Interesting Take On Fake Stamps From 1933

http://books.google.com/books?id=_C...age&q&f=true

While searching the net, looking for the reason why airmail booklets were 1 cent more then the value of the stamps, I came across this article from Popular Science September 1933. Very interesting read on faked stamps and detection methods used in the 30's.

Scott

I really like this article! Thanks for sharing it

Brian

It's not just the airmails, but almost all the US booklets of the first half of the 20th Century carried the additional 1c charge for the booklets. It simply reflected the additional cost of manufacturing the booklet. This additional charge was dropped around the middle of the century.

A similar thing happened with US self-adhesive stamps.

After the initial Christmas self-adhesive stamp test of 1974, BEP began printing self-adhesive definitives in 1989 with the 25c eagle/shield. The face value of that pane was $4, but USPS charged $4.50. USPS dropped the additional charge on self-adhesives after that.

When they try to revive the add-on charge with the 29c eagle/shield panes/coils of 1992, the Postmaster General at that time didn't know about it initially. So they sold $4.93 face value panes for $5. A pretty nominal charge. But when the PMG found out (apparently this was done without informing him) he put a stop to it and all subsequent sales of that issue and later self-adhesives were all at face value.

Those Popular Science articles make for great reading! Not that it has to do with stamps, but advance down to the top of page 29 of that link and see the latest in a "photocopying" machine ... and to think that most all of us have one of one type or another attached to our home computer today ... now a multi-function printer ... and back in the day scanning and faxing wasn't even a consideration!

Interesting about the booklet prices.

On May 5th, Great Britain will be issuing a Prestige Booklet [Yawn, another one !] that has stamps to the face value of £9.05 but will charge £9.99 for it [More kidology.....neat coming from RM-].
That's a whopping 10 point something percent mark-up.
which is equivalent to about £15,000+.

The pathetic, lame excuse coming out of RM " The extra is to cover the cost of production of such a booklet", is wishy-washy in the extreme. They have been issuing these booklets for over 20 yaers at face...suddenly they have just woken up to the fact they can charge extra.

Get real.

Sorry, I went off track.
Oops

Londonbus1

There is also a article with instructions on how to make mounts for mint stamps on page 78.

Thanks for the info KHJ very helpful

Scott

I certainly hope no one tries this technique today -- at least not with anything remotely valuable. It would certainly damage a stamp over time compared to the modern mounts we have available today. One must remember that the magazine was issued during the Depression era when "home-made everything" was tried in order to save money (if anyone had any to begin with).

Incidentally, this post started with the question about the extra fee for a booklet of stamps in the early 20th century. Does anyone know when the post office started charging a premium for postal cards? I remember that I used to be able to buy them at face value years ago, now they want 3 cents extra for the card over the face value of the postage.

Starting in 1999, USPS tacked on 1c to the face value.

khj: Thanks for the info.

After your post, I looked this up on the USPS web site and came up with this timeline. Did we all know that "postal cards" is now a discontinued term ... and that they are now known as "stamped cards"? I never realized it until reading this link ... I guess I need to keep more up-to-date with these current trends:

http://www.usps.com/postalhistory/_...arch='postal cards'

By the way, if anyone cares, the above link is not up-to-date, as we're now in a recent postal rate increase in 2011 to 29 cents for a postal card (er, stamped card) that costs 32 cents to buy at the post office.

Thanks for the link, wt1!

Translated, it means "We're setting you up to jack up the price one more way because we are limited in how much we can jack up the postage rate." Which in fact, is what they did. The price of the card increased faster than the rate of inflation.

I just looked at the pre-stamped envelopes the USPS is currently selling. With current 44 cent "forever" postage printed on them, they are getting 10 cents extra for a WAG (water-activated gum) envelope; and 20 cents extra for a PSA (pressure sensitive adhesive) envelope, both of which have got to be several times over the rate of inflation.

The way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised if the USPS starts placing a "surcharge" on Forever postage stamps, because they use the self-stick PSA.

(Shhh...We don't want to give any USPS readers any ideas!)

Lovely article. Thank you kegsgym!

Thank you very interesting article.

WT1 don't forget the surcharge to talk to a postal clerk instead of using the automated postal center.

By the way...did anyone check out the bottom of page 89 of the above link to the 1933 Popular Science Magazine? At the very bottom is a school offering education to get a "government job" and their illustration is to be a Railway Post Office Clerk!

To play devil's advocate here, the USPS does need to compensate for its losses for things such as glue stick usage and dealers who take the cardboard priority mail envelopes to use as stiffening inserts when packaging the stamp lots they've sold.

And you do have to pay for the envelopes or postcards that you buy in a store and will ultimately affix stamps to so I don't think it unreasonable to have to have to pay for those same items that come with postage integral to their design.

I agree, however, that charging 10c or 20c for an envelope is excessive. I think I pay about 3c an envelope when I buy in bulk from Staples (I imagine the self-licking ones cost a bit more expensive).