Circus Souvenir Sheet Selvage Error

The latest issue of Linn's is reporting that Mystic Stamp Company has discovered a selvage error in the Circus a Souvenir sheet.




Scott says they will be assigning a minor catalog number to this variety.

Since when does an error in the SELVAGE of a stamp require a different catalog number?

Since Mystic and Scott sleep in the same bed. no wonder Mystic use scott # on their online catalog

Has Scott indicated they are assigning a major catalog number to the regular sheet? I thought they still hadn't decided whether to list it or not, but I could have missed it if it changed. Anyway, I assume the Scott# would be assigned to the sheetlet as a whole, with each stamp therein being a lowercase a or b. Since the number is for the sheet and not the stamps themselves, any variation on the sheet would qualify as a collectible variety. The error would probably get a lowercase c, would be my guess. I could be off base, but that logic would make sense to me.

We have two threads on this subject. Here's a link to the previous one:

https://goscf.com/t/42142

As to the matter of Scott numbers, Linn's Stamp News has confirmed that:

My first inclination is to say "Never"! At least, I can't recall any such occurrence in the past. Are there any souvenir sheets in existence where selvage errors have occurred? It would seem to make no sense. But ... this particular souvenir sheet has no die-cuts. One could, I suppose, argue that the entire souvenir sheet is likely to be used as a single "piece of postage", up to the die-cuts at the sheet border. This would include the area with the missing "gold". So I can see that they might very well decide to assign this a minor number. What would Scott have done if there had been an error in some of the Lady Bird Johnson souvenir sheets? Would the answer be different based on the presence or lack of die-cuts? When there are no die-cuts/perforations, where does the "postage" end? I, of course, have no answer.

Well, since there is a version of the sheet with die-cuts, I would tend to think the stamp ends where the die-cuts end on the cut sheet.

The answer to this may be a bit more complicated. Do you think of a souvenir sheet as individual stamps with selvage? I don't. The selvage on a souvenir sheet is an integral part of the item, especially when it is part of a "tour de force" concoction of intaglio, offset, and letterpress printing with a die cut border. Also, the production of the press sheet produced many more of the imperforate sheets than the die cut yearbook sheets. So, it is really designed to stay together as a sheet. The die cuts on the yearbook sheets seem like an afterthought, or marketing scheme to create a variety by which to sell the yearbooks.

Are there any other US Souvenir Sheet errors known to exist?

There were numerous errors in the 1976 Bicentennial Souvenir Sheets (Scott 1686-1689) mostly involving missing denominations and "USA" text, as well as tagging errors, but all were within the stamps themselves. In any event, they all received minor letter suffix designations in the Scott Catalog.

In the end, the Scott Catalogue is owned and printed by Amos. They can put whatever they like in it. We're just the users of the catalog. To be honest, if you don't like it, Stanley Gibbons and Michel both makes fine catalogues that can be switched to.

Now looking at Scott's listing policy, maybe they should have created a separate number stream starting with a letter (perhaps G, for "Gouge the consumer") to enumerate these stamps and give them catalogue numbers.

Oh MY! But isn't that kinda where the US poastage theme is heading anyway.
USPS is in the red! Gotta make as many ways as possible t get people to buy stamps.
(I bet they wish they had control over email!)

see 2875b

Where did you come up with Scott 2875b? It is not listed in my 2013 Scott Specialized Catalog. Was it in the 2014 or 2015 edition?

My 2014 Scott has no entry for 2875b. But I would assume that you are referring to the 1994 BEP Souvenir Sheet with a double transfer in the selvage lettering. I had forgotten about this issue. But it does make a pertinent statement ... if the error is deemed collectable, the fact that it lies in the selvage rather than the stamps is probably moot. Whether it has its own number does not matter as it is listed & has a catalogue value.

This explains 2875b:




http://www.linns.com/news/us-stamps...istered-mail

Thanks wt1! Interesting. The BEP SS with supposed double transfer was listed without a separate number in my 2014 Scott specialized. And 2875b does not appear on the 2015 Changes page (I photocopied this at my public library). Will have to check the library copy on my next visit to see if the number is present.