Semi And Air Mail With The Regular ?

Minkus and Stanley Gibbons place the Semi-postal and the Air mail in date order with the Regulars and Commemoratives stamps. What is your tough about it ?

Well, as a specialized collector of U.S. airmail stamps and covers, and a few aviation themed stamps and covers from the regular issues, I like the "BOB" way better.

Michel also does not separate airmail or semi-postals
from " regular " stamps.

I actually prefer that and wish Scott were the same.

I could never understand the logic behind this BOB
format.

One of the worst aspects of the Scott system is the fact that it
splits up sets where some are regular issues and some
are airmail.
So you are constantly leafing backs and forth.

Another thing I find annoying about recent listings
in Scott is that they show only the value of the whole set,
not individual stamps.

Lighthouse US separate them like Scott
Lighthouse Canada include them with regular.

I found I don't go often in the BOB and I miss very beautiful Air Mail. The first Air Mail of Canada are so beautiful, why hide them at the back ? ( Other album than Lighthouse )

I'm working on my Hungary pages since Monday, and I wonder, why separate the regular and airmail especially when they look so close each other

The Dutch "Speciale Catalogus" separates them as well, so I guess I am used to it. But it lists the semi-postals with the regular stamps and that is a plus!

Peter

Yes I much prefer keeping postage stamps together by date, so prefer Michel for European stamps. I can understand BOB for postage due etc. Checking Scott for Hungary is a huge pain, particularly for sets that span normal postage, semi-postal and airs.

I also think Michel does a much better job than Scott in categorizing "sets".

Just curious about this. For those of you who prefer the strictly by date listing, would this include revenues? Booklets?

I think the BOB makes good sense in some cases, like revenues. They are in a completely different category, and are not "postal" at all. It makes less sense, to me, in the case of booklets. These are just a different format, not a different category of stamp altogether. I imagine the main consternation for those who prefer the "by date" approach would be with the air mails. Being postal, the reason for putting them in the back is less clear. But they did lead to a distinct category of philately, and for those who specialize in that area of collecting having them grouped together is convenient. I am not saying that justifies BOB for airmails, just that it is convenient. I imagine that flag stamp collectors wouldn't mind having all the flag stamps in one place in a catalog. And so for other topical specialties. But air mails are not just, or strictly, topical. They did represent, in the early days, a distinct category of service, and that is probably why they ended up BOB in Scott. Since their number is limited (only 150 in the U.S. catalog), I would think they are an inconvenience only occasionally to those who prefer the "by date" listing.

What about postal stationary? These can easily be considered 'postal'. Not so sure we can place a dividing line based upon 'postal' definition. Nor do I think we can do it with 'fit, form, or function'. I think it comes down to preference, there is no ideal solution.
Don

I definitely prefer the SG way of not putting airmail into the BOB. Facit is equally helpful. Some of the specialist SG catalogues put officials and postage due in chronological order too (e.g. Scandinavia) but I'm too conditioned to looking in the BOB for these to be convenient.

As for postal stationery that's a whole new ball-game. I only collect postage stamps per se and (rather unkindly I suppose) mentally lump unused postal stationery with revenues and that sort of thing. Used postal stationery is different as this falls into Postal History for me, and I don't necessarily categorise. Mind you, I'm wandering off-topic now.

Hi

I use all blank pages. My organization is as follows:

1. If a set includes Regular Issue and Airmail, all on one or more pages otherwise just the set or stamp. I also mount any pertinent covers on the page along with the stamp(s).

2. Airmails not part of a regular issue stamp or set

3. Back-of-Book separated by type: Postal Tax, Aknowledgement of Receipt, etc.

4. Miscellaneous separated by type

Every mounted item has a issue date and catalog number(s) written under the item. Every item, Mint or Used, is in a Showgard mount.

I have been told that it will be difficult to sell a collection organized this way. However, a friend that is a dealer, said that is not so.

Jerry B

Scott is US centric and for US it almost doesn't matter as there are only a few airmail issues that were part of a set that included "regulars" (National Parks, Electronics, Olympics, from the 70s I think without looking), and no semis or any other BOB that were part of a set that included "regulars". For some other countries there are many mixed sets (including special delivery etc.).

Having said that, I do prefer to see those sets all on one page and not split up. On the other hand, while I collect airs, I don't collect semis, so if the semis were in with the regulars I would have empty spaces, which isn't appealing.

Let make thing clear I asked the question with worldwide collecting in mind. This is not a country specialized album and they are plenty of choice for US albums on the market