Scott Cat. Values

The 2015 Catalog shows a value of US$1.00 for Penrhyn #87-9. Those stamps have a face value of NZ$3.50 and have not been demonetized. The same catalog gives a conversion rate of NZ $1.00 = US $.8396. Hence the face value of the set is US $2.96. What is the justification for a catalog value of only 1/3 of the intrinsic value of the stamps?

The above is an example only, as the same problem appears throughout the catalogs. (See for example some of the stamps of Bermuda whose $ is always at par with the US.)

I've always assumed these values are for those who don't live in Penrhyn. (Following your example.) If one can't actually use a stamp, I don't think it can be said to hold face value.

Is your opening premise that Scott's must bear some relationship to real value or the market?

According to Wikipedia, Penrhyn Atoll consists of 2 small villages. The population of this inactive, submarine volcano was 351 in 2001. By 2011, the population had declined to 213.

Stamps from territories outside the USA do not necessarily command prices that are equal to their face value, especially if they are older (though still postally valid) stamps that have been in the market place for many years. The reality is that most countries' stamps issued in the 1960s to early 1980s were printed in such huge quantities that they often only sell for a percent of face value. Just because the face value of the Penrhyn set is NZ$3.50 does not mean that a dealer or collector would pay the equivalent US face value in the USA for the stamps, especially since the stamps were issued in 1977 and were a hugely popular topical issue (QEII Silver Jubilee) at the time.

It's all about supply and demand. The greater the supply vs the demand, the lower the price, and that includes going below putative face value if the stamps are not valid for postage in the country being sold (or even if they are, most USA from the late 1940s onward can be purchased in the market place, in bulk, at something like 70-80% of face value).

To Canada Stamp. No, I intend no real premise. Its just that I have always understood that Scott's policy was to set their valuations, failing any other considerations, at approximately double face.

My general interest in the subject is, why wouldn't a large user of postage in the subject area (wherever it may be) be happy to buy the stamps of his country at a great deal more than 1/3 of face? In Canada at least, old stamps for use as postage usually sell in the 60-75% range.

I think Scott's 2x face applies to stamps when they are new issues. Then as time goes by market forces do their work and alter the catalog value accordingly. 2x face is not a hard floor for the catalog value of a stamp in Scott, if the retail market deems it worth only a fraction of (current) face value, then there you go, that is what will determine its catalog value.

(and just to satisfy my curiosity, I checked the historical rates for US$-NZ$ exchange and in 1977 the NZ$ was worth US$1.02 so actually the face value of the issue was more than US$3.50 at the time of release).

"My general interest in the subject is, why wouldn't a large user of postage in the subject area (wherever it may be) be happy to buy the stamps of his country at a great deal more than 1/3 of face? In Canada at least, old stamps for use as postage usually sell in the 60-75% range."

Because postal rates today are so much higher than in the 1970s and 1980s, so using the for postage would require a lot of extra licking (no self-sticks then) just to make up the current 2015 postal rate. For most mailers, that is not worth the hassle, so that kills demand from that portion of the market, leaving it to the collectors market to supply whatever demand there is for those older stamps, and with millions and millions printed, that means supply vastly exceeds demand.

Interestingly, this set was valued at $1.40 in Scott's 2009.

It is also interesting to think about one of the 200 or so residents of Penrhyn Atoll having internet access. And, on top of that, having the inclination to buy discount postage (taking away time from his/her basket weaving). AND...what about banking? On top of all this, how long would it take for the stamps to get back to Penrhyn Atoll?

Please don't dwell on Penrhyn. It was meant to be an example only, and was probably a bad one.

Perhaps the solution to my problem lies in DUCMHOH's observation about the huge numbers issued (in relation to domestic demand). So many stamps in fact that there is simply no practical use for them at any price - hence discount postage is valueless even as postage.

Actually, I think Penrhyn is an excellent example. There is neither great philatelic demand, nor is there consumer demand...hence the value for these issues has gone down. If the pricing gurus at Scott and Michel, et al, were really "on top of it", then the catalog values for POSTALLY used Penrhyn and others should probably be a lot higher.

Yep. I don't think Scott even bothers to research an actual retail value for any given stamp for at least a few years after its release, nor probably should they. 2X face for mint stamps is as good a value as any and is probably pretty close to what most dealers would charge for that new issue. Used stamps are priced similarly and values seem to be set at a certain ratio to face value, or the minimum of 25 cents. Only after a few years of kiloware have been soaked off by collectors will the market become aware of how scarce or common a particular stamp may be in postally used condition.