Stamp Community Family of Web Sites
Thousands of stamps, consistently graded, competitively priced and hundreds of in-depth blog posts to read
Stamp Community Forum
 
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some stamps?
Our stamp forum is completely free! Register Now!

Order Of Stamps Relative To Date In Scott Numbering System

 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 9 / Views: 393Next Topic  
Valued Member
Learn More...

United States
69 Posts
Posted 09/28/2021   8:47 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this topic Add serf_tide to your friends list Get a Link to this Message
This is off the wall, but why are the Scott #s sometimes out of order relative to the date that the stamp was released? Here is an example using Airmail stamps c80 and c81.


Send note to Staff

Pillar Of The Community
United States
7645 Posts
Posted 09/28/2021   9:01 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Petert4522 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
That is especially the case if it is a long drawn out issue. Personally I wish Scott had done this with the Transportation Series, instead of creating four different groups.


Peter
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
327 Posts
Posted 09/28/2021   10:41 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add classic_paper to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
From Scott:

Quote:
Although the Scott catalogue usually lists stamps in chronological order by date of issue, there are exceptions. When a country has issued a set of stamps over a period of time, those stamps within the set are kept together without regard to date of issue. This follows the normal collecting approach of keeping stamps in their natural sets.

In this case, Scott grouped the stamps for number continuity, but numbered the stamps in value order, not chronologically. Most catalogs do this to some degree.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by classic_paper - 09/29/2021 12:33 pm
Pillar Of The Community
3800 Posts
Posted 09/29/2021   12:17 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add John Becker to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Scott does indeed like to put "sets" in denomination order. If cataloged in issue sequence. the first U.S. airmail is C3, then C2, then C1. Too bad they didn't number these three in issuance order.

Conversely, who would want the 1/2 cent Ben Franklin Prexie listed between Martha Washington and John Adams?

For the transportation coils: Their issue dates span from 1981 to 1995 across 6 rate periods. It would make more sense to have 6 groups of catalog numbers corresponding to each of the 6 rate periods.

Catalog editing is surely a thankless job.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
3147 Posts
Posted 09/29/2021   06:26 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add angore to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
As noted, Scott numbering often seems tied to how they present in their album and usually have issues in demonization order for presentation.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Al
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
849 Posts
Posted 09/29/2021   10:07 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rustyc to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
...and usually have issues in demonization order for presentation.


Scary!
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by rustyc - 09/29/2021 10:09 am
Valued Member
United States
498 Posts
Posted 09/29/2021   12:11 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add jconey to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Scott's numbering system has been the de-facto standard for so long, at least with US collectors. There are number of glaring issues with it and the catalogs, some legit complaints, some are insignificant. The cost benefit does not play out well for attempting a major change and would never satisfy everyone. I have my own opinions, even so, I use the Scott's numbering in my inventory, and album pages but order the items on pages as I see fit, which is among the reasons I started making my own.

This subject can get deep fast.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by jconey - 09/29/2021 12:11 pm
Bedrock Of The Community
Learn More...
Australia
33024 Posts
Posted 09/29/2021   11:36 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rod222 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
Catalog editing is surely a thankless job.


Amen to that.
I consider those at Amos do a cracking job,
Keep it up boys and girls!
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
143 Posts
Posted 09/30/2021   07:01 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add APS-ISWSC Member to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
It's a no win deal; if they put in order by release date they may later prove to be out of denomination order and if they correct the issue means changing already-released Sc numbers. If they leave blank numbers foe future issues to keep in denomination order there will be numbers with no stamp. And, if they put in denomination order, later after all issues, they will be both delayed and out of release date order. The conflicts here are probably what drives the (capital) A, B, C Sc numbers. You can't please everybody simultaneously.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
6763 Posts
Posted 09/30/2021   07:34 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rogdcam to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
An excellent previous discussion of this:

http://goscf.com/t/63803
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
  Previous TopicReplies: 9 / Views: 393Next Topic  
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.


Go to Top of Page
Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Stamp Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2021 Stamp Community Family - All rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Stamp Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use    Advertise Here
Stamp Community Forum © 2007 - 2021 Stamp Community Forums
It took 0.16 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05