NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 02-20-2013, 07:29 PM
aelefson aelefson is offline
Alan Elefson
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: MA
Posts: 857
Default

Joe-
I believe a Broders type issue, or an unauthorized issue, means that a collector/dealer made the set on their own, with no MLB license. Further, these sets were made to sell to unsuspecting collectors as legitimate product (hence the Ajax label on your card). Personally, I have several of these from Ball Street and a few other "companies" in my Don Mattingly collection. I buy them if I do not have them and if I can find them for less than a dollar. Some collectors will never touch them, especially those who were burned speculating on them in the 80s. Others will never touch them because there are so many legitimate issues out there. Even collector issues such as TCMA are considered legitimate, because there was never an intent to defraud buyers. As awlays, collect what you like but keep in mind there are hundreds of these sets produced in the 80s, and very little of it is catalogued in any standard hobby publication.
Alan
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-21-2013, 12:21 AM
4reals's Avatar
4reals 4reals is offline
Joe W.
J0seph Wi.er
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 932
Default

Thank you for your response Alan. I've heard the term Broder-type used for years but incorrectly assumed it was a name brand like "Jay Publishing" or "Score" or whatever. I didn't realize the term Broder had a specific meaning. Damn, I missed the bus on that one! That's why when Bob said it was a bad looking Broder it didn't register as a negative to me (shaking my head at myself). I guess in the end it doesn't really matter if something is authorized or not, all that matters is whether the card has perceived value and what a collector is willing to pay for it. If a set of these sold for over $100 like the FCB thread said then who cares if it's unauthorized, there's buyers out there for them...kinda like those Helmar hand painted replica cards that keep popping up on ebay. Seems to me those would be a great present day example of an unauthorized Broder card, but hey, people are paying money for those too, probably as a cheap secondary option to owning the real thing.

Bob, I just read your excellent description of legitimate issues and collector's issues on pg. 5 of the SCBC under the Major League Issues sub-title. That explained everything perfectly.

Feb. 20, 2013 - the day 4reals finally understood the true meaning of "Broder". I just looked up the definition...it's French and means - to enlarge beyond bounds or the truth.
__________________
COLLECTING DODGERS ~ Vintage, OddBall, Regional
Trade/Sell Bucket: http://s773.photobucket.com/user/joe...le%20-%20Trade

Last edited by 4reals; 02-21-2013 at 12:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-21-2013, 03:47 PM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 4,357
Default

Ballstreet was in a gray area. No MLB license of the cards but they were part of a magazine so it sort of slid by as allowed editorial content just in card form.

Personally I like some of the unlicensed cards. I collect them when I find them cheap.

I think many of them were as good as the products from the licensed companies, at least one issuer -Pacific- eventually did get a license. And there was an actual Broder. There were a few sets he did that were unlicensed, and some that were a bit gray area like a japan baseball set mostly showing american players.

There was a big push by the companies to stop the production, sort of an early look at the whole rights management thing.
What I found silly was the ways they went after them.
Basically forcing Becketts to not list them was one tactic, then getting writers to denounce them as having no quality and no value since the issuer could just print more. Which is something Upper Deck got caught doing and last I looked they're still listed.

There were abuses, sets "limited" to 15,000, but available with red borders until they sold out then another color later. (Another thing that sounds familiar, like 8 different refractors for each set....)

The later ones took advantage of a loophole. Most league and player licensing groups decided that the minimum number of players they'd license was 8 or something like that. And that they wouldn't try to shut down the unlicensed stuff with fewer players.

And that's part of where Star company got into things, and when Pacific made the Ryan and Seaver sets. And the unlicensed stuff became basically groups of single cards rather than sets.
The licensing enforcement was pushed off onto the teams and individual players and their agents who usually didn't have time to chase down some guy selling a few thousand cards of a popular player out of his garage.

The publicity smearing them and lack of listing in most of the guides meant they died out quietly as demand faded.


Steve B
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-21-2013, 11:16 PM
h2oya311's Avatar
h2oya311 h2oya311 is offline
Derek Granger
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 2,139
Default 1983 Ajax

These are definitely tough to come by. I have one complete set (of 6) and one incomplete set of 4 (missing the Henderson and Ripken, both of which I sold).

Chili Davis, Pedro Guerrero, Kent Hrbek, and Willie McGee don't command much of a premium. The Ripken will often fetch around $75-$100 and the Henderson is a $30-$50 card.

As others mentioned, this was not distributed by the maker of Ajax (cleaning product) or a dog-food company...it was fictitious. The Guerrero you have is from 1983 (according to the 2003 Standard Catalog of Baseball Cards). There were also some white-bordered 1984 "Ajax" cards of a few players. I don't have any of those as there is no R. Henderson in that set.

All the best. If you want to see scans of the other cards (or are interested in purchasing any - other than Henderson), let me know.
__________________
...
.
http://imageevent.com/derekgranger

HOF "Earliest" Collection (Ideal - Indiv)...........: 192/317 (60.6%)
HOF "Earliest" Collection (Ideal - Indiv or Multi): 224/317 (70.7%)
1911 T332 Helmar Stamps..: 174/180 (96.7%)
1923 V100 Willard's Choc....: 45/180 (25.0%)
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-22-2013, 08:26 AM
DaClyde's Avatar
DaClyde DaClyde is offline
Jason Presley
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve B View Post
And there was an actual Broder. There were a few sets he did that were unlicensed, and some that were a bit gray area like a japan baseball set mostly showing american players.
Keep in mind that there were two "Broders". Ed Broder prodiced the TCMA-style sets of Japanese players or Americans in Japan in the 1970s. In the 1980s, Rob Broder started selling his unlicensed cards as advertisements for his glossy 8x10 photos. Very quickly he, and others, realized collectors would eagerly scoop up any new cards of popular players and just started cranking out set after set of the simple, unauthorized sets to be sold at card shows. He was eventually sued by MLB and settled for a fine.

About that time, MLB changed it's licensing rules to prevent "publications" like Ballstreet or Legends from basically printing baseball cards in a magazine wrapper. The cards were supposed to be simply a feature of the magazine to enhance articles, and as such, were subject to the rules of your average newspaper or magazine (as started by Baseball Cards Magazine in the 80s), but eventually people saw that as a way to print their own baseball cards without a license, and wrap it in a tissue thin veil of a magazine.

Last edited by DaClyde; 02-22-2013 at 08:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-22-2013, 11:27 AM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 4,357
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaClyde View Post
Keep in mind that there were two "Broders". Ed Broder prodiced the TCMA-style sets of Japanese players or Americans in Japan in the 1970s. In the 1980s, Rob Broder started selling his unlicensed cards as advertisements for his glossy 8x10 photos. Very quickly he, and others, realized collectors would eagerly scoop up any new cards of popular players and just started cranking out set after set of the simple, unauthorized sets to be sold at card shows. He was eventually sued by MLB and settled for a fine.

About that time, MLB changed it's licensing rules to prevent "publications" like Ballstreet or Legends from basically printing baseball cards in a magazine wrapper. The cards were supposed to be simply a feature of the magazine to enhance articles, and as such, were subject to the rules of your average newspaper or magazine (as started by Baseball Cards Magazine in the 80s), but eventually people saw that as a way to print their own baseball cards without a license, and wrap it in a tissue thin veil of a magazine.
Interesting, I sort of knew there were two, but didn't know what stuff went with which or even if it really was two different people and not just the same guy using a different name to confuse things.

I've never seen the cards that were ads for the photos. Did they have ad backs or were they more like regular cards than promos?

I should make a start at cataloging these things, but it's not easy. There's probably some ads in the hobby magazines for a little while, but they eventually stopped allowing them.

While they're unlicensed, I find that they're all a good deal harder to find than the licensed stuff.

Steve B
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-22-2013, 09:37 PM
DaClyde's Avatar
DaClyde DaClyde is offline
Jason Presley
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 327
Default

Actually I guess it was the 1986 Scott Cunningham cards I was thinking of that actually advertised the photographer's photos:



Look up Tim Peichel (tpeichel34 on eBay), he's spent the past 2-3 years attempting to catalog all the unlicensed issues he could find. He's assembled quite a database (and collection) of them.

Last edited by DaClyde; 02-22-2013 at 09:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-23-2013, 04:25 PM
mcadams mcadams is offline
Michael..Adams
member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 99
Default

The ugliness of the cards would make keeping them....challenging.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Food issues? laughlinfan Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present) 2 06-26-2012 02:35 PM
Food Cards... 53Browns Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 33 06-04-2011 07:46 AM
Food issues (let's see em) Archive Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 39 10-11-2008 05:08 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:27 AM.


ebay GSB