Rarest Stamp

In 1966 I went to the British museum in London & had a look at the Tapling collection which was on display. In case you don't know, this gentleman donated his collection to the British Museum in 1891, he had virtually everything till then barring the British Guiana 1c. The collection was worth about £24,000,000 in 2011 (Wiki).

The stamps were on display sheets in slide-out cupboards & I deliberately placed my finger on top of the glass protecting the Two Pence Blue Mauritius so that I could say that I had been about 1/8th of an inch away from this beauty.

There's stuff about copyright on the page so I won't post the pic here, but here's the link to the Library's page with the stamp about half-way down. I was THIS close to that stamp folks!

http://www.bl.uk/reshelp/findhelpre...tapling.html

The Queen's copy of this stamp came Down Under, yes, the one that George V bought, & was on display (maybe Ausipex?), & I saw that one, but it was under a glass dome with a security guard right next to it.

The rarest stamp I have ever seen in person is the United States Scott #1, #2, #3, #4. I need to get out more...lol

OH the 5¢/2¢ Washington/Franklin error.

"I suspect that if rarity were to by listed by quantity of surviving examples and not catalog value the list would be quite different.";

Art,

Yes, a bit off topic, but a great point. I have personally sold numerous items where the quantity known is less than 5, yet the prices were rarely over $5,000. The catalog prices do not reflect rarity, but rather current "market" price, and in the case of rare items, are generally supposed to represent the last true price in a real transaction (mostly public auction prices) but sometimes private treaty. And I personally do not really have a problem with that way of pricing. If you used quantities known as the basis, it would become abstract when the items don't change hands and prices would need to be artificially created, which is not good.

Unfortunately, too many collectors are captivated by the catalog prices and allow those prices to dictate their thinking ALL the time as it pertains to how much they are willing to pay for an item. More creative-thinking collectors realize that to restrict themselves to catalog prices will result in a lot of really nice material being unobtainable. I personally have never let a "catalog" price dictate my level of aggression when trying to buy a scarce/rare item. And neither do any other really serious collectors who want to build notable collections, particularly if they want to exhibit.

This is not to say that everyone in this great hobby must collect this way, because that is the beauty of stamp collecting. Everyone may choose HOW to do it, how much money to spend and what their personal comfort level is. And that's how in should be in my humble opinion!

The rarest stamps I have seen at different shows were the British Guiana magenta, and a pane of the St. Lawrence Seaway inverts. These were both seen at different CAPEX shows in Toronto over the years.

One thing I can tell you, security was heavy

Chimo

Bujutsu

Howell1018. I think that Grandma did the same thing, but a few years earlier. In my collection, she has placed the following two facsimiles, with her handwritten comments, probably from 1945 or so.

I personally saw a C3a and some of the Clay paper W-F's.

You know that dime I sent H.E. was 90% silver too, so I figure I'm owed about $2.00.

By the way, in my original post posing the question I inserted "(most expensive" because I didn't want to get responses like, "I have an 1895 Transvaal telegraph stamp in chartreuse that's unique so that would be the rarest" even though it's not in the catalog.

Now 5 people will respond, "I have that stamp!"

I have at least one of the china-clay Wash Franks. I found it in a bulk Washington/Franklin I bought once. No chartreuse telegraph stamp though! lol

I have absolutely no problem with the market place setting the value for a stamp. However, I would like to see collectors in general to start realizing the difference between rare and expensive. "How much is it worth" seems to be the first concern for a lot of collectors in regards to adding to their collection. By weight, stamps can be the most expensive commodity on earth.

Art

Well said Art.

Rare: Scott 78c (Blackish Violet 24c 1861), Grilled 24c Large Banknote, OG and Fault-Free, Centered 5c Buff, 24c Steel Blue, etc.

Valuable: C3a

In terms of rarest there are a fair number of stamps that are unique, but what about the case were only HALF the stamp is available. I have seen a reference (looong forgotten) where only half a Russian Zemstvo survives. Apparently half was affixed to the letter & half kept as a receipt. Any Russian collectors out there able to verify this?

Quote:
I have absolutely no problem with the market place setting the value for a stamp. However, I would like to see collectors in general to start realizing the difference between rare and expensive. "How much is it worth" seems to be the first concern for a lot of collectors in regards to adding to their collection. By weight, stamps can be the most expensive commodity on earth.

Art

Very well stated Art. I have noticed a lot of recent posts with a similar theme. I'm more that a little surprised by just the sheer volume of the posts but not by the content. Just an observation.

I Love Stamps, Are you aware that the China Clay paper W/F's are no longer listed in Scott? I know that I would not like to have bought one years ago and now find that they are no longer listed as a variety.

And yet they are discussed in Armstrong's book and other places. The notation in Scott leaves a lot to be desired in terms of information.