Collecting Unissued Stamps

"a significant run of catalogs" ... Owning 11 of the 13 editions of the UPSS Postal Card Catalogs, I was able to create:

https://www.folklib.net/fdc/bibliog...-index.shtml
"UPSS United States Postal Card Catalog" Index

But with only 2013 and 2020 Scott Specialized, I have no access to a similar run. I have made some sample updates up thru 1958. Does this alleviate some of your objections to my page? I hope in time it will evolve into a better more useful page with all de-bunking problems fixed.

https://www.folklib.net/fdc/us-stam...issued.shtml

PostalCardCachet,

As another example, Scott C4-C6 were originally listed as Scott 608, 609, 610, before becoming 1303-1305, then to C4-C6, etc. The expansion of the black Harding issues from 611-613 to 610-613 subsequently occupied the open slot for 610.

You may post what you like on your page, but the limited accuracy of the pre-1930 issues calls into question everything else.

I would prefer you NOT use my name on your pages as I do not wish to affiliate my name with anything of such poor scholarship/research. Sorry.

At times, Scott has set aside numbers for anticipated stamps. They still do this for definitives being issued over an extended period of time. In these scenarios, Scott is attempting to save catalog numbers to group certain stamps together for the sake of neatness.

Many times, stamps are never issued that match the intent of the saved catalog numbers. The desire for neatness has nothing to do with actual stamps being printed then never issued.

Owsi; collect what you enjoy. If you feel the need to complete a country or album with unissued stamps; go for it. All about what you want to do and what makes you happy; that's the only important thing.

And if you go that route; share them here with others!

I am collecting Russia now and Michel and Zagorsky have many stamps listed that Scott does not evidently consider to be "legitimate". In some cases Scott did recognize the stamp or stamps at one time and then did not with the result being missing or "skipped" numbers. There are some sets from the 1920's that are mentioned as footnotes and valued but were never used for postage, being issues of the Soviet Philatelic Bureau. Could some have utilized as postage? Yes, it is possible. I guess that it is a lot like US Special Printings. While they were a product of the Post Office they were not intended as postage. Heck, the dollar value Columbians were really just philatelic creations for collectors if you get right down to it. Sorry, I am wandering off topic....again.....

"such poor scholarship/research" ... I apologize. I have deleted the page.

PostalCardCachet - You did not need to delete your work based upon one comment. Heck, you took the time and had the initiative to start something like that. Good for you. Some people make comments that have never put together anything like what you were attempting. I say "Carry On"!

rogdcam,
Nor did I ask that the page be changed in any way except the deletion of my name in the references.
You would be surprised at the scholarship I have put together, much of it very quietly behind the scenes. Much of it for my own use in seeking additional items.
In this case I quickly explained 5 of the 88 listings, pointed out 1 other unlisted vacancy which had been filled by a later listing, and noted the change in Scott 1 & 2, backed up with research, facts and documentation.
Shermae and I both pointed out the fact that Scott regularly assigns block of numbers in anticipation, so that proposing any unused numbers as unissued stamps to be sought make no sense.
Using unassigned catalog numbers is just a poor methodology.

I would gladly collect Great Britain SG266a. It was never issued, but there is one known used example.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwar...dwardVII.jpg

Some specialized catalogues mention unissued stamps in order to try to be as complete as possible for collector information. Other such catalogues may even give some of these stamps variety status with some numbers. Meanwhile, some legitimate issued varieties with articles on them and certificates for them are ignored. Some of this can be attributed to the influence of dealers who sell these stamps on catalogue publishers. Thus, these stamps gain some air of legitimacy this way.

"... the limited accuracy of the pre-1930 issues calls into question everything else."
"... make no sense"
"... poor methodology"

Based on the previous "unissued" false premise focus of my page, it is not possible for me, without any outside assistance, to ever correct every objection John has. I had no choice except to delete it, and re-think the entire project. If there were someplace that already lists every missing U.S. Scott number in one source, there would be no need for my page, but there isn't. So the focus has been pared down to just a list of numbers that are missing from one selected sample Catalog, the 2020 Scott Specialized I own.

https://www.folklib.net/fdc/us-stam...issing.shtml

JohnBecker wrote this in 2018 and you may find it to be helpful:

https://goscf.com/t/63803

Thank you rogdcam, I had not gone searching for my previous posts on the evolution of the Scott catalogs, but some of it is there!

Otherwise, I am content to let the topic die a natural death.

Hi Owsi,
For me postage stamps are just it, postage, items used to transfer mail, so my first priority, or importance as postal items, are used stamps, and "second-grade" stamps are those that were not used for that purpose, like unissued, mint, and CTO's.
Yet I do collect those too:
Unissued - often reflect history, politics, global and local events, and so on;
Mint - help me to see the beauty of the stamp;
CTO's - some serve as mint to show real stamps' beauty, and some are just there, like Sealand stamps, and I keep them but don't make a special effort to find them. The bogusness of CTO's is clearly seen in those nude picture stamps issued by religious Muslim countries.

Scott has never been consistent in listing unissued stamps. The infamous New Brunswick "Connell" is catalogued as #5; the unissued Newfoundland "Wayzata" (ahown earlier in this thread) is not listed, but nnly noted in Scott.