Yo-yo demonstrator dies

  Ted Anderson, 93, a one-time traveling demonstrator/salesman for Duncan Yo-Yo, died Aug. 22. 
  Born Theodore Merrill Anderson, he worked as a butcher in the 1950s when the Luck-based Duncan company persuaded him to promote the wooden toys. He and his wife, Grace, spent years traveling along the East Coast and Puerto Rico for Duncan, stopping in New York City and many other spots to do yo-yo tricks and promoting Duncan products.
    In his later years, he moved to Orlando and worked as a greeter at Disney World, once again doing his yo-yo tricks.
    Grace and Ted were married for 67 years. She died in July. 
    A memorial service is planned for 11 a.m. Sept. 18 at Luck Lutheran Church.
    A full obituary can be found HERE.
 

New Video on the Life of a Yo-Yo Demonstrator

By John Dorschner
    Kids were wowed by dad's Thunderbird with Duncan Yo-Yo on the side. He did tricks for them in school yards, visited TV shows, five-and-dimes and newspaper offices. More than once, reporters called him  "yo-yo champ of the U.S."
    The champ was Herm Ridgeway, who toured the areas of Texas, Arizona, Utah and Colorado for Duncan Yo-Yo. His formal title was "campaign manger," according to his son Paul, but most Duncan folks called them "yo-yo demonstrators."
     While the tales of two demonstrators who retired to Polk County -- Ted Anderson and Jerry Videen -- are fairly well known, not much has reported about Herm Ridgeway until his son Paul returned to Luck last summer from his California home for a high school reunion and talked about going on the road with his mom and dad, who included Paul occasionally doing his own trick demonstrations.  
    A video of Paul's recounting of the family's yo-yo adventures is available HERE on YouTube.
         Duncan provided a good living for the Ridgeways for quite a few years, including summers at a lodge near Bone Lake that the company made available to the traveling demonstrators.
      Paul himself received a measure of fame at the age of 10 when the Milwaukee Journal wanted a kid to pose with a mound of yo-yos for a Sunday magazine cover story on the Luck yo-yo plant. The Journal called him a "yo-yo champion," though Paul remembers simply that his mom heard the newspaper wanted a kid to pose with the yo-yos and she volunteered him.
         Careful readers might note that the caption describes the child as Lynn Ridgeway. Paul says that was the name he was given at birth, but he never liked it and as an adult had his name legally changed to Paul Ridgeway, using his middle name. (Another Lynn who apparently didn't like his name was Hall of Fame pitcher Lynn Nolan Ryan, who is also best known by his middle name.) 
      The end for yo-yo demonstrators came abruptly. Paul recalls that Herm was in Texas selling yo-yos when he received a call from Duncan that the company was bankrupt and was closing. Herm had to sell his golf clubs to buy gas to get to Phoenix, where he had relatives.
  

Herm Ridgeway, second from right on the Len King TV show in Phoenix 1954.

Paul Ridgeway at the Luck Museum with his magazine cover.

...

The Diamond Jubillee Account

A history of the town, Diamond Jubilee Luck, has an in-depth section on the yo-yo era starting on page 139. The book -- credited to the Luck Area Historical Society, Polk County Ledger and Russell B. Hanson -- is available online here.

Gumwood and Maple -- the early years

         In 1996, Edwin Pedersen gave this personal account of the early Duncan years:

         “For nearly twenty years, everything revolved around—rose and fell with the fortunes or misfortunes of the Duncan Yo-Yo Company.

         “It all began quietly enough in the years before the war with area lumber men supplying yo-yo squares of maple shipped to Chicago. The heavy green maple was difficult to ship, so it was not long before a relatively small dry kiln was built next to the railroad spur in which the local maple squares were kiln-dried. For a time, gum wood from southern states also came by freight cars to be dried in Luck. This was in the days before everything was moved on pallets with fork lifts.

Edwin Pedersen, about 1941

          “This writer knows. Day after day, Ernie Gorr and I unloaded the heavy gumwood sticks, almost dripping with sap, from box cars, stickered them on huge platforms on wheels and pushed them into the dry-kiln. The next kiln load would be local maple. The two woods could not be dried at the same time because of the different time needed. Then, night after night, I slept and fired the kiln and took readings on temperature and humidity.  Once again a stick by stick loading of the box cars for shipping to Chicago. When it wasn't yo-yo sticks to be loaded, it was railroad ties, one car load after the other.

           “With the coming of the war, frivolous things, like making yo-yos came to a halt. Men left for the service, older men took over and production was geared to pallets and ties, not yo-yos.

            “With the end of the war and there was once again time for play, Einar V. Pedersen convinced the Duncan Company of the merits of moving their entire operation to Luck. This would s ave the endless loading and unloading, and shipping of rough, heavy yo-yo sticks, and ship only the finished product. The true yo-yo era began for Luck.”

             Source: A Little Bit of Luck, edited by Edwin Pedersen, provided by Katherine Pedersen Wilson. She also provided the photo.

Why Duncan Came to Luck

      In the traditional accounts of how the Duncan toy company ended up making Luck the yo-yo capital of the world, a local sawmill owner suggested the move to Duncan people: If you're getting so much of your maple from us, why not just build the plant here and save transportation costs? A subtext, often unstated, in most of those accounts is that labor costs would be much cheaper in Luck than in Chicago.

        An article in the St. Paul Pioneer Press on April 29, 1962, put it this way: "The spin of fate's wheel which gave Luck the most enduring toy of the century -- not excluding tops, jacks and marbles -- came in 1945 when a now-retired logger and saw miller named Einer Peterson persuaded Donald Duncan Sr. to move his Yo-yo factory from Chicago to the source of supply -- hard maple."

         Einar Pedersen -- correct spelling -- had a somewhat different account. He had two sawmills -- one in Luck, and and another in Milltown. Here's what he wrote, sometime before the plant closed down in 1965:

Einar Pedersen with wife Augusta

         "The reason for the Duncan Yo Yo factory locating here is as follows: A young man by the name of Urban Olson from west of Atlas had received an order for air dry yo yo squares to be delivered to Chicago at certain intervals.

         "He was not rigged up to take care of a large order like this, having no sawmill, and no equipment to handle it with, (the timber). He came to see me often, wanting me to help him get it out. I finally went with him to look at two pieces of maple timber which he had bought nearly a year prior to this. He had quite a few logs cut which were still in the woods where he had cut them. I found out that the leases on the timber rights had run out and the owners refused to renew without being paid in full for the timber. It was agreed that I take over the contract and as I had two sawmills going I agreed also to saw out what ever logs he had.

         "A few carloads were shipped, however payments were slow. The manager of Duncan's came up with the idea that a kiln be built in one of the towns which was handiest. I was told that I could choose the site, either Grantsburg, Luck, or Milltown. It was taken up by the Milltown Businessmen who did not seem to be interested, Grantsburg was out of the question as far as I was concerned, so it was decided that the company take over my lease on a railroad loading site I had leased in Luck.

         "Here a lumber dry kiln with a capacity of 2M (2 thousand board feet) was built. It was not long before the company decided to locate their factory by the kiln, however neighbors did not like the idea of a factory in their back yard, so a building was rented temporarily from Ray Johnson where they operated for several years.

Einar Pedersen at his Luck saw mill, probably in the 1940s. It was located west of the railroad tracks (now the Gandy Dancer Trail). All photos courtesy of Katherine Pedersen Wilson.

         "I kept them supplied with maple lumber which was in the dimension of 2 5/8"x 2 5/8" x 8 ft. for several years, however it was quite difficult as payments for the lumber were slow, and at one time the account due me was $12,000. Finally payments commenced to come, and in addition to being paid for current deliveries, I received $1,000 per month on the old account and after that everything was very satisfactory.

          "The statements by certain parties who claim credit for bringing the business to Luck are not true, as they had nothing to do with it. They later on built the present large factory which is credit to any town."

         This account was provided by Einar's granddaughter, Katherine Pedersen Wilson. She says the date of writing is uncertain, though it must have been before the plant closed in 1965 by the way the last paragraph is written. Katherine says her father, Edwin Pedersen, transcribed it at some point from Einar's handwritten notes.

Einar with his lumber. Polk County's hard maple was perfect for yo-yos.

           Katherine writes: “I found the one typewritten page in my dad's files after he died a couple years ago. I didn't remember having read it before and didn't know it's source, but I was sure it had been typed by my dad Edwin Pedersen, and that he had written the introductory sentence stating that what followed had been written by Einar Pedersen (Edwin's father). I can't tell you why my dad typed it.

            She said Edwin had learned a somewhat different version. “In dad's telling, Einar pointed out [to Duncan] that they could save some of the freight cost by drying the wood before shipping it to Chicago. Then after the kiln was built, he suggested that it would be more efficient yet to just make the yo-yos up here where the wood was.

          “In Einar's written account he doesn't claim credit and, in fact, states that building the kiln was the idea of a Duncan manager. But he is clearly irked that 'certain parties' are trying to take credit for bringing the factory to Luck. I tend to believe that there is some validity to Dad's story, but [Einar's] written account is the more authoritative (especially considering that my memory has to be factored into my dad's oral account). I think the third paragraph [quoted above] of the 1962 St. Paul Pioneer Press article lends credence to Dad's oral version.”

An Entrepreneur's Start

       One of those who took advantage of Luck's plant was a high school student, Dennis Frandsen, who figured out how to make money by cutting maple trees on his father's land to sell them to Duncan to make yo-yos.

        Frandsen has gone on to be an exceptionally wealthy entrepreneur and banker, with a holding company that includes banks that controlled over $1.5 billion in assets by 2012.

         Sources: Minneapolis Star-Tribune story on April 22, 2003. Research provided by Colleen Draxler.

The Devastating Lawsuit

    While Duncan struggled with costs and foreign competition, it was also engaged in a long-standing battle in the courts – in a fight that culminated in a huge defeat on March 3, 1965 – precisely when the company was at its most vulnerable.
    A federal appellate court ruled that Duncan could not claim an exclusive trademark on the term “Yo-Yo” because the word had long been used in The Philippines to describe the toy. Duncan filed for bankruptcy a short time after the ruling, although it's not clear how much the court ruling played in a company already beset by major financial problems.
    Here's the background, culled from appellate rulings available on the web.
    THE START OF YO-YOS IN AMERICA 
    Pedro Flores, who had been born in The Philippines, introduced the yo-yo to the United States about 1928 with a small manufacturing plant in California. Duncan, a longstanding company, got into the yo-yo business, going back to at least January 1929.
      On July 22, 1930, Flores Yo-Yo Corporation obtained registration of the trademark "Flores Yo-Yo."

Donald F. Duncan Sr.

    The first application of Donald Duncan Sr. was turned down by the Patent Office because of the Flores trademark. In response,  Duncan wrote: “The applicant understands the term `Yo-Yo' is used in the Philippine Islands to mean `come back' or `springy', and as the term was applied to the bandalore type of toy because it appears to be springy and comes back, there is a question as to whether or not this term alone, if presented for registration, would not be held descriptive. Under this reasoning, it is assumed that the only feature common to the two marks embodying registrable matter is the term `Yo-Yo' which, if descriptive, is incapable of exclusive appropriation and use by either the applicant or the registrant.”
    The argument apparently worked. Duncan received trademark 298,697 for “Genuine Duncan Yo-Yo” on Nov. 1, 1932, and trademark 300,504 for “Yo-Yo” on Jan. 24, 1933.
    THE MURKY YEARS 
    At some point Duncan bought the Flores company, and for the next 20 years the use of the term yo-yo often drifted through uncertain legal waters.
    The term was used freely by Joseph Radovan, who started Royal Tops in 1937. He was born in The Philippines in 1909, came to the United States in 1931, working as a yo-yo demonstrator until he formed the Royal toy company.
    On July 23, 1948, the Duncan company signed an agreement with Louis Marx & Company, Inc. and Charmore Company, in which Duncan granted them a license to use the trademark “Yo-Yo,” which were technically described as “bandalore types of toy spinning tops.” The agreement allowed for Duncan to cancel the agreement with 30 days written notice.
    In 1951, Royal filed suit in the Northern District of Illinois federal court seeking cancellation of Duncan's trademark registration because “Yo-Yo” was a generic name. That lawsuit effectively ended on Sept. 14, 1955, Duncan granted Royal “an exclusive and non-transferable right to use Licensor's trade-mark, `Yo-Yo,' on or upon or in association with bandalore tops," and Royal agreed to file papers in the federal lawsuit declaring Duncan's trademarks to be “valid and existing." On Nov. 21, 1955, a consent judgment was entered in the lawsuit declaring the trademarks to be valid.
    1961 -- THE START OF THE BIG LAWSUIT 
    Royal kept using the term. Eventually, Duncan insisted Royal stop. Royal refused. In 1961 Duncan filed a federal lawsuit claiming that Royal Tops and  Randy Brown, a former Duncan employee who went to work for Royal, were improperly using the term Yo-Yo.
    Royal filed counterclaims, alleging it was due money for Duncan making fraudulent claims. Royal contended that in the 1955 license agreement, Duncan claimed there was no agreement in effect, when in fact the 1948 agreement with Marx was still operative. In its 1965 appellate court decision, the judges wrote that “Royal's president, Joseph T. Radovan, testified that he would not have settled Royal's suit against plaintiff for declaratory judgment if he had known there was an outstanding license agreement with some other company.”
    A lengthy trial was held. Donald Duncan Sr testified that the 1948 agreement was cancelled in 1952 by mutual agreement in a conversation with Marx, but he admitted that no formal 30-day notice was given until Duncan's lawyer filed one in 1961.
    Joseph Radovan, president of Royal, testified in court that “yo-yo” was a Filipino word for a childhood game and was well known.
    Also testifying was Henry Lee Smith Jr., chair of the department of anthropology and linguistics at the State University of New York at Buffalo, who was qualified as an expert linguist and etymologist, particularly in the Polynesian languages.  He testified that he made a study of the term yo-yo, including major unabridged encyclopedias, dictionaries, various bibliographical references, and conversations with colleagues and children.  As the appellate court later wrote: “As a result of his study, he expressed the definite opinion that the word 'yo-yo' is a Malayo-Polynesian word of Philippine origin; that the toy itself is of Oriental origin, and that the word 'yo-yo' was tied together with the toy in the Philippines and was introduced into the American language from that country.”
    Among Smith's documented references, the judges cited,  was The Sunday Tribune Magazine of March 5, 1933, entitled, "Is Yo-Yo from the Philippines," which quotes the assistant director of the Philippine National Library, as saying that “ 'yo-yo' is descriptive of the movement and sound of the toy and hence the toy is characteristically so called in Filipino languages.” The article also stated that yo-yo was a well-known term for the toy throughout the Filipino islands.
    Smith also pointed to a July 1, 1916, in the Scientific American Supplement, entitled, "Filipino Toys," which mentioned that yo-yo was a term commonly used to describe the toy. This article appeared 15 years before Duncan received his trademark.
    Duncan countered in court that the publisher of the Merriam-Webster Dictionary and the American College Dictionary have agreed to acknowledge that Duncan owned a trademark that should be capitalized “Yo-Yo.” The company also noted that since it received its trademarks in the early 1930s, the federal government had rejected all efforts for other companies to register names that included the term yo-yo.
    A major witness for Duncan was Henry Gleiss, executive vice-president of Markoa Corporation. He testified that he had done a “joint venture” with Duncan's attorneys to prepare a survey that asked “What company do you think of as I mention each of these names?" The names included such well known brands as Band Aid, Coke and Jell-O. Of the 1,445 interviewed, 630 – 43 percent – associated the trademark Yo-Yo with the Duncan company.
   DUNCAN WINS TRIAL, BUT GETS APPEALED
    Duncan won the trial. Royal appealed. On March 3, 1965, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals Seventh Circuit, based in Chicago, reversed the trial court's decision. “An exhaustive study of the record and the cases leads us to the firm conclusion that plaintiff's trademarks were improperly registered and, therefore, invalid, or in any event that they have subsequently become such by reason of the general acceptance by the public of 'yo-yo' as a descriptive name for the toy,” the judges wrote.
    They noted that when Duncan testified that he had come up with the term yo-yo on his own, “It is of more than ordinary significance that Duncan Sr. while a witness ... was not asked to explain this statement, and he did not deny that at the time his applications were being processed he had the information which he then represented to have,” adding that Flores had already used the term in a previous registration.
    The appellate judges saw that, starting in the 1950s, the Duncan company had tried to make people use the term “return top” as the generic name for the toy, but that had limited success. They pointed to trial testimony from Duncan's staff that anytime they found people using the term yo-yo as a generic, they wrote letters saying that Yo-Yo was their trademark and return top was the generic name.
    “This correspondence constitutes a two-edged sword and is of little help to plaintiff,” the judges wrote, because the Duncan claims were often met with replies, “We thought it was generic.” The final decision said: “ 'Illustrative is the response from Maxwell J. Perrotta, a patent lawyer of Providence, Rhode Island, who in a letter dated June 20, 1962 stated: ' “Yo-Yo” is in our opinion clearly a generic term by which the product is now commonly known. The public is not now aware of what a `return top'  is, but they know what a yo-yo is. They do not recognize that yo-yos originate from a single source or have any other trademark significance.' “
    SOURCES
    The 1965 ruling can be found here and also here.
    A subsequent 1967 appellate decision on damage counterclaims can be found here.