Does This Poster Stamp Ruin This Cover?

My suspicion is that the cinderella was added later. Does it matter?

Of course the placement drives me crazy!

This is a common enough Ioor cachet, not very expensive, but I cannot help but think it is worth less now because of the label. Like you, I think it was added later. Had it been placed squarely on the cover before use, it would have been tied to the cover by the CDS, and in that case might have enhanced the cover. Given a choice between this one, and one without the label, I'd opt for the one without.

Don't discount that cover just because it has an inexpensive cachet and a poorly placed (possibly added later) cinderella. The cinderella in and of itself may be worth more than the FDC.

Further, take a close look at the addressee of the cover (B.C. Patchin) and the address R.D. Patchinville (New York). Patchinville? That's right, the addresee's last name is connected to the town. And there's even a Rhode Island connection to it as summarized in this history of the area:

http://history.rays-place.com/ny/st...ayland-t.htm

There's even a period newspaper article about a local politician who was a cousin to B.C. Patchin of Patchinville (read column 1 at this link):

http://fultonhistory.com/Newspapers...-%200047.pdf

Bottom line: See what a simple internet search can uncover? There's a lot to be said for the cover other than just setting it aside as a less than desirable item.

I suspect the poster stamp is more valuable than the cover.

wt1, fair points. However, the cover is offered on ebay for a buy-it-now price that does not seem to indicate any kind of premium for the label. The stamp on the cover is not one I collect, though, so I'm not really experienced on the covers for the stamp. As to the addressee, that might make the cover attractive on its own, but it doesn't stop the label from having a negative effect on it overall.

KGB, if the label is more valuable than the cover, do you think it would it retain that value if removed from the cover? Just wondering.

b, I think the label, if removed carefully, would hold its value for those interested in the Rhode Island Tercentenary. Tercentenary covers are pretty common, I think, though I bet the Patchins would like this one!

Sorry, I think the whole thing is tacky.

Jack Kelley

Poster stamps are very popular. For myself personally, I would keep the cover intact with it on.

Chimo

Bujutsu

The poster stamp is possibly not an add-on. Retroreveal reveals the following:

I can see that the person would have had a heck of a time because the cinderella is too big for the spot on the envelope.

The poster stamp DOES relate to the event in the cachet so it seems appropriate. While I think the poster stamp could have been better placed to make it nicer I do not think that this kind of less than perfect placement is at all uncommon. My guess is that the poster stamp was placed when the cover was made. As for value with or without the poster stamp I do not think it matters much given the relatively nominal commercial value of the cover of perhaps a couple of dollars. I would not place any extra value on the cover because of the poster stamp since in general first day cover collectors are not normally poster stamp collectors or vice versa. I think the starting bid on the ebay auction for this seems a bit full, but if you like it then go for it as it is not very much either way.

I don't collect first days, but I do buy an occasional cinderella or poster stamp on cover, preferably tied by the cancel. So, for me this cover has more appeal with the poster stamp applied.

Don