1969 Price List

[Digi]

Just a bit of cross-posting from Reddit, I’m not the poster there either.  Figured y’all would find it as interesting as I did!

Dibs on the box of BBFs for $23.13.

[RichG]

Yes this was a nice piece of history. I found it interesting to see how much higher today’s prices have landed beyond average yearly inflation. 

[NSXCIGAR]

With Inflation the price of the BBF would be about $195 today, so definitely a bit higher than they were in 1969, although BBF was not far from that price just a couple years ago.

There are many, many cigars on this list that I've never heard of anywhere, pre or post-Rev. I'd love to know if that shop has records or someone that could specifically recall some of those. I've never heard of the Don Candido No. 510 and it isn't in MRN. It appears to have been a Double Coronas and would be the grand daddy of Don Candido--an already legendary marca. I can't imagine what a box of Don Candido Double Coronas with provenance would be worth today. $50,000?

I go back and forth with @ATGroom a bit about this but this is exactly what brings me back to being very skeptical in concluding a cigar existed just because it's in a catalog--and in this case, even with a photo. This Don Candido 510 is a perfect example. How could this cigar not have surfaced by now with even MRN and Rius missing it? This would surely have been one of the most notable CCs in the entire portfolio. In fact it's second-highest priced in this catalog behind the RyJ Churchills which was probably the most famous cigar in the world and certainly always considered to be the highest quality. 

So as late as 1969 we have cigars in a catalog that were probably not in production and at best may have been carryovers from before 1962. As I said, I would love to find out if someone who was there in 1969 remembers or has any records of some of these cigars being ordered and actually being received. What was the retailer purchasing situation in 1969? Was the distributor system similar as today and if so could a distributor have info? The shop still exists. I'd love to know. 

[Bijan]

1 hour ago, NSXCIGAR said:

I go back and forth with @ATGroom a bit about this but this is exactly what brings me back to being very skeptical in concluding a cigar existed just because it's in a catalog--and in this case, even with a photo.

I have to wonder why they would put a cigar that they didn't sell in a catalog with an accurate looking price. What is to be gained?

And it isn't a one off, it's a very common occurrence. I have to agree with @ATGroom I think who said that production in the 60s (and maybe into the 70s) may have been chaotic with a lot of weird vitolas produced before the series of rationalisations.

[Shrimpchips]

I wonder if those vitolas were for roll to order, hence the choice of wrapper shade for most of the marca? 

[NSXCIGAR]

2 hours ago, Bijan said:

I have to wonder why they would put a cigar that they didn't sell in a catalog with an accurate looking price. What is to be gained?

And it isn't a one off, it's a very common occurrence. I have to agree with @ATGroom I think who said that production in the 60s (and maybe into the 70s) may have been chaotic with a lot of weird vitolas produced before the series of rationalisations.

Clearly, we know from MRN and Rius that there were cigars that existed in catalogs that were almost certainly never produced. Your guess is as good as mine as to why.

As far as the period I think that is purely Alex's assessment. Why do none of these cigars survive nor are in MRN? To date, we've seen about a half dozen examples of cigars proven to exist post-Rev (with half of those being the Nectares) that are not in MRN. 

Not one of those cigars listed above in that catalog have surfaced from what I can tell. I would strongly push back on the assertion that there were more than a handful of cigars produced in the 60s and 70s that MRN and Rius missed. Not that I'm considering MRN to be the arbiter of what existed. I'm not a special pleader for MRN or his research acumen. My opinion on this is based solely on what has surfaced over the decades compared to what is in MRN. Whether he has superhuman research abilities or whether he got lucky the very, very low number of cigars that have surfaced that aren't in MRN is my basis for that conclusion.

Alex's position about the "chaotic" nature of production isn't backed up by examples of actual evidence of these "weird vitolas". Yes, I've seen now what appears to be hundreds of models in various post-Rev catalogs that aren't in MRN. The question is did they ever actually exist? To date, I've seen less than 10, and that to me is much more indicative that it's very unlikely that most of them did. 

A cigar like the Don Candido 510 would almost certainly have surfaced by now if it had existed. No one's even ever mentioned it. This is a Don Candido Double Corona we're talking about here--the flagship cigar of Dunhill's flagship line. A cigar that would sell for $500 each today in just about any condition without hesitation. Yet nothing.

I can only conclude at this point in time that it was a common phenomenon that many cigars listed in catalogs in the 60s & 70s were never actually available. Those models simply being pre-Rev carryovers that were never deleted makes the most sense but most of these have never even surfaced as pre-Rev examples. 

Until someone credible can confirm first-hand that a significant number of these models existed or photographic evidence is produced my position will continue to be that almost none of these esoteric models found in these catalogs ever existed. 

 

 

[ATGroom]

I don't think we need to get into the whole palaver again @NSXCIGAR, but suffice to say, I continue to disagree with your position on this and reject most of the logic behind it.

 

4 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

There are many, many cigars on this list that I've never heard of anywhere, pre or post-Rev.

Almost all of the cigars in this list appear in other documents I've seen; factory records, tax lists, other catalogues etc. Some pre-Rev, some post-Rev.

 

The main question I would have of the OP if someone has a Reddit account want wants to ask, is "how do they get to the 1969 date?" Doesn't seem to be dated anywhere in the pics.

If it's possible to get a scan I would be very pleased to put it up on CCW with the other old catalogues.

 

[Bijan]

2 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

As far as the period I think that is purely Alex's assessment. Why do none of these cigars survive nor are in MRN? To date, we've seen about a half dozen examples of cigars proven to exist post-Rev (with half of those being the Nectares) that are not in MRN. 

To be fair if we look at the most common online auction listing site I know of (I think we all know it), then only 4 (or maybe 5) out of the 10 don Candidos have shown up. Are all the other 5 illusory? Do they exist because MRN said they did? But is it that the 507 and 510 don't exist because he omitted them? It's quite a rabbit hole/

 

2 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

I can only conclude at this point in time that it was a common phenomenon that many cigars listed in catalogs in the 60s & 70s were never actually available. Those models simply being pre-Rev carryovers that were never deleted makes the most sense but most of these have never even surfaced as pre-Rev examples. 

Problem is in this case it makes no sense if they didn't even exist pre-rev. If they existed pre-rev and the catalog is from shortly after the revolution then that would make sense. But now you have the 510 listed in a 1969 catalog with a price that seems reasonable, being more expensive than the BCG, which they must have sold. Who thinks to update the price year by year for a decade on a cigar that never existed?

Edit: I see the date of the catalog is not verified, If the catalog is not actually from 1969, but from closer to 1960 then your theory would make more sense.

 

32 minutes ago, ATGroom said:

The main question I would have of the OP if someone has a Reddit account want wants to ask, is "how do they get to the 1969 date?" Doesn't seem to be dated anywhere in the pics.

Yes, I have just asked. I'll let you know the response.

Edit: From the post it seems like the price list is from a friend who use it to order from this shop in 1969 or something like that.

 

Also given that the address blanked out on the first page/pic is on the reddit post and is an address in Manhattan, I wonder if this is pre-embargo and not 1969? Or would a shop have actually sent a cuban cigar catalog to the US in 1969 without even putting it in an enveloppe?

 

32 minutes ago, ATGroom said:

The main question I would have of the OP if someone has a Reddit account want wants to ask, is "how do they get to the 1969 date?" Doesn't seem to be dated anywhere in the pics.

Actually I think we can independenly arrrive at 1969+ based on the Monte Especial!

 

[99call]

2 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

A cigar like the Don Candido 510 would almost certainly have surfaced by now if it had existed

What range of numbers are you seeing Don Candido as being limited to?

 

[Bijan]

Found a photo of the box for the 507 too.

[Bijan]

10 hours ago, ATGroom said:

The main question I would have of the OP if someone has a Reddit account want wants to ask, is "how do they get to the 1969 date?" Doesn't seem to be dated anywhere in the pics.

No date but his friend and the source of the pics said circa 1969/1970 from memory.

Again this would accord with the presence of the Montecristo especial released in 1969 and the general price levels.

[SCgarman]

18 minutes ago, Bijan said:

No date but his friend and the source of the pics said circa 1969/1970 from memory.

Again this would accord with the presence of the Montecristo especial released in 1969 and the general price levels.

Hard to believe that $25usd/box for Monte 2's was considered "expensive" for the times. But what would I know? I was 3 years old in 1969. LOL

[El Presidente]

it was common practice for factories to produce cigars for private retailers worldwide in the 60's and 70's.  Catalogues could certainly have accounted for these. 

 

[NSXCIGAR]

17 hours ago, 99call said:

What range of numbers are you seeing Don Candido as being limited to?

I'm limiting them to what is in MRN and what we have photographic evidence of existing post-Rev. Is the 257 and 555 post-Rev? 

19 hours ago, Bijan said:

To be fair if we look at the most common online auction listing site I know of (I think we all know it), then only 4 (or maybe 5) out of the 10 don Candidos have shown up. Are all the other 5 illusory? Do they exist because MRN said they did? But is it that the 507 and 510 don't exist because he omitted them? It's quite a rabbit hole/

They do not exist just because they are in MRN. MRN notes several cigars he lists that may never have existed. But at least he included them, so it's covered.

As far as the 507, it is quite odd he didn't include it as he has the rest. He does state all the Don Candido info came solely from a 1981 Cubatabaco catalog which apparently didn't list it, but apparently that catalog also didn't include the 500, which he notes he only included because he had an actual box on hand confirming its existence. 

19 hours ago, Bijan said:

Problem is in this case it makes no sense if they didn't even exist pre-rev. If they existed pre-rev and the catalog is from shortly after the revolution then that would make sense. But now you have the 510 listed in a 1969 catalog with a price that seems reasonable, being more expensive than the BCG, which they must have sold. Who thinks to update the price year by year for a decade on a cigar that never existed?

1969 isn't that far from 1962. Cuba leaving things in catalogs or not purging items for many years they had no intention of making doesn't seem that far fetched to me. 

I would make the case that that price for the 510 may not have been updated. I could easily imagine a cigar like a Don Candido 510 being the most expensive cigar in the portfolio. Inflation wasn't as high from 62-69, but that might very well be an older price.

And for a cigar of that caliber and value never to have surfaced is quite remarkable. The 507 has surfaced. Why not the 510?

19 hours ago, ATGroom said:

Almost all of the cigars in this list appear in other documents I've seen; factory records, tax lists, other catalogues etc. Some pre-Rev, some post-Rev.

I'm sure they do. Their ubiquity in all of these catalogs would appear to strengthen my case: why have only a handful of the cigars listed in these catalogs but not included in MRN ever surfaced? Surely their wide availability would insure their existence if they were actually being produced. 

[Bijan]

1 hour ago, NSXCIGAR said:

1969 isn't that far from 1962. Cuba leaving things in catalogs or not purging items for many years they had no intention of making doesn't seem that far fetched to me. 

Cuba sure but this is not Cuba. This is a mail order brochure for a Swiss shop. Imagine them if you are correct. For almost 10 years it must have been a regular occurrence to receive orders for or including the don candido 510 and then have to say sorry we don't have it in stock or sorry the cigar never existed but we are too lazy to remove it from the catalog despite the fact that we update it annually and then have to have a back and forth phone or mail exchange across the Atlantic to fulfill the order. It makes no sense.

 

1 hour ago, NSXCIGAR said:

And for a cigar of that caliber and value never to have surfaced is quite remarkable. The 507 has surfaced. Why not the 510?

I think the simplest explanation is that as the most expensive cigar and such a large one it sold in the least numbers. So it is least likely to surface.

 

1 hour ago, NSXCIGAR said:

Surely their wide availability would insure their existence if they were actually being produced. 

Only a few examples of monte 1-5 from the 60s and 70s have shown up on our most prolific online source of cigar auctions. Based on that you could make the case monte 3 or some such vitola did not exist in that period.

If monte 3 never surfaced how much more for a rare cigar like the don candido 510.

[NSXCIGAR]

6 minutes ago, Bijan said:

Only a few examples of monte 1-5 from the 60s and 70s have shown up on our most prolific online source of cigar auctions. Based on that you could make the case monte 3 or some such vitola did not exist in that period.

If monte 3 never surfaced how much more for a rare cigar like the don candido 510.

No, but they are in MRN. 

The criteria is it must both neither be in MRN nor have photographic or credible first-hand testimony of its existence. Presently this encompasses about 10 cigars, a far cry from the hundreds of oddball models found in these post-Rev catalogs. 

[Bijan]

6 minutes ago, NSXCIGAR said:

No, but they are in MRN.

The question I was answering is why didn't or don't they show up. My answer is some of the most common cigars don't show up from that period. If many common cigars don't show up from that period it is no wonder the rarest cigars don't show up either.

Another answer from Rob is that some of these oddballs were distributor or shop specific models during that period. So a much more restricted distribution. If monte 3 sold in every habanos dealer in the world is not well attested how much more of a don candido model sold only in a handful of Swiss shops.

[NSXCIGAR]

1 hour ago, Bijan said:

The question I was answering is why didn't or don't they show up. My answer is some of the most common cigars don't show up from that period. If many common cigars don't show up from that period it is no wonder the rarest cigars don't show up either.

Another answer from Rob is that some of these oddballs were distributor or shop specific models during that period. So a much more restricted distribution. If monte 3 sold in every habanos dealer in the world is not well attested how much more of a don candido model sold only in a handful of Swiss shops.

Yes, it's possible that few examples of even common cigars have surfaced, but only one example surfacing is needed. There's also plenty of photographic evidence of early post-Rev Monte 1-5 and probably most if not all of the cigars that still exist today. 

There no doubt were cigars in these catalogs that were essentially private commission or special retailer selections. But Alex is focusing on cigars that "appear in other documents I've seen; factory records, tax lists, other catalogues etc." so this likely wouldn't apply. In fact, I believe Alex's position is based precisely on the fact that the cigars he's seeing appear in these multiple sources and seem to have had relatively widespread availability. 

2 hours ago, Bijan said:

Cuba sure but this is not Cuba. This is a mail order brochure for a Swiss shop. Imagine them if you are correct. For almost 10 years it must have been a regular occurrence to receive orders for or including the don candido 510 and then have to say sorry we don't have it in stock or sorry the cigar never existed but we are too lazy to remove it from the catalog despite the fact that we update it annually and then have to have a back and forth phone or mail exchange across the Atlantic to fulfill the order. It makes no sense.

But the information was coming from Cuban sources. How would the retailers know what Cuba was offering? Cigars can be out of stock for years even today. In fact, cigars currently appear on the HSA website vitoleria that are long gone. Seems like the same thing to me. Perhaps Cuba would wait for hundreds or thousands of orders to come in before deciding to make something, and that volume just never came in. We're talking Cuba in the 60s--do you think it was in less disarray than it is now? It seems much more likely that they would leave items on a list rather than delete it. Maybe they make it, maybe they don't but they have the option.

2 hours ago, Bijan said:

Only a few examples of monte 1-5 from the 60s and 70s have shown up on our most prolific online source of cigar auctions. Based on that you could make the case monte 3 or some such vitola did not exist in that period.

If monte 3 never surfaced how much more for a rare cigar like the don candido 510.

As far as the 510 being a low volume cigar, sure. That would actually agree with my minimum order theory. But if it was in fact made, the super premiums are exactly the type of cigars that seem to survive for decades. People who buy those were much more likely to have lockers, and we know things in lockers survive. In fact, this is a Dunhill--a super-premium Dunhill--and it has never surfaced in any of Dunhill's lockers? Never appeared in any of Dunhill's catalogs? The 502 was probably the second-highest priced Don Candido and those things are everywhere. 

1 hour ago, Bijan said:

The question I was answering is why didn't or don't they show up. My answer is some of the most common cigars don't show up from that period. If many common cigars don't show up from that period it is no wonder the rarest cigars don't show up either.

Another answer from Rob is that some of these oddballs were distributor or shop specific models during that period. So a much more restricted distribution. If monte 3 sold in every habanos dealer in the world is not well attested how much more of a don candido model sold only in a handful of Swiss shops.

Again, it only takes one example. We're trying to verify existence. Auctions are only one source. For something like Monte 1-5, I'm sure Sahakian or Simon Chase could have told you he's seen them continuously since the Rev. For only 10 cigars to show up out of the hundreds in these catalogs to me is highly suggestive that they likely never existed. We're also forgetting MRN had access to information, lists, factory managers/workers and catalogs we do not, and he also had Rius who would have had a great deal of direct knowledge about what was being produced and when. This is critical in deciding whether it's coincidence that less than 1% of these oddball cigars have ever surfaced or whether it's because they weren't produced. 

I found this little gem on Davidoff's site about Edward Sahakian:

Edward says of this time. “And of course, I made sure I visited the cigar shops.“I started visiting the magnificent Dunhill store, which at the time was by far the best in London. I would buy a couple of boxes and ask Dunhill to keep them for me. Some of my cigars are still there. I was buying at that time the Don Candido in Churchill – I still have some of those too.

So Sahakian would be someone who was there as early as the early 70s, but here he mentions a Don Candido Churchill. This could be the 500, as MRN lists it at 48 x 165. Perhaps Sahakian's box is the one MRN used for reference. But it might also be the 510. This catalog doesn't list the RG, but the length. It has the same length as a Prominentes, but perhaps it was a 47 RG, and could have been called a Churchill. Either way, there are several ways to verify a cigar's existence. 

[99call]

I think this whole discussion boils down to perception of the world and to some degree Schrodinger's cat. 

Some people consider something can't or is unlikely to exist if they themselves have not experience it, and others are perfectly happy to imagine there is endless possibility beyond their direct experience or exposure. 

One very minor point and it is by no means a catch all.   Is it worthwhile considering that in the UK and Europe through the 60s 70s and 80s pretty much everything in a household that would burn (that was no longer wanted) would get thrown in the fireplace. 

[El Presidente]

1 hour ago, 99call said:

I think this whole discussion boils down to perception of the world and to some degree Schrodinger's cat. 

 

It's 11:20 PM.....but now I have to go and google "Schrodinger's cat" 

[El Presidente]

8 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

It's 11:20 PM.....but now I have to go and google "Schrodinger's cat" 

...I hate you Stefan.

 

 

[99call]

3 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

...I hate you Stefan.

It's a much more pleasant experience when you convert it within reference to cigars. i.e. every cigar is a 100 pointer, until you smoke it and find out that it isn't. This works for everything apart from guantanemeras, where they start with 10 points and end up with 5

[Bijan]

2 hours ago, El Presidente said:

...I hate you Stefan.

 

 

The thought experiment was meant to show that the idea of superposition of the states for the cat is nonsensical:

https://www.wtamu.edu/~cbaird/sq/2013/07/30/what-did-schrodingers-cat-experiment-prove/

I believe the point is to show that observation collapsing the state doesn't imply conscious vs non-conscious observation but observation in the sense of quantum vs non-quantum systems.

"

What did Schrodinger's Cat experiment prove?

Category: Physics      Published: July 30, 2013

Public domain image, source: CDC.

"Schrodinger's Cat" was not a real experiment and therefore did not scientifically prove anything. Schrodinger's Cat is not even part of any scientific theory. Schrodinger's Cat was simply a teaching tool that Schrodinger used to illustrate how some people were misinterpreting quantum theory. Schrodinger constructed his imaginary experiment with the cat to demonstrate that simple misinterpretations of quantum theory can lead to absurd results which do not match the real world. Unfortunately, many popularizers of science in our day have embraced the absurdity of Schrodinger's Cat and claim that this is how the world really works.

In quantum theory, quantum particles can exist in a superposition of states at the same time and collapse down to a single state upon interaction with other particles. Some scientists at the time that quantum theory was being developed (1930's) drifted from science into the realm of philosophy, and stated that quantum particles only collapse to a single state when viewed by a conscious observer. Schrodinger found this concept absurd and devised his thought experiment to make plain the absurd yet logical outcome of such claims.

In Schrodinger's imaginary experiment, you place a cat in a box with a tiny bit of radioactive substance. When the radioactive substance decays, it triggers a Geiger counter which causes a poison or explosion to be released that kills the cat. Now, the decay of the radioactive substance is governed by the laws of quantum mechanics. This means that the atom starts in a combined state of "going to decay" and "not going to decay". If we apply the observer-driven idea to this case, there is no conscious observer present (everything is in a sealed box), so the whole system stays as a combination of the two possibilities. The cat ends up both dead and alive at the same time. Because the existence of a cat that is both dead and alive at the same time is absurd and does not happen in the real world, this thought experiment shows that wavefunction collapses are not just driven by conscious observers.

Einstein saw the same problem with the observer-driven idea and congratulated Schrodinger for his clever illustration, saying, "this interpretation is, however, refuted, most elegantly by your system of radioactive atom + Geiger counter + amplifier + charge of gun powder + cat in a box, in which the psi-function of the system contains the cat both alive and blown to bits. Is the state of the cat to be created only when a physicist investigates the situation at some definite time?"

Since that time, there has been ample evidence that wavefunction collapse is not driven by conscious observers alone. In fact, every interaction a quantum particle makes can collapse its state. Careful analysis reveals that the Schrodinger Cat "experiment" would play out in the real world as follows: as soon as the radioactive atom interacts with the Geiger counter, it collapses from its non-decayed/decayed state into one definite state. The Geiger counter gets definitely triggered and the Cat gets definitely killed. Or the Geiger counter gets definitely not triggered and the cat is definitely alive. But both don't happen.

In summary, quantum state collapse is not driven just by conscious observers, and "Schrodinger's Cat" was just a teaching tool invented to try to make this fact more obvious by reducing the observer-driven notion to absurdity. Unfortunately, many popular science writers in our day continue to propagate the misconception that a quantum state (and therefore reality itself) is determined by conscious observers. They use this erroneous claim as a springboard into unsubstantial and non-scientific discussions about the nature of reality, consciousness, and even Eastern mysticism. To them, "Schrodinger's Cat" is not an embarrassing indication that their claims are wrong, but proof that the world is as absurd as they claim. Such authors either misunderstand Schrodinger's Cat, or purposely twist it to sell books."

[NSXCIGAR]

All I know is that there are hundreds of oddball post-Rev cigars and only 10 have shown up. There are cigars in MRN that haven't shown up. 

More likely or less likely an oddball cigar actually existed? 

 

[Bijan]

I see it as I see pre war blues records. There's a period form 1928 (or maybe 1927) to 1934 where there was a large output of blues music from Southern black musicians either recorded on location or in the north.

Almost all of the master recordings were lost and so all that remains are from the 78 rpm records which can be found. By the 1980s the vast majority of all that would ever be found was found. But every year or couple of years one or two new records surface. There are written records of what was recorded at each session and a pretty good written record or idea of which of those recording were released on record (from catalogs or studio documents). But still some of those released records have never surfaced.

In the same way by the time MRN wrote his book practically everything that would surface had surfaced. Being closer to the time and cigars being more perishable than records any given cigar was much more likely to surface at the time than now compared to records.