Self Adhesive Vs. Lick-And-Stick Stamps

Which do you prefer, and why?

I did not vote, but as I see the results are a 50/50 split, I'd be on teetering on both sides of the issue as well.

Seeing that you asked "why", I feel compelled to make these comments.

From a non-philatelic point of view, self-stick stamps are the greatest thing to come out of the post office since use of postage stamps began. They are more sanitary, more easy to store and very easy to access when you need them, etc.

However, as a fellow stamp collector, I must lament the virtual end of the lick-and-stick stamps for the following reasons:

1. No one up to this day knows how a pressure-sensitive stamp will hold up over the long term. If we are indeed saving our stamps for the next generation, are they going to even have anything to treasure if the adhesive decays over time?

2. The USPS is promoting a "Go Green" initiative and it has already been stated in another post that it is not "Going Green" to be using self-stick stamps. Water activated stamps are much more "Green".

3. The USPS is also promoting a recycle value to stamps and postal stationery items, suggesting that they are "Cradle to Cradle" certified which in essence means they are biodegradable over time and will not contribute in any significant way to the waste we all generate. No one has yet been able to tell me (and the USPS did not answer an inquiry I made on the question) as to what that all means in terms of a collectible. If these pieces are designed to biodegrade over time, what's the point in collecting them?

4. The introduction of self stick stamps also results in the loss of specialty collections, such as plate block collecting or coil pair collecting, etc., as we used to know it. One cannot affix a block or pair or plate block of stamps to a cover anymore, as they are all die cut.

5. What self stick stamps have resulted in are just too many varieties of the same stamp. The printing is being contracted out to third parties, so we not only have panes and coils of the same stamp generated by outside vendors but different die cuts in the perfs, different color varieties, reprints (of regular issues) with different years printed on the stamp, etc., each being assigned it's own catalog number, which makes for collecting an entire series of stamps not only difficult, but needlessly expensive.

I'm sure others can add to my list, but since you asked for an explanation as to "why", those are my thoughts on the subject.

I agree with the above statement as I couldn't have said it better myself. I stopped collecting the newer ones after the early 80's and after that ONLY mint sheets, souvenirs and vignettes.

I agree as well and well put. I stopped collecting new issues in 2000, I limited myself to PNC and then stopped that in 2006. However, I didn't stop with the new issues because of the self adhesive stamps. I quit collecting the new issues because of the number of new issues coming out each year and decided to put my $$ on the older stamps. Consequently, I have managed to fill some holes in my coils and line pair collection, started collecting the Hawaiian issues and filled many gaps of the classics. Not to mention my U.S. Revenues, covers, exposition tickets, books and so on.

I also agree with all the points raised by wt1.
I think it will affect collecting in a very negative way.

So now if the stamp paper is biodegradable, what happens?
One day we check our collection & find a bunch
of empty spaces where stamps used to be.
Will it be messy?

BTW I can't seem to be able to vote.

Lithograving - I have found if you check the results first you will not be able to vote, maybe that's what you did? I have done it a couple of times oops

Simple, there are stamps and there are stickers.

Hmm, funny how when the USPS started to switch to stickers they slowly went from being in the black to the red. Coincident I think not.

Without a doubt water activated. Makes it's so much easier to remove from paper. I'm sure that's the number one reason most of us like water activated.

LICK

Hi stampgal
Yes that's exactly what I did.

I can't stand collecting self-adhesives. While it wasn't the reason I stopped collecting new issues after 1993 (that was the rape of the collector by the USPS), I'm not sad that I don't have to put up with the stickers in my albums. The few that were released before that time are bad enough. I'm just not interested in non-gummed stamps, period.

As a collector, lick and stick stamps are the only way to go. As a user of the postal system, I can see where self adhesive stamps are favoured by many consumers.

Like some other collectors, I don't collect self stick stamps except for Canada which come in the Quarterly packs that I buy from Canada Post.

I personally voted for lick & stick. They have a real stamp "feel", not like worthless stickers. They are FAR easier to soak off as well. As for usability, self adhesives are a bit better, but I swear sometimes the print quality isn't as good as on regular paper (not sure of there is actually a difference in paper stock).

I have noticed that many other postal services still offer their stamps in water activated form. Great Britain pops into mind...

I'm old fashioned, I like the linked stamps. Besides they a much easier to soak off.