Scott 500 - I Doubt It

Until there's some in-depth study on the issue,
and recognition and differentiation between the
Full Type I and Ia, we can all expect sellers
like the one on Stamp Auction Network below
(lot 762) and numbers of them on ebay to continue
offering them as 500's... many of whom successfully
make the sale, and, no doubt-either laugh all the
way to the bank, or were just too ignorant to see
and know the difference...

http://stampauctionnetwork.com//AE/ae15439.cfm#194

Ken... nobody's looking to "corner the market" on
anything... I acknowledge you and others here on
SCF for your expertises, but denial without study
and research of a reality is not beneficial to anyone
and most certainly not of benefit to our hobby...

I am no expert, and I fully confess that... but I
do consider myself a seasoned collector, I have a
decent library, and look quite introspectively into
everything I buy and add to my collection...

Lastly, I am not a seller, nor ever intend to be one
beyond-perhaps at some point doing it privately with
other collectors after I retire...

Oh, this is too funny. The 2 cent stamps under 505 selling on ebay have intermittently a 5 cent stamp. (They look as if they have more lines over left two than over the right two as well.)

Brenda... kindly share the link with us...

Randall

Brenda, I think what you referred to earlier is the 5 cent error from plate 7942 of the #499s. From memory so anyone jump in if I'm wrong, 3 positions needed to be re-entered, and the 5 cent relief (#505) was used in error.

No doubt... or a 467...

"...but denial without study and research of a reality is not beneficial to anyone."

No one is denying anything "without study and research." In fact, the Washington Franklins have been extensively studied, and I consider Clark to be one of the leading students. Why do you think modern WF specialists don't recognize the "full type I"? Might it be their "study and research"?

...and what "study and research" did you do prior to claiming "...they are FAR MORE RARE than 500's...end of story"?

That "end of story" sounds pretty definitive to me, and something I feel no WF expert/specialist would agree with. Making such a bold (but unsupported & questionable) claim like you did is the very reason I decided to respond. Since you "fully confessed" that you're "no expert," I might humbly suggest you back down a little on those "...end of story..." statements.

BTW, you know Martin Armstrong's history, right? Hopefully he's not your sole source for this "full type I" thing...

No... I do not know his history...

What I do know is that the 2 cent WF section
of his book is correct to a *T* as I've studied
his textual and visual descriptions for every
one of them INCLUDING the Full Ty I and they are
all 100% correct... and that's irrespective of
anyone (present company included) whom claims
to refute those descriptions...

For anyone who does not know (I didn't).......

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB937352708437378435

My response to this is... so what... it's irrelevant to his 1979
W/F book... the book's correctness and his authoring credibility
stands by itself... the fact that he might have also been a shady
securities criminal has no bearing on the book...

So... rather than throwing stones at the author, debate the subject...

The fact that few others (or no others, as the case may be), have
discussed the Full Type I, doesn't make Armstrong wrong...

OJ was a murderer, and a collectibles criminal... does this mean
he wasn't a great football player?

It doesn't raise any suspicions to you that none of the great philatelists of the 20th century wrote about it or discussed it at all? That people wrote books that are still considered fundamental reference works said nothing about it? That the only person who did write about it was later arrested for fraud involving collectors?

Not at all... those same great philatelists *INSISTED* the 164
did not exist and Jay Tell proved them ALL wrong...

You make this statement as if Armstrong had something to gain
by including one solitary page on it amidst the rest...

As I previously stated... the fact that he was a securities
criminal is totally irrelevant with regards to the book...

"Not at all... those same great philatelists *INSISTED* the 164
did not exist and Jay Tell proved them ALL wrong..."

Not at all correct, since Brookman specifically states that 365,000 were printed and delivered to the stamp agent between Jan 1 and June 30, 1875. They were printed on the old National plate 21. What is not known is whether any were delivered to post offices, and that all remaining 24 cent stamps were destroyed in 1885. That total was 364,950. No one knows how many of those remainders were Continental printings.
Brookman was first published in 1947.

I will say there is much to learn. I'm open to hearing whatever views you may have. This hobby though forces us to prove these out. If you can people look at like your a genius. If you can't then they think your a little kooky.

Good point... Jay Tell was looked upon through the entire chirade as
somewhat kooky... probably today as well with his tv appearances on
'Pawn Stars'... but he came out shining with a nice commission on
the 164...

Armstrong's criminal activities aside... what's his overall philatelic
reputation... anyone know?