Difference Between Scott And Stanley Gibbons

I have always used the Scott catalog, but I am wondering what is the difference between it and the Stanley gibbons? There must be more to it than just a different numbering system. Is one better than the other or is it like everything else just personal preference?

Personal preference .......both have information the other doesn't have . Both sit on my bookshelf

I think there is no simple answer to your question as it depends on what you collect, how you collect, and where you source your stamps from.

I am not familiar with Scott. Scott is not used much in Europe. I collect GB and Ireland, Netherlands, and some Spain. Relating to Great Britain (and to some extend Commonwealth) on this forum, I have not been impressed by Scott references.

Stanley Gibbons being from Great Britain tends to be the standard for Great Britain and Commonwealth. I would not think of using it for my home country (NVPH), or Spain (EDIFIL). This requires some nuance, as Canada, Australia, and South Africa have their own specialised catalogues. I do get the impression the South African one is derived from Stanley Gibbons. If you collect all world, you might prefer a worldwide catalogue and not national specialised catalogues.

The biggest difference is that as the standard for an area, most people will use it. In the case of the Barbados 6d chrome-yellow, I think someone using Scott would not know which stamp it is as I believe Scott lists it as orange. This makes it difficult to communicate when only quoting catalogue numbers (that is a two-way street).

Your question has one problem.
Taking my own interest in Great Britain, Stanley Gibbons publishes:
- Collect British Stamps
- Commonwealth and Empire Stamps
- Great Britain Concise
- Stanley Gibbons Great Britain Specialised Catalogue.
I am not sure if Stanley Gibbons 'Stamps of the World' lists Great Britain or builds on the Commonwealth catalogue.
So, what Scott and what Stanley Gibbons catalogues are you referring to.

If you collect according to a Scott album and the Scott catalogue, that may be the preferable catalogue.
If you want to have a specialised Great Britain or Commonwealth collection, you might want to look at the Stanley Gibbons catalogues.
In Europe, albums are mostly based on Michel, Yvert & Tellier, or Stanley Gibbons catalogues.

As someone stated, most US dealers use Scott for Great Britain and Commonwealth. If that is where you buy your stamps, you might prefer that. If you buy mainly from German dealers, you might prefer Michel. If you buy worldwide, then most people will quote Stanley Gibbons for those areas. Similarly, collecting US stamps even in Europe, you might prefer Scott.

If I would have collected all world, I might have used Michel. In part because it is one of the better ones. But also, because when I started to collect Scott was not even known here and would not have been an alternative. Now, I would still choose Michel over Scott, but that is a regional preference.

Stamps of the World includes all countries, but it's simplified, i.e. it ignores shades, perfs etc. Gibbons's area catalogues are a good bet if you want a catalogue in English - and, to take the example of France, Gibbons gives better information on some aspects, e.g. issue dates than Yvert (although Maury is the best French catalogue).

Want339- if you are collecting general material such as normal sets and singles, Scott is a decent worldwide catalog. It's also the standard for US collecting at any level.

As others have mentioned, if you collect in depth and want the best available info to consult with for foreign varieties such as paper differences, perfs, shades, watermarks, printings, overprints, and errors/flaws, other catalogs will be stronger than Scott. Gibbons strength is definitely Commonwealth.

Scott's full catalog is updated annualy, as some level, as is Gibbons for for 1840-1970 Commonwealth stamps. Gibbons listings for other parts of the world are periodic, not annually.

Since you are based in the US and are likely to be buying from mainly US sellers (making a key assumption here since we don't know what you collect), Scott's will be the catalog that allows you to best communicate with US sellers.

The OP's question was about Scott and SG, and that's where I'll hone (thank you Belafonte) the question.
I saw two main levels of these catalogs: The basic/standard/concise/simplified catalogs, and the specialized catalogs.
Within each of these two levels, what differences are likely to be found in them?
For example, at the basic level, does one add BOB category stamps that the other doesn't?
I have "Scot Standard" and "SG simplified" catalogs from 2013-2014. I assume they are at the same level. Scott includes WMK and SG doesn't, so judging by this alone, Scott is more useful.

Rob Roy- SG Simplified only provides info on face-different stamps. There are no listings for perf, watermark, shade, and most if not all other varieties. Scott's attempts to list most (but not all) perf and watermark varieties but is weak on things like shades.

I think that this kind of question tends to elicit responses influenced by the catalog collectors first relied upon when they began the hobby.

In my opinion, purchasing materials from a specific region on Earth often leads to their catalog numbers being listed according to the primary publisher's system in that particular area. This might makes owning that particular catalog useful on that basis alone.
Don

shermae - from your answer, maybe I should have asked first how many levels each catalog offer.
I have the SG simplified, someone told me he used SG concise, so before comparing, I should know how many types each of them published.
Maybe comparing Scot Standard to SG simplified was wrong and I needed to look for either Scot simplified or SG Standard.

Don, I think I had a rather cosmopolitan education in that way, my first catalogs were two online catalogs, stampworld being the more novice-friendly, and I obtained the two SG/Scott catalogs at the same time, Scott being the more informative one.
In general, I believe that SG/Scott are the easiest choice for collectors that English isn't their first language, unless their first language is French or German.

Rob Roy unless I am mistaken, The Gibbons Concise is only a catalog of GB Stamps.

Don- no doubt growing up in a world of Scott users heavily influenced me. I only took up with Gibbons when my intensifying interest in KGVI and earlier QE2 varieties made it necessary.

@ Rob Roy

Could the Stanley Gibbons Simplified Catalogue be their 'Stamps of the World' catalogue?

The Concise Catalogue's full name is 'Great Britain Concise.' It is a reasonably specialised catalogue of the stamps of the United Kingdom. It includes the stamps of Guernsey, Jersey, and the Isle of Man before those gained postal independence. Those were either issued by the GPO and valid everywhere in the UK, or German occupation issues.

Most people collecting GB in any other way than one of each design, value and primary colour use that catalogue. If you want to fill the SG one-country album, which is the DAVO one, you can do with 'Collect British Stamps.'

Stanley Gibbons has a whole range of catalogues for individual countries or regions that are more detailed than 'Stamps of the World.' But those will cost you a lot.

The 'Specialised' catalogues are purely for the UK. Not only are they more comprehensive than any other catalogue for GB and (Northern) Ireland; they also provide a lot of background information. In threads about Machins, you may have read about the 'Connoisseur Catalogue' and 'Deegam Handbook.' The former, I do not expect to be updated anymore. The Deegam Handbook will be updated, and a new King Charles III Handbook will appear. These are even more specialised than the SG Specialised. Personally, I do not use Stanley Gibbons for Machin stamps as even the 'Specialised' is very basic.

For the British Empire and Commonwealth, Stanley Gibbons had what they refer to as the 'Part One' or 'Commonwealth Stamp Catalogue' they now appear to have split in territories. Some 'bigger' Commonwealth countries have their own catalogues. They still have a 'Commonwealth and British Empire Stamps Catalogue 1840-1970.' And they have a 'King George VI Stamp Catalogue.'

So, one question for a choice of catalogue is "What do you collect?"

@ NSK
Thank you again for the detailed explanation.
You guessed it, the full name of my PDF version is "SG Stamps of the World Simplified Catalogue".
The other is "Scott Standard Postage stamp Catalogue".
I guess the original question was, regarding Scott and SG, was: Given the same level of catalogue, what will be the difference? I'll venture further and assume he was referring to world catalogues.

Regarding "GB and Ireland", a recent album that I'm waiting to arrive, has a bit of an anecdote: The former owner seems to have decided that he doesn't accept the separation between GB and Ireland, so they were arranged together, as one country.

I, still, am looking for that album that combines Belgium, Netherlands, and Luxemburg. :-)

Actually, there is something opposite, separative example: When Yugoslavia was first formed by Serbia, each of the states kept issuing their own stamps in their own style in the first years. Both Scott and SG chose to present those stamps separately, and Serbian stamps of those years, are not included in Yugoslavia but in Serbia.

It really doesn't matter which catalog you use .

Experience stamp dealers , philatelic buyers , experience collectors and readers on this board are more interested plus value what you have done based on neatness , organization ,completeness , decent explanation of varities, everybody likes to see unusual items that are not catalog listed .

floortrader, everything you wrote is true and important.
I think the OP's intention was, when it comes to catalogs, as important or less important they are for a collector, which is better.