Scott Great Britain Question.

Quote:
This is the approximate timeline and MY guess as to what happened (brought to you with minimal sarcasm at Scott -- or at least trying to minimize sarcasm).

-- The Scott listing for the 1934-1936 issue has always been confusing. In previous catalogs, design A97 is actually assigned to 1p, while most of the other denominations are assigned older design numbers; that's even though A97 doesn't show the 1p value! The purpose of A97 was an example of the "solid background", which Scott notes. The whole set should be A97, based on this premise.
-- In 2006, Scott decided to colorize the catalog and also "unconfuse" this listing. So they changed the design numbers of this set to A97. But someone got confused and thought they were reversing the design assignments. So they changed the 1p stamp listed as design A97 to the older design number A83, while all the others were changed to A97.
-- But in 2006, they DIDN'T make this change in the Classic Specialized!! It had already been colorized in earlier editions. That is why you see the listing discrepancy between the Classic and WW catalogs even though same year 2006, as Jeri observed.
-- In 2007, Scott changed the Classic listings to reflect the new "unconfused" design number assignments. So from 2007 onwards they should match (even if it's still wrong).

k's conclusion (all sarcasm removed!): all the stamps in this last 1934-1936 set (Scott #210-220) should be design A97. As of the 2009 V3 and the 2007 Classic, this has not been corrected. These are the latest editions I have access to right now.

Remember, A97 does NOT reflect the frame. It represents the background. So just check for the "solid" background -- which is actually a very small dot array.

Quote:
My 2009 Scott catalogue has them all as type A97 except for #211 which I take to be a misprint.