Site Forum

From Admin via ranfordfan: "...only use a Sponsor if it is displayed on card front, if on card back only it does not get added to title."

Here's the forum thread Rules for Set Names

However, an exception can be made in cases where no information is on the front. In the case of the 1994 Kodak Chicago White Sox team set we have a situation where it's not like there's the player's name on front, a team name, and a team logo and they relegated the sponsor to the back. Since it's Kodak, the emphasis is on photography, so they didn't want to mar the nice picture on front with a logo. An exception should be made for sets that feature full photographs on front.

I can see your point.  I personally think most sponsors shouldn't be in set titles.  In most cases, the team just sold advertising space on the cards to offset the cost.  The sponsors didn't actually produce, issue or distribute the cards. But the sponsors that actually were part of the issuing process should be mentioned.

I understand your point about only having sponsors in the name if they were part of the distribution process, however, with the passing of time, in many cases, the sponsor name on the card becomes an identifying mark, which will only assist fellow collectors in identifying what they have. For example, this set: http://www.tradingcarddb.com/ViewSet.cfm/sid/119159/1984-85-Star-Franz-Portland-Trail-Blazers always uses Franz when describing it, and has since the 1980s.

Of course, in your example Franz is on the front of the card.  But I agree there are some cases where there's nothing on the front and a sponsor or company is helpful in the title. And as always we do as Admin wishes.  

On a side note. Do you know how your Franz cards were actually distributed? Through their bakery outlets or in their products?

The 3 years of basketball were before my time with the company (by a few months). Since they were also in the sealed poly-bags like the other teams sets, I'd guess that they were sold directly to hobby shops/dealers nationwide. (Which was the excuse Beckett gave us as to why they weren't: 1 - in the price guide, and 2 - when they got in the price guide, why the Jordan rookie wasn't his "true" rookie - the way they were distributed. One of the reasons XRC came about.)

Of note, the basketball sets sold so poorly back then, that is why they began putting them in Crunch n Munch - just to clear them out!

Interesting story Dan, I agree not every guidline is black and white and that is why we have Admin. Somethings always need your parent. =)

So on that note. Should it be 1986-87 Kodak Washington Capitals or 1986-87 Washington Capitals Kodak?

Sponsor before team.  Set titles hierarchy: Year_CardCo._Sponsor_Team

Thanks