Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
I found this quite interesting, hope you do too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytGKRiXa9d4
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Very nostalgic Rob, that was heck of a lot of watermark fluid for one stamp and like most of us at that time, and probably today, no tongs/tweezers when mounting the stamp.
Not so many stamp shops around these days and I wonder how many collectors are there really?
Login to Like
this post
Thanks for the video. The basics have not changed. Yes, it was a lot of watermark fluid and also suspect many collectors did not use tongs for every stamp. The comment about rising in value was obviously not correct.
Login to Like
this post
"The comment about rising in value was obviously not correct."
I am not going to try to convert to today's dollars or look up today's catalog values, but here is Scott Specialized catalog value in the 1955 edition (mint/used)
#1 75 / 27.50
#2 235/ 80
#573 10/ 1.25
#C15 70/ 60
Login to Like
this post
"Very nostalgic Rob, that was heck of a lot of watermark fluid for one stamp and like most of us at that time, and probably today, no tongs/tweezers when mounting the stamp.
Not so many stamp shops around these days and I wonder how many collectors are there really?"
Hi Victor
I thought the same thing about the use of that liquid and no stamp tweezers (I wonder if many improvised by using normal beauty care tweezers), and how she stuck that stamp in, was it on a hinge or did she stick it in the album wet?
There definitely isn't many stamp shops around these days, in Brisbane where I originally came from, there was an old stamp shop in the Brisbane Arcade, a family business since the 1940s, I used to go there a lot in my early 20s, they are no longer there.
In Sydney, where I have been for the past 20 years, there were two, one in the CBD and the other at Milson Point, inside the train station just under the northern section of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, it was there since the 1950s, not any more.
Although there are a couple in Western Sydney (too far to go), there is one still in the CBD, they do not have the stamps I require so I only buy from Victoria.
Login to Like
this post
"Thanks for the video. The basics have not changed. Yes, it was a lot of watermark fluid and also suspect many collectors did not use tongs for every stamp. The comment about rising in value was obviously not correct."
Hi Al
Don't mention it, I thought members would like a little bit of nostalgia; many stamps did rise considerably since 1955, but many of those stamps were pricey even then.
There have been relatively budget value stamps increasing many fold in the past 61 years; and there are scores more that are still very cheap even after 60 years.
It merely depends on the type of stamp really, and of course the condition. When you said "The comment about rising in value was obviously not correct" you were partly correct.
Login to Like
this post
Hi Carol
I have no idea what stamps those Scott numbers are referring to, if people are buying cheap stamps, which many did in the 1950s, then to say "rising in value was obviously not correct" is not far off the mark.
Rob
Login to Like
this post
Hi Rob, our nearest stamp dealers are in Winnipeg, a two and a half hour drive away and they work from home or from antique shops.
I will admit that for the majority of used stamps I do not use tweezers to mount hinges. But will use them for mint or stamps to go into mounts. I think probably the used stamps have possibly got more dirt on them than my hands, which I do scrub before working on stamps.
Guess really we should all be using cotton, archive type, gloves now.
Login to Like
this post
I am surprised that you do not use tweezers ( tongs) to mount used stamps.
I take your point about clean hands, but I find that my dexterity is improved using them. In fact I sometimes ( but not always) use one pair in each hand, and they act as (thinner) extensions to my fingers.
I have several pairs, but I find that not all have the right "grip" on the stamp - some are prone to allowing the stamp not to be held firmly, and it falls on the floor - very annoying.
Malcolm
Login to Like
this post
"I have no idea what stamps those Scott numbers are referring to, if people are buying cheap stamps, which many did in the 1950s, then to say "rising in value was obviously not correct" is not far off the mark."
I should have noted that I was referring to US stamps. I have added the 2012 Scott values alongside the 1955 values. But you re correct, many 5 cent steps are still 5 cent stamps.
#1 mint went from $75 to $6,750. Used went from $ 27.50 to $ 500
#2 mint went from $235 to $ 35.000. Used went from $ 80.00 to $1150
#573 mint went from $ 10 to $ 100. Used went from $ 1.25 to $ 10
#C15 mint went from $ 70 to $ 575 Used went from $ 60.00 to $ 600
Login to Like
this post
Malcolm, old habits die hard and I'm not likely to cause any more damage to a cheap stamp that has been through a number of previous hands. I also find it more awkward to manipulate stamps and small hinges as I have got older and arthritic wrists and finger joints do not help.
At the end of my time I doubt if my collection will be worth more than a couple of thousand when it is disposed to dealers or auction houses. Hopefully I'll be around for a few years to enjoy stampin' with my pretty bits of paper.
I'm sure all serious collectors do use tweezers all the time and so make a better job of displaying their pages with stamps looking more pristine.
Vic
ps using stock pages and vario style sheets I do always use tweezers.
Login to Like
this post
Hi Victor
The local stamp shop in the CBD is about an hour from where I live and the Western suburbs store at Blacktown is 1½ hours away. Since the attempted terrorist attack at the Blacktown railway station and the thugs that frequent that station I tend to veer away from it, pity though, they have very nice common stamps that I used to get to fill gaps (I now order them from the store, not as good as going through their collection myself).
The only used stamps I have are historical, such as the first day of issue stamps (not FDCs), of the opening in 1927 of Australia's first Federal Parliament House in Canberra (1927-1988), the stamps themselves also celebrated the opening of Parliament House, the stamps were circular date cancelled at the opening when the Duke of York (later to be King George VI) officially opened the building on behalf of his father King George V, they are scarce.
Link to an earlier post I submitted showing the Canberra stamp cancellations (3/8/2016).
https://stamporama.com/discboard/disc_main.php?action=20&id=15325#115336
That's about all there is I have in the way of used stamps; there are used stamps that are worth more than their MUH cousins, don't have any yet, but when one turns up (if one turns up), I will grab it.
I do know that many stamps that dealers have in the common arena have been handled by the former owners without tweezers, and although using tweezers is always advisable whether the stamps is used or not, I have seen dealers use their fingers.
Using a pocket hand sanitiser is advisable as it removes dirt and grease from your hands, I always use one.
I actually used to use cotton archive gloves but found they were more of a nuisance than help,
Login to Like
this post
Hi Carol
Don't know much about US stamps, though I do have some in my collection. The Scott# 2 that went from $235 to $35,000 in 61 years, that is quite a jump. The stamps mentioned here are the not so run of the mill stamps that the average collector would buy in 1955, unless they had what is known as a specialised collection, but it does show that many made quite a jump.
But the "nickel" and "dime" stamps will still cost nickels and dimes today.
Rob
Login to Like
this post
When nickel and dime stamps cost the same then they have gone down in value. The hoarding of sheets was common and now why they are plentiful and generally inexpensive.
I did not look it up but did the set of stamps she purchased happen to increase?
Login to Like
this post
Inflation adjusted prices for used #1 and #2
1955 2017
#1 $27.50 -> $246
#2 $80 -> $716
That's pretty much in line with what I paid for cert'd copies of fault-free stamps at auction, though perhaps the #2 is a little high. I think that 2012 cat prices (quoted above somewhere) are higher than can be realized today through a reputable auction house. That is, you don't have to pay $500 and $1150 for really nice four-margin used fault-free examples today.
Login to Like
this post
In 1955, min wage was $1 and the average salary was over $3K. Now, the minimum wage is $7+ and average wage is over $43k ($20+ hr). The 1955 dollar is now worth $13+.
So that $1.50 sheet of 3 cent stamps (mails 50 letters) was 1.5 hrs work. Now, 50 letters would cost $24.50 or about 3 hrs at minimum or a little more than 1 hr at average wage.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
10:49:08pm
" ... #1 mint went from $75 to $6,750. Used went from $ 27.50 to $ 500
#2 mint went from $235 to $ 35.000. Used went from $ 80.00 to $1150 ..."
To that add this
USA 1914; today's #s 1 & 2, before renumbering;
#28 $8.50 / 1.75
and
#29 $35.00 / 5.00
Login to Like
this post
I found this bit of an auction catalog inside the cover when I purchased it. A former owner paid $17.50 for it in 1953. I believe I paid $175 for it in 2016.
The good stuff will still increase in value. There is a limited supply and that supply constantly shrinks due to collections being thrown away, fires and natural events like hurricanes.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
I received a 1904 Scott stamp catalog last week that I won at auction. It does not list single stamps but sets of the world and their selling prices.
U.S. Numbers 1 and 2 sell for $3.75 used
1893 Columbians $20.00 mint
Many of the sets are missing the top values which I find curious. They must be in the
not so cheap set listings that don't appear in this catalog.
Shown below are the first two pages of listings.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
12:31:26am
Those are, I suppose truly "Cheap Sets" at the back of the book.
On page four (1904)where the actual catalog listings for #28 and #29 (Modern day #s 1 & 2)
they are cataloged at;
#28 (#1) - $7.50/0.75
and
#29 (#2) - $20.00/4.50
compared to ten years later;
1914
#28 (#1) - $8.50/1.75
and
#29 (#2) - $35.00/5.00
And just for reference the average wage (Male workers) in New York City in 1914 was $0.37 per hour.
That was before the 40 hour week became somewhat common or eight hour day and overtime required. Most jobs, or at least many jobs, required a ten hour day, limited lunch break and at least a half day on Saturday. A fifty to sixty hour work week was quite normal, so a worker was fortunate if his salary reached $20 a week.
That was when Henry Ford broke ranks with other manufacturers and paid his production line workers $5.00 a day.
Login to Like
this post
I found a 3 minute video showing stamp collecting in 1955. From frame 2:15 onwards it mentions Scott publication and a woman using a stamp gauge that looks very much like the Instanta transparent perforation gauge.
I found this quite interesting, hope you do too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytGKRiXa9d4
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Approvals
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
Very nostalgic Rob, that was heck of a lot of watermark fluid for one stamp and like most of us at that time, and probably today, no tongs/tweezers when mounting the stamp.
Not so many stamp shops around these days and I wonder how many collectors are there really?
Login to Like
this post
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
Thanks for the video. The basics have not changed. Yes, it was a lot of watermark fluid and also suspect many collectors did not use tongs for every stamp. The comment about rising in value was obviously not correct.
Login to Like
this post
12:46:39pm
Auctions - Approvals
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
"The comment about rising in value was obviously not correct."
I am not going to try to convert to today's dollars or look up today's catalog values, but here is Scott Specialized catalog value in the 1955 edition (mint/used)
#1 75 / 27.50
#2 235/ 80
#573 10/ 1.25
#C15 70/ 60
Login to Like
this post
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
"Very nostalgic Rob, that was heck of a lot of watermark fluid for one stamp and like most of us at that time, and probably today, no tongs/tweezers when mounting the stamp.
Not so many stamp shops around these days and I wonder how many collectors are there really?"
Hi Victor
I thought the same thing about the use of that liquid and no stamp tweezers (I wonder if many improvised by using normal beauty care tweezers), and how she stuck that stamp in, was it on a hinge or did she stick it in the album wet?
There definitely isn't many stamp shops around these days, in Brisbane where I originally came from, there was an old stamp shop in the Brisbane Arcade, a family business since the 1940s, I used to go there a lot in my early 20s, they are no longer there.
In Sydney, where I have been for the past 20 years, there were two, one in the CBD and the other at Milson Point, inside the train station just under the northern section of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, it was there since the 1950s, not any more.
Although there are a couple in Western Sydney (too far to go), there is one still in the CBD, they do not have the stamps I require so I only buy from Victoria.
Login to Like
this post
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
"Thanks for the video. The basics have not changed. Yes, it was a lot of watermark fluid and also suspect many collectors did not use tongs for every stamp. The comment about rising in value was obviously not correct."
Hi Al
Don't mention it, I thought members would like a little bit of nostalgia; many stamps did rise considerably since 1955, but many of those stamps were pricey even then.
There have been relatively budget value stamps increasing many fold in the past 61 years; and there are scores more that are still very cheap even after 60 years.
It merely depends on the type of stamp really, and of course the condition. When you said "The comment about rising in value was obviously not correct" you were partly correct.
Login to Like
this post
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
Hi Carol
I have no idea what stamps those Scott numbers are referring to, if people are buying cheap stamps, which many did in the 1950s, then to say "rising in value was obviously not correct" is not far off the mark.
Rob
Login to Like
this post
Approvals
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
Hi Rob, our nearest stamp dealers are in Winnipeg, a two and a half hour drive away and they work from home or from antique shops.
I will admit that for the majority of used stamps I do not use tweezers to mount hinges. But will use them for mint or stamps to go into mounts. I think probably the used stamps have possibly got more dirt on them than my hands, which I do scrub before working on stamps.
Guess really we should all be using cotton, archive type, gloves now.
Login to Like
this post
04:50:53pm
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
I am surprised that you do not use tweezers ( tongs) to mount used stamps.
I take your point about clean hands, but I find that my dexterity is improved using them. In fact I sometimes ( but not always) use one pair in each hand, and they act as (thinner) extensions to my fingers.
I have several pairs, but I find that not all have the right "grip" on the stamp - some are prone to allowing the stamp not to be held firmly, and it falls on the floor - very annoying.
Malcolm
Login to Like
this post
05:51:21pm
Auctions - Approvals
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
"I have no idea what stamps those Scott numbers are referring to, if people are buying cheap stamps, which many did in the 1950s, then to say "rising in value was obviously not correct" is not far off the mark."
I should have noted that I was referring to US stamps. I have added the 2012 Scott values alongside the 1955 values. But you re correct, many 5 cent steps are still 5 cent stamps.
#1 mint went from $75 to $6,750. Used went from $ 27.50 to $ 500
#2 mint went from $235 to $ 35.000. Used went from $ 80.00 to $1150
#573 mint went from $ 10 to $ 100. Used went from $ 1.25 to $ 10
#C15 mint went from $ 70 to $ 575 Used went from $ 60.00 to $ 600
Login to Like
this post
Approvals
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
Malcolm, old habits die hard and I'm not likely to cause any more damage to a cheap stamp that has been through a number of previous hands. I also find it more awkward to manipulate stamps and small hinges as I have got older and arthritic wrists and finger joints do not help.
At the end of my time I doubt if my collection will be worth more than a couple of thousand when it is disposed to dealers or auction houses. Hopefully I'll be around for a few years to enjoy stampin' with my pretty bits of paper.
I'm sure all serious collectors do use tweezers all the time and so make a better job of displaying their pages with stamps looking more pristine.
Vic
ps using stock pages and vario style sheets I do always use tweezers.
Login to Like
this post
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
Hi Victor
The local stamp shop in the CBD is about an hour from where I live and the Western suburbs store at Blacktown is 1½ hours away. Since the attempted terrorist attack at the Blacktown railway station and the thugs that frequent that station I tend to veer away from it, pity though, they have very nice common stamps that I used to get to fill gaps (I now order them from the store, not as good as going through their collection myself).
The only used stamps I have are historical, such as the first day of issue stamps (not FDCs), of the opening in 1927 of Australia's first Federal Parliament House in Canberra (1927-1988), the stamps themselves also celebrated the opening of Parliament House, the stamps were circular date cancelled at the opening when the Duke of York (later to be King George VI) officially opened the building on behalf of his father King George V, they are scarce.
Link to an earlier post I submitted showing the Canberra stamp cancellations (3/8/2016).
https://stamporama.com/discboard/disc_main.php?action=20&id=15325#115336
That's about all there is I have in the way of used stamps; there are used stamps that are worth more than their MUH cousins, don't have any yet, but when one turns up (if one turns up), I will grab it.
I do know that many stamps that dealers have in the common arena have been handled by the former owners without tweezers, and although using tweezers is always advisable whether the stamps is used or not, I have seen dealers use their fingers.
Using a pocket hand sanitiser is advisable as it removes dirt and grease from your hands, I always use one.
I actually used to use cotton archive gloves but found they were more of a nuisance than help,
Login to Like
this post
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
Hi Carol
Don't know much about US stamps, though I do have some in my collection. The Scott# 2 that went from $235 to $35,000 in 61 years, that is quite a jump. The stamps mentioned here are the not so run of the mill stamps that the average collector would buy in 1955, unless they had what is known as a specialised collection, but it does show that many made quite a jump.
But the "nickel" and "dime" stamps will still cost nickels and dimes today.
Rob
Login to Like
this post
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
When nickel and dime stamps cost the same then they have gone down in value. The hoarding of sheets was common and now why they are plentiful and generally inexpensive.
I did not look it up but did the set of stamps she purchased happen to increase?
Login to Like
this post
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
Inflation adjusted prices for used #1 and #2
1955 2017
#1 $27.50 -> $246
#2 $80 -> $716
That's pretty much in line with what I paid for cert'd copies of fault-free stamps at auction, though perhaps the #2 is a little high. I think that 2012 cat prices (quoted above somewhere) are higher than can be realized today through a reputable auction house. That is, you don't have to pay $500 and $1150 for really nice four-margin used fault-free examples today.
Login to Like
this post
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
In 1955, min wage was $1 and the average salary was over $3K. Now, the minimum wage is $7+ and average wage is over $43k ($20+ hr). The 1955 dollar is now worth $13+.
So that $1.50 sheet of 3 cent stamps (mails 50 letters) was 1.5 hrs work. Now, 50 letters would cost $24.50 or about 3 hrs at minimum or a little more than 1 hr at average wage.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
16 Sep 2017
10:49:08pm
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
" ... #1 mint went from $75 to $6,750. Used went from $ 27.50 to $ 500
#2 mint went from $235 to $ 35.000. Used went from $ 80.00 to $1150 ..."
To that add this
USA 1914; today's #s 1 & 2, before renumbering;
#28 $8.50 / 1.75
and
#29 $35.00 / 5.00
Login to Like
this post
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
I found this bit of an auction catalog inside the cover when I purchased it. A former owner paid $17.50 for it in 1953. I believe I paid $175 for it in 2016.
The good stuff will still increase in value. There is a limited supply and that supply constantly shrinks due to collections being thrown away, fires and natural events like hurricanes.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
I received a 1904 Scott stamp catalog last week that I won at auction. It does not list single stamps but sets of the world and their selling prices.
U.S. Numbers 1 and 2 sell for $3.75 used
1893 Columbians $20.00 mint
Many of the sets are missing the top values which I find curious. They must be in the
not so cheap set listings that don't appear in this catalog.
Shown below are the first two pages of listings.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
18 Sep 2017
12:31:26am
re: Stamp Collecting in 1955
Those are, I suppose truly "Cheap Sets" at the back of the book.
On page four (1904)where the actual catalog listings for #28 and #29 (Modern day #s 1 & 2)
they are cataloged at;
#28 (#1) - $7.50/0.75
and
#29 (#2) - $20.00/4.50
compared to ten years later;
1914
#28 (#1) - $8.50/1.75
and
#29 (#2) - $35.00/5.00
And just for reference the average wage (Male workers) in New York City in 1914 was $0.37 per hour.
That was before the 40 hour week became somewhat common or eight hour day and overtime required. Most jobs, or at least many jobs, required a ten hour day, limited lunch break and at least a half day on Saturday. A fifty to sixty hour work week was quite normal, so a worker was fortunate if his salary reached $20 a week.
That was when Henry Ford broke ranks with other manufacturers and paid his production line workers $5.00 a day.
Login to Like
this post