Ludlow packs. Didn't someone turn up unopened series 2 Ludlow packs years ago?
-
If they turn out to be series 1 packs, will be a bargain for the buyer, this seller doesn't seem to have any clue on what he was selling nor did he care based on the feedback from one of the posts above. The display box is worth a couple hundred so that knocks off like $5 per pack. Imagine if these are Ludlow packs. Didn't someone turn up unopened series 2 Ludlow packs years ago?
Too many "ifs" for me to take a $10K gamble!!
-
Too many "ifs" for me to take a $10K gamble!!
How many full series 3 boxes are in existence? How many Ratz/Cracked combos are out there? From a scarcity point of view, price is about right. Let's watch and see these packs resold on ebay as single packs and see how well the seller does.
-
If they turn out to be series 1 packs, will be a bargain for the buyer, this seller doesn't seem to have any clue on what he was selling nor did he care based on the feedback from one of the posts above. The display box is worth a couple hundred so that knocks off like $5 per pack. Imagine if these are Ludlow packs. Didn't someone turn up unopened series 2 Ludlow packs years ago?
There's no reason to think they are 1st series, 2nd series is a lot more likely. The display box is not in great shape, but does have some value. I wouldn't think it that crazy for someone to pay $250 for a 2nd or 3rd red pack, as they have become tough to find. But averaging that for a whole full box is nuts. The highest I've ever seen a box like this sell for is $3800.
Ludlow packs is a bit of a stretch, though they do exist.
(https://s19.postimg.org/7in1zsvz7/2sludb.jpg)
-
How many full series 3 boxes are in existence? How many Ratz/Cracked combos are out there? From a scarcity point of view, price is about right. Let's watch and see these packs resold on ebay as single packs and see how well the seller does.
If these packs were put on eBay in any quantity, there's no way a price of $225 a pack would hold up. Sure, there are not that many early series full boxes out there, so the value is determined by how much people want it. The problem is, that varies widely over time.
And that's assuming the packs are good, which I admit seems likely given the circumstances.
-
There's no reason to think they are 1st series, 2nd series is a lot more likely. The display box is not in great shape, but does have some value. I wouldn't think it that crazy for someone to pay $250 for a 2nd or 3rd red pack, as they have become tough to find. But averaging that for a whole full box is nuts. The highest I've ever seen a box like this sell for is $3800.
Ludlow packs is a bit of a stretch, though they do exist.
(https://s19.postimg.org/7in1zsvz7/2sludb.jpg)
There is no reason to think they are first series?? Of course there is, they look exactly the same as 2nd and 3rd series as there is nothing in the photos so suggest one series over another. Now if you meant to say it is not likely due to the box being 2nd series and the seller saying they are 3rd series, I will give you "credit" for that.
-
If these packs were put on eBay in any quantity, there's no way a price of $225 a pack would hold up. Sure, there are not that many early series full boxes out there, so the value is determined by how much people want it. The problem is, that varies widely over time.
And that's assuming the packs are good, which I admit seems likely given the circumstances.
4 bidders thought otherwise so this indicates a bulk of these could easily be sold to 3 other bidders who lost out with very high bids. Eric ended up getting them all so he will kill packs, get his PSA 9-10 set and then sell the rest. Let's see how I do.
-
4 bidders thought otherwise so this indicates a bulk of these could easily be sold to 3 other bidders who lost out with very high bids. Eric ended up getting them all so he will kill packs, get his PSA 9-10 set and then sell the rest. Let's see how I do.
how many of those 3 other bidders actually care to buy single packs? they were bidding big to get a full box showcase item.
-
There is no reason to think they are first series?? Of course there is, they look exactly the same as 2nd and 3rd series as there is nothing in the photos so suggest one series over another. Now if you meant to say it is not likely due to the box being 2nd series and the seller saying they are 3rd series, I will give you "credit" for that.
You answered your own question. Nothing about the packaging suggests they are first series, while something does suggest they are 2nd series. I meant to say exactly what I said.
-
4 bidders thought otherwise so this indicates a bulk of these could easily be sold to 3 other bidders who lost out with very high bids. Eric ended up getting them all so he will kill packs, get his PSA 9-10 set and then sell the rest. Let's see how I do.
Yes, Eric won the loose packs, not the full box. Getting PSA 9-10 stickers by killing 2 sticker packs is easier said than done, I wish him luck if that is his plan. One thing is for sure. If resold one or several packs at a time in any quantity, the price will not stand up. The same thing happened with 11th yellow packs when a full box worth hit the market. The price dropped significantly, and the same thing would happen here.
-
how many of those 3 other bidders actually care to buy single packs? they were bidding big to get a full box showcase item.
Only one of the boxes was full so it isn't logical to say the bidders for the 25 pack box were bidding to get a full box to show case, that box looked like hell.
-
Yes, Eric won the loose packs, not the full box. Getting PSA 9-10 stickers by killing 2 sticker packs is easier said than done, I wish him luck if that is his plan. One thing is for sure. If resold one or several packs at a time in any quantity, the price will not stand up. The same thing happened with 11th yellow packs when a full box worth hit the market. The price dropped significantly, and the same thing would happen here.
Few people care about 11th yellow packs so that was a given. I am willing to bet red series 1,2,3 original packs are far more desirable to the average collector. Weird that Eric didn't even bid on the full box. I think that strongly indicates he plans to kill the packs.
-
Only one of the boxes was full so it isn't logical to say the bidders for the 25 pack box were bidding to get a full box to show case, that box looked like hell.
wasn't referring to the partial. we were talking about the full box.
-
Few people care about 11th yellow packs so that was a given. I am willing to bet red series 1,2,3 original packs are far more desirable to the average collector. Weird that Eric didn't even bid on the full box. I think that strongly indicates he plans to kill the packs.
Obviously killing those packs is a financial boondoggle, but Eric probably doesn't care about that, so more power to him. If he gets a few nice stickers I'm sure he'll be happy.
-
wasn't referring to the partial. we were talking about the full box.
Ok, I don't see 4 bidders that made the price of this box so I assumed the discussion of 4 bidders was across both auctions(Tom?). The bidding on the other box was similar price per pack given the box in the other auction was trashed.
-
Obviously killing those packs is a financial boondoggle, but Eric probably doesn't care about that, so more power to him. If he gets a few nice stickers I'm sure he'll be happy.
I would agree but I am not up to speed on what people would pay for PSA9 or PSA 10 series 3 titles. I killed a series 2 pack years ago(one I got from Brian) and got 6 stickers in the pack. I just couldn't resist the urge to relive opening such an early series pack. Wouldn't that be a hoot here if these packs were over stuffed?
-
Unless the packs were stored immaculately over the last 40 years, one sticker is likely to have a gum stain in every pack. Value wise, the contents will not approach the price paid, but again, that only matters if you care.
-
Did anybody ask the seller to describe the backs of the opened third series stickers? Given production timeline, the 3rd series white backs would have been in red packs. These might have been a steal, if they're minty 3rd whites.
-
Did anybody ask the seller to describe the backs of the opened third series stickers? Given production timeline, the 3rd series white backs would have been in red packs. These might have been a steal, if they're minty 3rd whites.
I tried to get the info from him but no luck. I even offered to drive there as he is like 40 minutes from my house to help him assess what he has, nada, he really couldn't care less as shown by the additional text added to his ebay auction descriptions.
-
I hope some of the packs get opened and the wrappers sold - I could use a red wrapper.
-
I hope some of the packs get opened and the wrappers sold - I could use a red wrapper.
Ask George Wright...he just may have an extra or two...
-
wasn't referring to the partial. we were talking about the full box.
No, the 4 bidders I was referring to crossed both box auctions. There aren't 4 bidders who drove up the price of the full box.
-
Ok, I don't see 4 bidders that made the price of this box so I assumed the discussion of 4 bidders was across both auctions(Tom?). The bidding on the other box was similar price per pack given the box in the other auction was trashed.
First, why are you not band-ache? What's up with the "s"?
Anyway, you are correct, I was referring to bidders across both auctions. A simple review of the bid history shows this.
-
I hope some of the packs get opened and the wrappers sold - I could use a red wrapper.
I've seen many red wrappers on ebay over the years. They are far from rare.
-
I was one of the bidders on both boxes, but really baled on the full box as I suspected it would sell between $10,000 and $12,000. I was the third highest on the partial box, but just did not want to spend more than $5,000 on the box. I wanted to build in some profit on re-selling them
I would have sold the packs for a profit without even grading them. I leave that to the next owner.
I suspected that they were 2nd series packs, but the owner was very uncooperative when asked important questions. My key question was whether all packs contained gum in them, and whether that gum was unbroken. He responded that he did not have the time to check every pack. Really, how difficult would that have been to check all 73 packs? 5 to 8 minutes at most.
That kept me from bidding higher than $5,000 on the partial box.
I have bought 7 complete OS boxes in the past 2 months, and almost bought 2 more just recently, but I had to cancel a personal check when the seller ignored my telephone calls for 5 days.
Boxes are for sale if you keep searching everywhere but just plan on paying approximately double or more than they sold for 1-2 years ago.
But while I have your attention, I just want to thank the experts on this site (such as Dave) who unsparingly provide responses to the most difficult questions, even when there is no real reward for offering their knowledge.
One last thing: I hope that some of the packs do not get opened so they can eventually be bought up by pack collectors.
Happy hunting!!
Steve
-
I was one of the bidders on both boxes, but really baled on the full box as I suspected it would sell between $10,000 and $12,000. I was the third highest on the partial box, but just did not want to spend more than $5,000 on the box. I wanted to build in some profit on re-selling them
I would have sold the packs for a profit without even grading them. I leave that to the next owner.
I suspected that they were 2nd series packs, but the owner was very uncooperative when asked important questions. My key question was whether all packs contained gum in them, and whether that gum was unbroken. He responded that he did not have the time to check every pack. Really, how difficult would that have been to check all 73 packs? 5 to 8 minutes at most.
That kept me from bidding higher than $5,000 on the partial box.
I have bought 7 complete OS boxes in the past 2 months, and almost bought 2 more just recently, but I had to cancel a personal check when the seller ignored my telephone calls for 5 days.
Boxes are for sale if you keep searching everywhere but just plan on paying approximately double or more than they sold for 1-2 years ago.
But while I have your attention, I just want to thank the experts on this site (such as Dave) who unsparingly provide responses to the most difficult questions, even when there is no real reward for offering their knowledge.
One last thing: I hope that some of the packs do not get opened so they can eventually be bought up by pack collectors.
Happy hunting!!
Steve
Agree that the seller was uninterested in helping and I am glad it cost him getting more money. You said you would have sold the packs for profit even at your bid on these by flipping them yet I see the experts here felt otherwise. Interesting dichotomy there on perceived values for these. I agree with you that the full box was on par with value as it certainly is far more rare than a ratz and Cracked combo.
-
I was one of the bidders on both boxes, but really baled on the full box as I suspected it would sell between $10,000 and $12,000. I was the third highest on the partial box, but just did not want to spend more than $5,000 on the box. I wanted to build in some profit on re-selling them
I would have sold the packs for a profit without even grading them. I leave that to the next owner.
I suspected that they were 2nd series packs, but the owner was very uncooperative when asked important questions. My key question was whether all packs contained gum in them, and whether that gum was unbroken. He responded that he did not have the time to check every pack. Really, how difficult would that have been to check all 73 packs? 5 to 8 minutes at most.
That kept me from bidding higher than $5,000 on the partial box.
I have bought 7 complete OS boxes in the past 2 months, and almost bought 2 more just recently, but I had to cancel a personal check when the seller ignored my telephone calls for 5 days.
Boxes are for sale if you keep searching everywhere but just plan on paying approximately double or more than they sold for 1-2 years ago.
But while I have your attention, I just want to thank the experts on this site (such as Dave) who unsparingly provide responses to the most difficult questions, even when there is no real reward for offering their knowledge.
One last thing: I hope that some of the packs do not get opened so they can eventually be bought up by pack collectors.
Happy hunting!!
Steve
Hey Steve, good to see you on the forum.
I've had a hard time keeping track of valuation on unopened product for the last five years because there have been so few public sales. Individual unopened packs from series 1-5 almost never surface on eBay anymore, and full boxes (other than the occasional 7th gumless or 14th series) even less so. I guess valuations have moved up a significant notch based on these auctions. I bought a 2nd series box for $3800, but I have to keep reminding myself that was over 10 years ago and really means almost nothing anymore. Problem is I haven't seen an early series full box sell publicly since then.
The trend on sports boxes is BBCE certification, and I expect that will gradually become the case for valuable non-sports boxes as well. Because at $10K the risk of shenanigans with unopened material is too much for me.
-
Hey Steve, good to see you on the forum.
I've had a hard time keeping track of valuation on unopened product for the last five years because there have been so few public sales. Individual unopened packs from series 1-5 almost never surface on eBay anymore, and full boxes (other than the occasional 7th gumless or 14th series) even less so. I guess valuations have moved up a significant notch based on these auctions. I bought a 2nd series box for $3800, but I have to keep reminding myself that was over 10 years ago and really means almost nothing anymore. Problem is I haven't seen an early series full box sell publicly since then.
The trend on sports boxes is BBCE certification, and I expect that will gradually become the case for valuable non-sports boxes as well. Because at $10K the risk of shenanigans with unopened material is too much for me.
But is certification of any sort fool proof evidence of untampered packs? I am pretty sure years ago there were resealed series 16 packs that received PSA grades. If the buyer never plans to open the packs and one can never really be 100% certainty of the authenticity, then it seems best to just buy at your own risk and enjoy owning what is perceived to be a vintage full box.
-
But is certification of any sort fool proof evidence of untampered packs? I am pretty sure years ago there were resealed series 16 packs that received PSA grades. If the buyer never plans to open the packs and one can never really be 100% certainty of the authenticity, then it seems best to just buy at your own risk and enjoy owning what is perceived to be a vintage full box.
Yes, GAI (not PSA) did certify re-sealed 16th series packs years ago. That company is defunct now.
Steve Hart of BBCE is the pack authenticator for PSA and is a widely acknowledged expert in the field. While no one is perfect, I would feel better with his word if I could not examine the packs myself. At the same time, it would bother me not to be able to see pictures of the packs themselves (with the box sealed), which is why I've suggested that the packs be photographed before the box is wrapped. Either way, I would unwrap it after I bought it.
-
Yes, GAI (not PSA) did certify re-sealed 16th series packs years ago. That company is defunct now.
Steve Hart of BBCE is the pack authenticator for PSA and is a widely acknowledged expert in the field. While no one is perfect, I would feel better with his word if I could not examine the packs myself. At the same time, it would bother me not to be able to see pictures of the packs themselves (with the box sealed), which is why I've suggested that the packs be photographed before the box is wrapped. Either way, I would unwrap it after I bought it.
You've lost me here, why are we talking about wrapping boxes? Xmas is June?
-
You've lost me here, why are we talking about wrapping boxes? Xmas is June?
It's because the boxes came wrapped in plastic from the factory, or some other reason... :^)
-
It's because the boxes came wrapped in plastic from the factory, or some other reason... :^)
I believe what is being referred to hear is that if PSA certifies a full box, the box is closed and sealed in plastic and you can't see any of the packs. While it is unlikely PSA would graded and empty box, you never really know if all of the packs inside are what they are supposed to be when you buy a graded box.
-
I believe what is being referred to hear is that if PSA certifies a full box, the box is closed and sealed in plastic and you can't see any of the packs. While it is unlikely PSA would graded and empty box, you never really know if all of the packs inside are what they are supposed to be when you buy a graded box.
It's actually Baseball Card Exchange themselves that certify and wrap full boxes, but everything else you said holds.
-
(https://s31.postimg.org/pvpw6cxfv/image.jpg)
-
It's actually Baseball Card Exchange themselves that certify and wrap full boxes, but everything else you said holds.
...and how would one have known this is what you meant? Given this has now been cleared up. If you trust their grading and authentication ability, why would you unwrap the box to see the packs?
-
If you trust their grading and authentication ability, why would you unwrap the box to see the packs?
I would not buy a wrapped box in the first place unless I could see photos of the packs, because BBCE makes no attempt to describe pack condition. I'd unwrap it because I like to see and examine what I own, otherwise it isn't much fun. It could always be re-wrapped if I wanted to sell it.
-
I would not buy a wrapped box in the first place unless I could see photos of the packs, because BBCE makes no attempt to describe pack condition. I'd unwrap it because I like to see and examine what I own, otherwise it isn't much fun. It could always be re-wrapped if I wanted to sell it.
I think you have supported my point, it is waste of time to get this stuff graded, own it, decide for yourself if you like it, trust it, enjoy it. You will never absolutely know the "legitimacy" of this stuff as "legitimacy" is too loosely defined as we discussed in the wrapper/pack thread and the crooks who remove creases from cards, repack packs and such have become too good to be detected in call cases.
-
I think you have supported my point, it is waste of time to get this stuff graded, own it, decide for yourself if you like it, trust it, enjoy it. You will never absolutely know the "legitimacy" of this stuff as "legitimacy" is too loosely defined as we discussed in the wrapper/pack thread and the crooks who remove creases from cards, repack packs and such have become too good to be detected in call cases.
I tend to agree with you. I only have some stuff PSA graded purely for resale value because some others value PSA graded. I have no desire to keep any PSA graded stuff.
-
So I came upon some evidence that Taster's Choke and Bald were originally slated for series 1 and that Bum Chex and Choke Wagon were NOT replaced by Mess Clairol and Windhex(which never made any sense anyway as the cuts of the titles don't align), If this is old information, stop me, if this is new, I will dig out all of info that was just sent to me by one of the Godfather's of wackys.
-
Do tell!
-
Not sure what you mean about Bum and Choke. Yes, they were initially replaced by dupes of Hipton and Chef Girl before Mess and Windhex were added. Is that what you mean?
-
So I came upon some evidence that Taster's Choke and Bald were originally slated for series 1 and that Bum Chex and Choke Wagon were NOT replaced by Mess Clairol and Windhex(which never made any sense anyway as the cuts of the titles don't align), If this is old information, stop me, if this is new, I will dig out all of info that was just sent to me by one of the Godfather's of wackys.
News to me, but I don't tend to get quite that deep into all the Wacky history. I enjoy hearing stories, though, even if they tend to last only minutes before I forget them.
-
So let's start with series 4
(https://s15.postimg.org/6ss9ibad3/series_4_checklist.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/6ss9ibad3/)
(https://s4.postimg.org/u47nza6ix/Series_4_sticker_sheet_first_version.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/u47nza6ix/)
Were the collection of titles on this checklist known? This seems to represent the -01 version of the sheet with winsome on it
-
Yes, fairly old news.
I've posted about it a number of times
-
Yes, fairly old news.
I've posted about it a number of times
Including a checklist that has bum, choke, mess Clairol and windhex all on one checklist?
-
I remember the Winsome thing, but I never saw the Checklist with Bum/Choke/Mess/Windhex.
Tasters Choke & Bald appeared on the 2nd series proof sheet. If Mess/Windhex were originally slated for the 4th, it's odd that they were replaced by Tasters Choke & Bald only to be available to replace Bum and Choke.
-
Including a checklist that has bum, choke, mess Clairol and windhex all on one checklist?
Yes, including the checklist.
The checklist was posted years ago on Gregs interim forum, and that kicked off the whole discussion
-
Yes, including the checklist.
The checklist was posted years ago on Gregs interim forum, and that kicked off the whole discussion
Funny, I have no memory of the checklist. Was there a consensus on why Mess /Windhex were not used if they were later available?
-
toppsvault later posted an auction for an odd sheet, possibly the original version of the mail-in poster, that included both Taster's Choke and Bald.
My take is that sheet was scrapped, and the 2 titles were moved into the 4th series before it went to print.
here's my reverse image of the auction photo, with my mini-versions of TC and Bald inserted so it's easy to see the matching borders.
(https://s17.postimg.org/6w07qjj0v/1st_with_Bald_Tasters_Choke.jpg)
original image
(https://s4.postimg.org/l0bg1077h/Mail_In_Proof.jpg)
-
Funny, I have no memory of the checklist. Was there a consensus on why Mess /Windhex were not used if they were later available?
the image wasn't posted for long and was taken down by the originator. I thought I had a screen grab, but never found it. I'm glad that it's finally been re-posted all these years later.
no consensus that I recall. 4th series is one of the craziest, for sure. With all these odd puts and pulls of titles, the change in checklist color, maiming of jokes, etc.
-
I remember the Winsome thing, but I never saw the Checklist with Bum/Choke/Mess/Windhex.
Tasters Choke & Bald appeared on the 2nd series proof sheet. If Mess/Windhex were originally slated for the 4th, it's odd that they were replaced by Tasters Choke & Bald only to be available to replace Bum and Choke.
So Chef Boy replaced Bum Chex on the sheet that had no Bum, Choke, Mess or Wind. Then that spot was changed to Mess Clairol. There could never have been a sheet that matches this proof checklist, correct?
-
So Chef Boy replaced Bum Chex on the sheet that had no Bum, Choke, Mess or Wind. Then that spot was changed to Mess Clairol. There could never have been a sheet that matches this proof checklist, correct?
haven't seen one.
There was also that proof sheet showing the 2 replacement stickers, which were Milk-Foam and Pepto-Dismal, but no Mess or Wind.
(https://s17.postimg.org/seiiq5djj/4thproof.jpg)
-
So Chef Boy replaced Bum Chex on the sheet that had no Bum, Choke, Mess or Wind. Then that spot was changed to Mess Clairol. There could never have been a sheet that matches this proof checklist, correct?
So Hipton replaced Choke Wagon on the sheet that had no Bum, Choke, Mess or Wind. Then that spot was changed to Windhex.
-
toppsvault later posted an auction for an odd sheet, possibly the original version of the mail-in poster, that included both Taster's Choke and Bald.
My take is that sheet was scrapped, and the 2 titles were moved into the 4th series before it went to print.
(https://s17.postimg.org/6w07qjj0v/1st_with_Bald_Tasters_Choke.jpg)
here's my reverse image of the auction photo, with my mini-versions of TC and Bald inserted so it's easy to see the matching borders.
Here is the color version....
(https://s22.postimg.org/5qh0ya2hp/Series_1_sheet_with_Taster_s_Choke.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/5qh0ya2hp/)
(https://s22.postimg.org/j8wf94r6l/Series_1_sheet_with_bald_and_code.jpg) (https://postimg.org/image/j8wf94r6l/)
-
So awesome, thanks for all the hard work.