1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
The US government reissues (many more than #3 and 4. Were added to the Scott catalogue many moons ago at the insistence of some dealers.
At one point, Scott listened to the same questions that you asked that was raised by many collectors. In response, Scott agreed, and somewhere in the late 1980s (I believe, or early 1990s), Scott removed the reissues from the main listings. The were retained, but put in the back of the US Specialized Catalogue as reissues.
Dealers screamed over the change in the catalogue listings and claimed that the value of the stamps now removed from the main listings plummeted, and that the dealers had invested much money in obtaining such items for their stock. Also, they claimed that collectors had paid good sums of money to add such stamps to their collection, and that collectors would lose much value in those stamps.
Whether true or not, Scott capitulated, and returned the reissues to their former places in the main catalogue listings.
Login to Like
this post
It just show the power of a catalog listing.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
and to whom Scott caters
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
I still remember back in 1988 when Scott revalued their listings to supposedly more market priced/. Some dealers refused to use the new catalogs.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
you're right Al; it was just as i was re-entering the hobby and the contortions some would use to explain their pricing.....
Login to Like
this post
One of my peeves is that specialists can lobby to get a Washington Franklin on new paper or some plate scratch to be a major catalog number that may take an expert to determine (all the WF types) yet do not elevate many modern varieties (paper differences, perforation holes, tagging, microprint, etc) to major numbers. It is a double standard.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
I agree, Al.
A good case in point is when the USPS started issuing the imperf stamps. Scott said only a note with no catalogue number. Mystic cornered the market on them, and then lobbied Scott to add a minor listing for them, which was done.
Login to Like
this post
I agree about 3 & 4, thus I will never buy them for my collection. I do have nice 1 & 2 covers in my collection.
For much of the early US Nineteenth Century stamps, there are listed catalog numbers of minor variations, some that are one stamp of a sheet of the lesser value stamp. I have no interest in these either.
Login to Like
this post
I'm glad my album leaves them out because I have little, or no, interest in them. I keep them on my want list for completeness but I would only buy them if the price were very low. I really don't agree with them being put in catalogs since they were never intended to be used as postage. Does anyone have them so they could post a scan next to #1 and #2?
Login to Like
this post
I saw that someone was offering #3 on Hipstamp and I'm wondering why these stamps are even listed in catalogs. They were not meant to be used postally and didn't even have gum. Why bother to consider them as "postage" stamps at all? I know it's been done with other "stamps" as well. I spent MUCH money for BC #1 which seems to fall into the same category - no gum and has never been found used. I always assumed that such material, if not considered to be of postal use , was not a "postage" stamp and should be considered to be a Cinderella. Am I totally out to lunch on this? My Canada album does show BC#1 but my US album leaves out #2 - #6, but I think that's probably because of price.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: A question about US#3 and 4
The US government reissues (many more than #3 and 4. Were added to the Scott catalogue many moons ago at the insistence of some dealers.
At one point, Scott listened to the same questions that you asked that was raised by many collectors. In response, Scott agreed, and somewhere in the late 1980s (I believe, or early 1990s), Scott removed the reissues from the main listings. The were retained, but put in the back of the US Specialized Catalogue as reissues.
Dealers screamed over the change in the catalogue listings and claimed that the value of the stamps now removed from the main listings plummeted, and that the dealers had invested much money in obtaining such items for their stock. Also, they claimed that collectors had paid good sums of money to add such stamps to their collection, and that collectors would lose much value in those stamps.
Whether true or not, Scott capitulated, and returned the reissues to their former places in the main catalogue listings.
Login to Like
this post
re: A question about US#3 and 4
It just show the power of a catalog listing.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: A question about US#3 and 4
and to whom Scott caters
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: A question about US#3 and 4
I still remember back in 1988 when Scott revalued their listings to supposedly more market priced/. Some dealers refused to use the new catalogs.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: A question about US#3 and 4
you're right Al; it was just as i was re-entering the hobby and the contortions some would use to explain their pricing.....
Login to Like
this post
re: A question about US#3 and 4
One of my peeves is that specialists can lobby to get a Washington Franklin on new paper or some plate scratch to be a major catalog number that may take an expert to determine (all the WF types) yet do not elevate many modern varieties (paper differences, perforation holes, tagging, microprint, etc) to major numbers. It is a double standard.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: A question about US#3 and 4
I agree, Al.
A good case in point is when the USPS started issuing the imperf stamps. Scott said only a note with no catalogue number. Mystic cornered the market on them, and then lobbied Scott to add a minor listing for them, which was done.
Login to Like
this post
re: A question about US#3 and 4
I agree about 3 & 4, thus I will never buy them for my collection. I do have nice 1 & 2 covers in my collection.
For much of the early US Nineteenth Century stamps, there are listed catalog numbers of minor variations, some that are one stamp of a sheet of the lesser value stamp. I have no interest in these either.
Login to Like
this post
re: A question about US#3 and 4
I'm glad my album leaves them out because I have little, or no, interest in them. I keep them on my want list for completeness but I would only buy them if the price were very low. I really don't agree with them being put in catalogs since they were never intended to be used as postage. Does anyone have them so they could post a scan next to #1 and #2?
Login to Like
this post