If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Used recent stamps worth more than mint stamps or not?
I would like to know what you think of mint & used stamps.
In Scott (USA) & Yvert & Tellier (French) catalogue both mint & used stamps have the same value, ( more recent ones from 1980 to nowadays) & in Stanley Gibbons, it is the contrary, that is recent used stamps have more value than mint (in general) Could you tell me what is your opinion about it? I am using as example Mauritius stamps, it may be different for other countries. Do you consider that used recent stamps ( from the past 30 years or so) are more valuable than mint ones or not? Are you willing to purchase used stamps at higher than what you normally accept for mint stamps for your collection? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Ingraham wrote in message ...
For ordinary stamps with better cancels, such as nicely placed corner CDS cancels, yes. Do you mean that even if the stamps don`t show the date of cancel or don`t show the full name of postoffice, but do have a clean corner cancel you would be willing to offer more than for mint stamps? Another item will all smaller countries having generally small mintage of its stamps also its used stamps will be worth more than mint stamps if it do have the proper round date cancel? Such as the Seychelles,Comoros, Trinidad & Tobago? What about stamps with larger mintage that is used in other islands, so having having a different name on its cancel, will they be worth more because of the cancel? I am talking for example French stamps which are issued in several millions of each face value, but which are also in use in other islands belonging to France, such as in Reunion island or Guadeloupe, where they use a different cancel having the name of the island where it has been used. Will such French stamps having the cancel with the name of Reunion island or Guadeloupe or other islands belonging to France be worth more in used condition than those used in France? These islands are called in French "DOT-TOM, Deparment Outremer - Territoire Outremer" I think that it is tranlated into English as "Overseas Departments-Overseas Territories" |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
From: (Joe) Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Newsgroups: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss Date: 2 Sep 2003 12:04:13 -0700 Subject: Used recent stamps worth more than mint stamps or not? Bob Ingraham wrote in message ... For ordinary stamps with better cancels, such as nicely placed corner CDS cancels, yes. Do you mean that even if the stamps don`t show the date of cancel or don`t show the full name of postoffice, but do have a clean corner cancel you would be willing to offer more than for mint stamps? Basically, yes, if I were looking for particular modern stamps of some countries, notably the U.S. and Canada and to some extent Great Britain. These countries have for many years been incredibly sloppy with regards to cancellations and cancellation policies. Efficiency has become the ruling concern, and to hell with the stamps. Managers and clerks for the most part don't understand the interest that collectors have in tidy cancellations that convey information about the mailing, to the extent that cleanly cancelled modern stamps are in the minority, and SON stamps are nearly impossible to find. If rarity is a factor in pricing, then attractively cancelled stamps should be worth more than the same stamps in mint condition, which exist in abundance.*All you need to obtain a modern mint stamp from these countries is money; all you need to obtain a nicely cancelled stamp from these countries is a lot of patience and a degree of luck. With other countries there is less difficulty. Scandinavian stamps, for example, are nearly always nicely cancelled, as are German stamps, and no doubt many others that I am not aware of. (I rarely bother with any modern stamps, except to stick them on letters; in some cases I treat them as collateral items to my WWII and early airliner/early airmail collections, and then generally I want mint stamps simply because they look better on web pages and the cancel would detract from the purpose of displaying them.) Bob |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On 1 Sep 2003 23:21:06 -0700, (Joe) wrote:
I would like to know what you think of mint & used stamps. In Scott (USA) & Yvert & Tellier (French) catalogue both mint & used stamps have the same value, ( more recent ones from 1980 to nowadays) & in Stanley Gibbons, it is the contrary, that is recent used stamps have more value than mint (in general) Could you tell me what is your opinion about it? I am using as example Mauritius stamps, it may be different for other countries. Do you consider that used recent stamps ( from the past 30 years or so) are more valuable than mint ones or not? Are you willing to purchase used stamps at higher than what you normally accept for mint stamps for your collection? Many things dictate value. Popularity of Topic and Country, numbers of stamps issued, numbers of stamps postally used, the method that the collectors of those stamps prefer them (mint or used), etc... Modern Canada are quite common used, so mint are more (at least face value for postage). Postally used stamps and covers from smaller places such as the various camps of the British Antarctic Territory or South Georgia would be scarcer than mint and command a premium by stamp dealers. Bottom line is supply and demand. Collect what you like and remember to have FUN. Blair -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Joe wrote :
................. I am talking for example French stamps which are issued in several millions of each face value, but which are also in use in other islands belonging to France, such as in Reunion island or Guadeloupe, where they use a different cancel having the name of the island where it has been used. Will such French stamps having the cancel with the name of Reunion island or Guadeloupe or other islands belonging to France be worth more in used condition than those used in France? These islands are called in French "DOT-TOM, Deparment Outremer - Territoire Outremer" I think that it is tranlated into English as "Overseas Departments-Overseas Territories" Joe, Yes it is a good translation ;-) (Just a small typo : it is DOM instead of DOT for Département d'Outre-Mer) On the value of cancelled stamps from DOM-TOM, theoretically, you are right. But I am not aware of any special demand on modern French stamps nicely cancelled in the DOM-TOM (i.e. with a readable place of cancel and a date corresponding to the period of validity of the stamp). In France, there are not so many collectors appreciating used stamps (compared to the vast majority of people *demanding* for MNH only). For those who collect used stamps, it is quite difficult to find the stamps they are missing if they insist to get a stamp with a readable date (from the period of validity). Difficult even if (or because ?) the catalog value is much less than for a MNH. All this is valid for modern stamps. Of course, for 19th century French stamps, it is a different story and the used stamps from Guadeloupe, Martinique, Reunion, ... have a much higher cat. value compared to their equivalents from France "Métropolitaine" ( = Inland France ?) HTH -- All the best, Pierre Courtiade |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
The current policy of the United States Postal Service is to issue
"mailstream stamps" and "collectors' stamps". 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. I now get more 30- and 40- year old U.S. commerative on mail (from businesses purchasing discount postage) than present-day ones. "Joe" wrote in message om... I would like to know what you think of mint & used stamps. In Scott (USA) & Yvert & Tellier (French) catalogue both mint & used stamps have the same value, ( more recent ones from 1980 to nowadays) & in Stanley Gibbons, it is the contrary, that is recent used stamps have more value than mint (in general) Could you tell me what is your opinion about it? I am using as example Mauritius stamps, it may be different for other countries. Do you consider that used recent stamps ( from the past 30 years or so) are more valuable than mint ones or not? Are you willing to purchase used stamps at higher than what you normally accept for mint stamps for your collection? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: 390 Different Mint + Factory SETS 1981 to 2003! | SMCCI | Baseball | 0 | September 8th 03 08:29 PM |
FS: 408 Different Mint + Factory SETS 1981 to 2003! | SMCCI | Baseball | 0 | August 2nd 03 01:39 AM |
FS: 403 Different Mint + Factory SETS 1981 to 2003! | SMCCI | Baseball | 0 | July 30th 03 02:40 AM |
FS: 406 Different Mint + Factory SETS 1981 to 2003! | SMCCI | Baseball | 0 | July 14th 03 01:16 AM |
FS: 406 Different Mint + Factory SETS 1981 to 2003! | SMCCI | Baseball | 0 | July 12th 03 04:33 PM |