USPS "Gives Away" Right Side Up Jenny Souvenir Sheet

We may find out, but I sort of doubt they retained any for exchanges.

Are made to order or created rarities as valuable as or as respected as accidental or unintentional ones?

jogil....no.
"Philatelic" mail is not consider the same as "regular" mail

One hesitates to look at the prices being paid for The Jenny Contrivance, and think that the valuation would be even higher if only the error were unintentional.

OTOH, a genuine error would enlarge the bidder pool so, to a first approximation, I suppose the answer must be 'yes, intention positively impacts valuation' of an EFO.

Respect?

As many of us remember, once upon a time, the US Bureau of Engraving & Printing would routinely honor (read: ingratiate itself with) a prominent American stamp collector by bestowing favors from its shop, including essays & proofs that were a) government not-to-be-gifted property, and b) not otherwise available to the public.

Q/ Has anyone here refused to purchase an essay or proof because of its FDR provenance?

The majority opinion seems to be that we are glad that a stamp collector was in a position to pry this stuff loose from the BEP, period, so let the feeding frenzy begin.

If respect is delayed, an as-yet-unrealized capital gain awaits every early buyer.

Collectors focus on their collectibles, eh?

Cheers,

/s/ ikeyPikey

The more this issue gets pressed, the worse it gets -- at least based on these sample quotes from the news article linked below:

http://linns.com/news/editorial-ins...-better-luck

Quotes from Mark Saunders of the USPS, as taken from the above linked article:




And this final comment from Charles Snee of Linn's Stamp News:

So those of us buying from small post offices likely never had a chance to find one of the unverts to begin with.

B*stards.

I originally was a fan of the entire "lottery" aspect of this sheet's release, but the more that comes out about it, the more it seems like the whole thing weas rigged, and the more it stinks like last week's diapers.

While the mass media may never become aware of the whole mess and those responsible for this farce likely will never be held accountable, the USPS may wind up destroying any ounce of credibility or benefit of the doubt it had been given... In this case, I'd *LOVE* to sic some Congressional oversight pit bulls on their azzes just for an ounce of comeuppance.

I repeat: B*stards.

Last weeks diapers indeed.

One right side up Jenny was purchased at a PO in Waverly, N.Y (by Art Van Riper). This hardly seems like a post office with high-volume customer traffic The post office had a total of 45 inverted Jenny sheets.

Priceless.

Surely a dirty diaper that lingers on and on!

Yes. If the distribution had been truly random, then they would not have a list of the post offices the sheets went to!

I am not certain that this is entirely true.

I can keep a list of pseudo-randomly-selected zip codes ...

SETI records staggering amounts of effectively-random white noise ...

PC-linked Geiger counters record effectively-random nuclear decay ...

Time for a non-random end to this list?

Cheers,

/s/ ikeyPikey

Linn's reported a RSU Jenny was purchased in Allenton, Wisconsin (pop. 843). It's hard to believe that location could be considered a post office with "high-volume customer traffic" either.

There always seems somebody has to complain. I wonder if they are not jealous. Just because they were not the one chosen to get the free desired pane. I mean the man spent $219,000 trying to get one. I think he deserved it. I know my comment is going to (miss) somebody off or stir up a can of worms. But that is just my opinion.

It certainly would have been nice to know that they were going to lotterize one of the unverts from the stamp fulfillment center. I daresay I would have bought a couple just as I did from my local post office. But not having a chance is not right!