1973 Candy Lids (high grade) Are 1973 Topps Candy Lid proofs being die cut to make these???

divecchia

I was looking through some ebay auctions early this week and noticed a few high grade 1973 Topps Candy Lids. These normally don't grade much higher than a PSA 5 or 6 because of the bent tab, but after checking the pop report I noticed what I consider a significant amount of PSA 8's PSA 9's and 1 PSA 10. So I searched ebay again and came across a few of the PSA 8's and one PSA 9 and the lone PSA 10. When I looked at the scans closely I noticed something that looks strange to me. It looks like the new batch of high grade '73 Candy Lids have a small radius where the tab comes off the main circle. I do not see this on '73 Candy Lid, but I thought maybe I could not see it because the tab was bent so it was distorted. Then I decided to take a look at my 1972 Topps Candy Lid that has no bent tab and there is no radius at the corners where the tab meets the circle. Now, I assume the '72's and '73's were cut from the same die so there should be no radius in the corners.

Please take a look at the scans below for more detail and let me know what you guys think about the Reggie Jackson in question compared to the Ryan Candy Lids. Could someone have had a die made and die cut some of the 1973 Candy Lid Proofs?

Donato
Edited: To change picture size and title.

llafoe

PM JoeBanzai - the ones listed on eBay are his.

divecchia

Already did, he could not tell me much about them.

Thanks,
Donato

aconte

Donato,

I saw them on ebay too. They looked different than the candy lids I have seen in the past or in person. The high grade examples looked a lot thicker.
How would one be able to remove them without bending the tab just a little bit? These looked perfect.

aconte

firedawg45

All the high grade are sheet cut!! I too think they are sheet cut from proofs. The Reggie has no bend on the tab ie crease!!! When they were inserted in the lids they creased the tab to pull it open. Psa will not grade it higher than a 6 with the creased tab even thought that's they way it came. Notice the crease on the Psa 6

KbKards

There should not be a radius where the tab joins the main circle. The lower right 1/4 of the card also doesn't look normal, like a complete printed back had to be stuck to a front. That would explain the increased thickness if it's in fact thicker than normal. There's a lot of proof sheets and singles like the Ryan square above that come with varying degrees of back completion. The Jackson looks like somebody other than Topps finished it up.

jeffcbay

GET SOME!

llafoe

<< <i>GET SOME!

>>



Group Break? Only $225 per "lid" from an unopened box (or $200 per lid from an opened box)... who's in?

Edited to add: Does anyone know if the candy stains the lids on these unopened lids?

CON40

The die used to punch out the Reggie '73 lid is not the same die used to punch the '73 Ryan. The shape of the tab is different and the corner radius where it meets the full circle is not on the Ryan. It's a different die. Also, the depth of the punch differs. The stock on the Reggie has a rounded contour to it. It's not as straight (and possibly sharp) a cut as the Ryan.

It looks to me like someone made their own die to punch a Reggie proof lid.

Also, before this, I'd never heard of ANY '73 lid grading higher than a PSA6 because all existing copies have the folded tab.... suddenly there are a slew of high grade '73 lids on the market... hmmmmm.

bishop

mikeschmidt

The lids certainly have the appearance of not being factory cut by Topps in 1973 -- as if they came from a Proof sheet.

That said, wouldn't a proof sheet basically encompass the entire set? The pop report only shows the high grades for a subset of about two dozen of the players. There are some key players, many HOFers, for whom a high grade does not exist.

Curious, indeed

Maurice

<< <i>The lids certainly have the appearance of not being factory cut by Topps in 1973 -- as if they came from a Proof sheet.

That said, wouldn't a proof sheet basically encompass the entire set? The pop report only shows the high grades for a subset of about two dozen of the players. There are some key players, many HOFers, for whom a high grade does not exist.

Curious, indeed >>


A full sheet wouldn't be necessary. As KbKards mentioned, there are plenty of proof singles around.

I agree that the recently graded high grade Candy Lids don't appear to be factory cut. And they definitely were never on the tubs of candy.

Stone193

Hiya Donato

I would've never noticed anything if your good eye hadn't raised some interesting questions?

No. Don't know anything about this issue.

I do have some proofs and a couple of empty lids compliments of one of our generous members.

First - thinking about an unbent tab? I would guess the unused lids will find their way into the hobby - like the ice cream lids I've seen that appear unused?

I took your posted 9 to compare with a 5 on ebay - and the tabs are suspicious. Unless there were 2 different "dies" used in cutting these things?

Otherwise - they don't look similar IMO.

And, as was already said, the surface cut appears to be different - perhaps due to the fact that they were more "slowly" cut - causing an exaggerated bevel on the edge?

JoeBanzai

Thought I would chime in here. There's no big story here to be told. Ran into a guy at a card show last year that had a bunch of oddball items. He did not have a table, was just another attendee. I noticed the candy lids were not bent. The fellow was in his 50's or so and said he had these "laying around" for years. I was excited to purchase them as I had only seen one on ebay with no bend. I didn't notice at the time any difference, but I didn't have a bent one in hand to compare it to.
Submitted them to PSA for grading and they recieved great grades as I thought they would.
I do agree they have a different look than the others pictured. Except for low dollar items everything I sell is PSA graded. The reason for that is to try to avoid issues like this.
What are the suggestions from my fellow board members on these? I was thinking I had a great find here, it's beginning to look like I might have been duped. Since PSA has authenticated and graded them, I am in a quandry.

Joe

llafoe

Great detective work... great read!

KbKards

This should be brought to the attention of Joe Orlando. Lids that look like the PSA 9 Jackson haven't been floating around the hobby for years and years. It's a recent "discovery" that PSA will probably find all coming from a single submitter and they need to take a closer look at exactly what it is.

JoeBanzai

I have revised the listings to include this message;

"Some questions have been raised on this item because of the area where the tab connects to the lid. PSA obviously graded them, however please do not bid on this item if you have a problem with it. Joe"

Any thoughts? If they were your items would you simply end the listings?

Joe

llafoe

<< <i>Any thoughts? If they were your items would you simply end the listings? >>



I'd send them back to PSA for review.

Stone193

<< <i>I have revised the listings to include this message;

"Some questions have been raised on this item because of the area where the tab connects to the lid. PSA obviously graded them, however please do not bid on this item if you have a problem with it. Joe"

Any thoughts? If they were your items would you simply end the listings?

Joe >>

Very classy Joe!

You're a good guy. I read with interest about the item but will say - there's always a chance they were an "alternate" cut from Topps? Or - perhaps - "first cuts" to check for fit before they went into mass production?

Wouldn't it be nice if Topps had an accessible archive on all this stuff?

KbKards

PSA is by no means an expert on what somebody might do with or to a 1973 Candy Lid. It's an oddball issue that you wouldn't expect somebody to be monkeying around with. But there's obviously something not right with them and PSA will most likely want them off the market until they can take a look at them. Can you post a good quality scan of the back of one? I'd be curious to see if the back has complete printing.

JoeBanzai

Thanks Mike, I am only trying to do what's right.

I almost ended the listings, but thought I would give any potential bidder the information so they can decide for themselves.

Could Topps have had a couple of different ways of cutting these? I certainly don't know, but my '67 Standup (also PSA graded and in my set) is unperforated around Killebrew's head, and seems to be on rather thin cardboard. I hope I didn't get screwed on that one.

Joe

JoeBanzai

Photobucket has made some changes. Attempting to post back scan.






Joe

bishop

Joe--the 67 Stand Ups ( I still need 2 to complete the set) can be found in perforated or flat proof form. There is some premium on the perforated, thicker versions but they are both so rare that either is a valuable scarce item. My set in the making is a mixture of the two. Thick and Thin examples

Maurice

After looking at these more carefully, and seeing the large back scan, I think they are fine other than the fact that they were never on the candy tubs.

I believe what appears to be beveled edges is an optical illusion caused by the scanner. It is producing somewhat of a 3D effect. It seems that almost everybody here loves those epson v300 scanners but I don't find the images they produce to be an accurate representation of the items being scanned. And if you look at this seller's other listings, you'll notice what appears to be a beveled edge on the top border of all the 1966 Topps Rub Offs he's offering. Either this guy is running a chop shop or it's the scanner. I'll bet it's the latter.

Looking closely at the PSA 5 and PSA 6 Candy Lids on ebay from other sellers, you can see a hint of a beveled edge on the right side of the tabs on some of them. This is also an optical illusion but just not as exaggerated as what you see with the epson scanners.

That said, I don't think PSA should grade any 1973 Candy Lids that were obviously never on the tubs of candy. In my opinion, all 1973 Candy Lids graded above PSA 6 should be decertified as none of them were issued as intended.

Stone193

I just scanned a Reggie proof I have - and will say - a skilled surgeon with a Ginsu could make a really nice 9 or 10.

I still think it's possible these are real and never made it to the tub - but I still have a question about the tab size?

Maurice

If you look at the PSA labels in the first post of this thread, you can see what I'm talking about regarding the somewhat 3D effect from the epson scanner. Compare the label of the PSA 9 Reggie Jackson to the label of the Nolan Ryan PSA 6. The Reggie Jackson label has shadows and the Nolan Ryan doesn't.

divecchia

Sorry, I can't reply to all right now as I'm on break at work, so my reply will be rushed. I will address Maurice as he has some good points (not that other's don't) for these being legit.

Maurice,

Just so you know, my scan was also done on an Epson V200.

Most of the Candy Lids that I've seen have what I call little tick marks that could be die nicks that were put there on purpose to keep the parts in the web (The web is the scrap part of the sheet) until they were ready to be plucked out further down the production line. The nicks could also have developed over time as debris like metal chips from machinery or the like got under the cutting blades and nicked the dies. Usually if you look at a Ryan disc you will see those nicks at around 9 o'clock and 2 o'clock and other players will have them in different locations, but usual the same area for the same player. Now if you look at the 5 high grade discs on ebay you will see the same misalignment of what I think is a steel rule die starting to separate under pressure of cutting cardboard at roughly 10 o'clock or the upper right side of the discs. Therefore in my opinion one die only was used for all these discs in question as they all have the same anomaly. Something that is definitely not true of the rest of the set. I doubt Topps used one die only to cut all the discs in 1973 as they all have different anomalies on the edges, but somewhat consistent for the same player.

Just a little background on me. I've worked for a foam fabricator for the last 29 years that orders around 500 steel rule dies, forged dies and compound dies per year. I've been a Production Manager for more than 20 of those years running production equipment similar to what a Topps production line would consist of. So I may have a little knowledge on die cutting and the production equipment used to run these discs.

Thanks for everyone’s input in discussing this topic.

Donato

llafoe

This thread gets my vote for Best Thread of 2013; thus far!

Stone193

<< <i>Just a little background on me. I've worked for a foam fabricator for the last 29 years that orders around 500 steel rule dies, forged dies and compound dies per year. I've been a Production Manager for more than 20 of those years running production equipment similar to what a Topps production line would consist of. So I may have a little knowledge on die cutting and the production equipment used to run these discs. >>

Plus you're one of the best contributors - honest - friendly - fair - and knowledgeable that we have here.

divecchia

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your praises, but I'm sorry to say it's not all true. I'll give you the honest-friendly-fair and little bit knowledgeable, but as far as contribution goes I'm slacking significantly. I was a much better contributor when I first came on here, especially on the Nolan Ryan stuff. Now it seems I just can't find the time to scan or post anything. Sometimes life just gets in the way.

As always your kind words are appreciated,
Donato

Dboneesq

<< <i>Plus you're one of the best contributors - honest - friendly - fair - and knowledgeable that we have here. >>

Stone193

<< <i>Hi Mike,

Thanks for your praises, but I'm sorry to say it's not all true. I'll give you the honest-friendly-fair and little bit knowledgeable, but as far as contribution goes I'm slacking significantly. I was a much better contributor when I first came on here, especially on the Nolan Ryan stuff. Now it seems I just can't find the time to scan or post anything. Sometimes life just gets in the way.

As always your kind words are appreciated,
Donato >>

Hey there Donato - I'll take quality over quantity if ya know what I mean?

Maurice

<< <i>Just so you know, my scan was also done on an Epson V200. >>


The Epson v200 and v300 scanners are very different.

The v200, like all older scanners, uses a white cold cathode fluorescent lamp for its light source.

The v300, like most newer scanners, uses white LEDs for its light source.

It is the white LEDs that produce that somewhat 3D effect as well as the shadows. The white LEDs are also responsible for the small white "lines" that you see around the top/bottom edges of the PSA holder, the PSA label and the inner rails.

Note that I am assuming that the seller is using an Epson v300 but it could be an Epson v30 or a Canon 8800F or a Canon 9000F. It doesn't really matter. The only thing that matters is that it is certainly a scanner that uses white LEDs for its light source. And your scanner doesn't.

You can't accurately compare scans of PSA cards that were produced with scanners that use different light sources.



<< <i>Most of the Candy Lids that I've seen have what I call little tick marks that could be die nicks that were put there on purpose to keep the parts in the web (The web is the scrap part of the sheet) until they were ready to be plucked out further down the production line. The nicks could also have developed over time as debris like metal chips from machinery or the like got under the cutting blades and nicked the dies. Usually if you look at a Ryan disc you will see those nicks at around 9 o'clock and 2 o'clock and other players will have them in different locations, but usual the same area for the same player. >>


I understand what you mean by the tick marks. There are many low to mid grade Candy Lids with a bent and creased tab that do not have the tick marks, so the lack of tick marks is not necessarily indicative of a non-factory cut.



<< <i>Now if you look at the 5 high grade discs on ebay you will see the same misalignment of what I think is a steel rule die starting to separate under pressure of cutting cardboard at roughly 10 o'clock or the upper right side of the discs. Therefore in my opinion one die only was used for all these discs in question as they all have the same anomaly. Something that is definitely not true of the rest of the set. I doubt Topps used one die only to cut all the discs in 1973 as they all have different anomalies on the edges, but somewhat consistent for the same player. >>


They all have the same look in the same area because of the scanner. As mentioned earlier, all of this seller's 1966 Topps Rub Offs appear to have a beveled edge on the top border. It is a result of the scanner.

KbKards

That said, I don't think PSA should grade any 1973 Candy Lids that were obviously never on the tubs of candy. In my opinion, all 1973 Candy Lids graded above PSA 6 should be decertified as none of them were issued as intended.

I disagree with this because just because something wasn't issued as intended doesn't mean it wasn't produced with intent to use, but wound up not being needed. The extras would have found their way into the hands of Gelman, Yeko, Galasso, etc. Final production product ready for packaging, but never used. 1973 Topps Comics and Pinups are a good example of this and they're actually rare to find in used condition. Like somebody said before it's very common to find unused Dixie Lids, and 1970 and 1972 Topps Candy Lids are more often found with unfolded tabs. For some reason there's a lot of proof stuff out there for 1973 but I've never seen a 1973 lid with an unfolded tab. If some unused final production lids made it into the hands of Gelman, etc. then it was a very few, and they would have looked like every other 1973 lid made except for the folded tab. The back scan of the Jackson PSA 9 looks very different(in a good way) than what the front is suggesting. What causes concern looking at the front scan is the radius around the tab and the layered look at edge of the card in the bottom right quarter of the card. If the card looks like that in hand then it's highly unlikely that is was cut by Topps at any point in the production or pre-production process. If it's just an effect from scanning then there's nothing wrong with grading the card. The lack of little white ticks at the edges is less of a concern as not all cards have it and the damage could be caused from either cutting or from the handling process of pushing a lid into the top of the tub. If a lid was never used it would not have the handling marks.

The back scan makes it look a whole lot more original than the front. Can you post the same size scan of the front as you did the back? Also, if it's a scanner effect issue then scanning it upside down from the way you would normally lay the card down should show the effect on a different area.

divecchia

Maurice,

It looks like most of your argument is based on the scans of the lids and the type of scanner used. I will concede that you may be correct that the scanner may be giving an optical illusion, so I will have to defer to Joe who has these in hand and only he will be able to say if what I say is true or not. If the misalignment I'm talking about is a created illusion then I would think a scan of the back of the lid would NOT show the same misalignment. But I see the same misalignment on the large reverse scan at 2 o'clock that was provided by Joe in this thread. The front scan shows the misalignment at 10 o'clock (upper left side, I said upper right last night, meant upper left) and the large reverse scan in this thread shows it at 2 o'clock ( upper right side) then more than likely it is an actual misalignment on the lid and not an illusion. I don't think the scan would conveniently reverse the illusion when scanning the back. (See scan below with arrows pointing to the misalignment on the lid created by the die). What I'm saying is all five of these high grade lids on ebay have the same misalignment, it's telling me that the same die was used in making them, where originally different dies were used by Topps in die cutting the different players. Therefore different players would have different anomalies or no anomalies where in this case 5 different players all have the EXACT same anomaly.

Joe, since you have the lids in hand can you tell us if all the players you have show the same EXACT misalignment as I described?

I will add this to preempt the next argument. I will agree that Topps could have used a sample die (as my company does) to die cut the first printed candy lid sheet(s) in the pre-production run and these could be from such a group.

Thanks,
Donato

Edited for spelling.

KbKards

I really don't think Topps would have needed to have a special die made for pre-production on 1973 lids. The 1972's which are most often found unfolded aren't rounded, and the non-sport issue similar to these Rocks of Gum aren't rounded either. I thought maybe the roundness at the base of the tab could rip to be 90 degree looking after the tab was folded but looking at many in hand there's no indication that the paper making up the radius was ever there.

JoeBanzai

Upon close inspection the cards do all look like they have a similar "misalignment" on the upper left side. I don't really know what this proves. Either these were cut by Topps or someone else. Since PSA has graded them, I am leaving them up on ebay. If they don't sell, I'll just keep them in my collection.
In the interest of fair play I have edited the auctions and also my post on the "buy sell trade" thread to warn potential bidders of the possibility of these having problems.
Joe

Maurice

KbKards, nice post. You've made some great points. I may need to rethink my position regarding the "issued as intended" argument.

Maurice

divecchia, correct, most of my argument has been based on the scans and the scanner used. The scans seem to have been causing most of the confusion.

When you mentioned misalignment, I thought you were referring to what appears to be layering on the upper right of the lid. You weren't clear in your previous post but I do see what you are referring to now. I don't know what to make of that. Perhaps there is a problem but I'm not 100% convinced.

bishop

<< <i>

<< <i>Just a little background on me. I've worked for a foam fabricator for the last 29 years that orders around 500 steel rule dies, forged dies and compound dies per year. I've been a Production Manager for more than 20 of those years running production equipment similar to what a Topps production line would consist of. So I may have a little knowledge on die cutting and the production equipment used to run these discs. >>

Plus you're one of the best contributors - honest - friendly - fair - and knowledgeable that we have here. >>



+1

bishop

,,,,and I feel the same way about Joe B

cpamike

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>Just a little background on me. I've worked for a foam fabricator for the last 29 years that orders around 500 steel rule dies, forged dies and compound dies per year. I've been a Production Manager for more than 20 of those years running production equipment similar to what a Topps production line would consist of. So I may have a little knowledge on die cutting and the production equipment used to run these discs.

>>

Plus you're one of the best contributors - honest - friendly - fair - and knowledgeable that we have here. >>



+1 >>



+2

llafoe

<< <i>

<< <i>

+1 >>



+2 >>



=3

divecchia

<< <i>Upon close inspection the cards do all look like they have a similar "misalignment" on the upper left side. I don't really know what this proves. Either these were cut by Topps or someone else. Since PSA has graded them, I am leaving them up on ebay. If they don't sell, I'll just keep them in my collection.
In the interest of fair play I have edited the auctions and also my post on the "buy sell trade" thread to warn potential bidders of the possibility of these having problems.
Joe >>



Hi Joe,

Thanks for clearing up the issue regarding the misalignment being consistent on all the high grade lids in question. I’d also like to commend you on being such an upstanding person and putting a note on your ebay auction regarding the controversy. Most people would have not done that and just called bs on me and moved on. That speaks volumes about your moral character.

There have been many good points made on both sides, but my initial concern still remains and that is that these high grade lids MAY have been cut outside the Topps factory. I never questioned the authenticity of the lids. My initial intent after seeing the first scans of these high grade lids was to discuss the possibility that these lids were cut from proof sheets or proof singles (see the scans in my opening post) AFTER they left the Topps factory. We discussed it. Did we come to a definitive conclusion? I don’t think so, BUT I HOPE we came up with enough good information to allow the collectors to make up their own minds.

As far as grading them goes. I look at it the same way PSA looks at sheet cut cards. They were intended to be cut and sold in packs, vending boxes or complete sets. They were not produced to go out the back door in uncut form and then to be cut down afterwards. If you send in a card and PSA does not deem it to have a factory cut, does PSA grade it? I would think it would be the same for these, but that's another discussion.

Donato