Used recent stamps worth more than mint stamps or not?

On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 08:13:56 -0400, "John O'Brien"
wrote:

The current policy of the United States Postal Service is to issue
"mailstream stamps" and "collectors' stamps".

Yup. We've been discussing that for a few years here.

I believe that the collectors' stamps in postally used condition will be
more valuable to future collectors than their unused counterparts.
particularly since no one knows the long term effect of the self-stick
adhesives now being used.

This "may" help bring about the downfall of MNH fanaticism so
prevalent in "chic" collectors out there. (Excuse me while I puke.)
The snobbery is ever prevelant in many of these types.

I now get more 30- and 40- year old U.S. commerative on mail (from
businesses purchasing discount postage) than present-day ones.

And I'll continue to use up my old postage, where applicable. Why?
So USPS won't keep on getting present benefits. This way we can see
them whine and moan all they want about selling collector's items,
sponsoring race teams and all that when their main task is to provide
a service of delivering the mail.

Notice the latest Linns? Mentioning about one of the high muck-mucks
taking advantage of USPS and then resigns? Gotta wonder if our past
debates were pretty much on the money why there's no pork left in
USPS' barrel...

Tracy Barber

Tracy Barber wrote:
On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 08:13:56 -0400, "John O'Brien"
wrote:


The current policy of the United States Postal Service is to issue
"mailstream stamps" and "collectors' stamps".


Yup. We've been discussing that for a few years here.


I believe that the collectors' stamps in postally used condition will be
more valuable to future collectors than their unused counterparts.
particularly since no one knows the long term effect of the self-stick
adhesives now being used.


This "may" help bring about the downfall of MNH fanaticism so
prevalent in "chic" collectors out there. (Excuse me while I puke.)
The snobbery is ever prevelant in many of these types.


I now get more 30- and 40- year old U.S. commerative on mail (from
businesses purchasing discount postage) than present-day ones.


And I'll continue to use up my old postage, where applicable. Why?
So USPS won't keep on getting present benefits. This way we can see
them whine and moan all they want about selling collector's items,
sponsoring race teams and all that when their main task is to provide
a service of delivering the mail.

Notice the latest Linns? Mentioning about one of the high muck-mucks
taking advantage of USPS and then resigns? Gotta wonder if our past
debates were pretty much on the money why there's no pork left in
USPS' barrel...

I use older stamps when paying bills and such, but current
commemoratives, often these "collectors' stamps", when sending mail to
fellow collectors.

= Eric

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 07:01:45 -0700, Eric Bustad
wrote:

Tracy Barber wrote:
On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 08:13:56 -0400, "John O'Brien"
wrote:


The current policy of the United States Postal Service is to issue
"mailstream stamps" and "collectors' stamps".


Yup. We've been discussing that for a few years here.


I believe that the collectors' stamps in postally used condition will be
more valuable to future collectors than their unused counterparts.
particularly since no one knows the long term effect of the self-stick
adhesives now being used.


This "may" help bring about the downfall of MNH fanaticism so
prevalent in "chic" collectors out there. (Excuse me while I puke.)
The snobbery is ever prevelant in many of these types.


I now get more 30- and 40- year old U.S. commerative on mail (from
businesses purchasing discount postage) than present-day ones.


And I'll continue to use up my old postage, where applicable. Why?
So USPS won't keep on getting present benefits. This way we can see
them whine and moan all they want about selling collector's items,
sponsoring race teams and all that when their main task is to provide
a service of delivering the mail.

Notice the latest Linns? Mentioning about one of the high muck-mucks
taking advantage of USPS and then resigns? Gotta wonder if our past
debates were pretty much on the money why there's no pork left in
USPS' barrel...

I use older stamps when paying bills and such, but current
commemoratives, often these "collectors' stamps", when sending mail to
fellow collectors.

That's cool - we're still cutting down on the amount of "freebies" the
USPS is getting. :^)

Of course, when we do this, they complain... They want more money...
want to raise the rates... more people going "postal"... you name
it!

A vicious cycle - around and around. USPS made their bed, I sure
wished they'd sleep in it as well.

Tracy Barber

Blair wrote:
Modern Canada are quite common used, so mint are more
(at least face value for postage).

I suppose that is correct, Blair, but the vast bulk of them have been pretty
much ruined, in my opinion, by terrible cancels, usually of the wavy-line
variety, which I just hate and won't have in an album (unless, as I said
before, they are on cover.)

My original statement still stands: a common used modern stamp with an
attractive cancel is worth more to me than for a mint copy, assuming I
wanted the stamp in the first place, which is quite unlikely. Well cancelled
stamps may not be highly valued now, but I think they will be in the future,
if the law of supply and demand applies and assuming that used stamps with
readable cancels begin to be recognized by more collectors as artifacts
worth collecting.

Bob

-------
The brain-workers and manual workers of today need a hobby ‹ some quiet
pursuit of perennial interest and charm to smooth their journey through a
none-too-easy world. ‹ The Honourable J.C. Elliott, Postmaster General of
Canada, referring to philately in foreword to the 1938 Annual Review of the
British Columbia Philatelic Society
-------

On 2 Sep 2003 11:46:36 -0700, (Joe) wrote:

Lotus what do you mean by :-

This happens quite often for modern Mauritian stamps, as certain
values are produced in much smaller quantities than the internal value
rate (usually the first stamp of each series),


Do you mean that the lowest face value of Mauritius stamps in a set is
worth more in used condition than the actual face value in mint
condition because the mintage is lower than other larger countries
abroad?
Even though Mauritius Postoffice issues less in quantity than most
other larger countries, it`s lowest face value of commemorative stamps
is still between 500 000 to 2 000 000, for definitive stamps the
quantity will probably be higher.

Not the lowest face value of a commemorative set, as that is usually
the current internal rate (one rupee at the moment). Usually the
other three stamps of a four stamp set are issued in MUCH smaller
quantities, and you'll notice that a lot of these have higher sed
values.

Lotus

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:46:31 +0400, Lotus wrote:

On 2 Sep 2003 11:46:36 -0700, (Joe) wrote:

Lotus what do you mean by :-

This happens quite often for modern Mauritian stamps, as certain
values are produced in much smaller quantities than the internal value
rate (usually the first stamp of each series),


Do you mean that the lowest face value of Mauritius stamps in a set is
worth more in used condition than the actual face value in mint
condition because the mintage is lower than other larger countries
abroad?
Even though Mauritius Postoffice issues less in quantity than most
other larger countries, it`s lowest face value of commemorative stamps
is still between 500 000 to 2 000 000, for definitive stamps the
quantity will probably be higher.

Not the lowest face value of a commemorative set, as that is usually
the current internal rate (one rupee at the moment). Usually the
other three stamps of a four stamp set are issued in MUCH smaller
quantities, and you'll notice that a lot of these have higher sed
values.

I have a friend in Mauritius, with whom I haven't spoken to in a
while, but many Mauritius used stamps are worth more than many, many
other countries out there. If not mistaken, they have somewhat of a
conservative issuing policy, like you stated.

Tracy Barber

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:37:42 GMT, (Tracy
Barber) wrote:



I have a friend in Mauritius, with whom I haven't spoken to in a
while, but many Mauritius used stamps are worth more than many, many
other countries out there. If not mistaken, they have somewhat of a
conservative issuing policy, like you stated.


Yes, only four or five sets a year, and no US-oriented commercial
(Disney, etc) sets like many other African countries.

Lotus

On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 19:00:22 +0400, Lotus wrote:

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:37:42 GMT, (Tracy
Barber) wrote:



I have a friend in Mauritius, with whom I haven't spoken to in a
while, but many Mauritius used stamps are worth more than many, many
other countries out there. If not mistaken, they have somewhat of a
conservative issuing policy, like you stated.


Yes, only four or five sets a year, and no US-oriented commercial
(Disney, etc) sets like many other African countries.

I thought so... Rememebr, now - Disney is also in Europe. :^)

Tracy Barber

Way back in 1939 when Fred Small the Aust investor who eventually
purchased the one cent black on magenta, indicated his desire to
Finbar Kenny the then manager of US Macey's Stamp dept. Mauritius was
even then high on the investment list, having been a hedge against
inflation purchased by Caspary, Liechtenstein, and others.

In a brilliant coup, Kenny decided to buy the 1856 1c magenta, along with
two other Brit Guiana collections, which were then at reasonable,
but not distressed prices.

What great advice that turned out to be!

(ack: from an old copy of "The Philatelist" UK.)



| I have a friend in Mauritius, with whom I haven't spoken to in a
| while, but many Mauritius used stamps are worth more than many, many
| other countries out there. If not mistaken, they have somewhat of a
| conservative issuing policy, like you stated.