How Would You Describe This Cover?

The cover:

How I'm leaning: "A philatelic creation designed to mimic a first day cover for the earliest known use (EKU) of the tagging-omitted variant of the 65 cent H.H. 'Hap' Arnold stamp. Of the two stamps on the cover, the stamp at right has the tagging, and the stamp on the left does not."

If I had created that creation, I would have waited, and added the "Earliest Known Use" text well afterwards ...

... does the alignment of the text offer a clue as to whether/not it was added later?

Cheers,

/s/ ikeyPikey

I am pretty sure that the "Earliest Known Use" text was there from the start. Which does raise the question of whether there are actually any "real" covers in existence with the tagging omitted variant with an earlier date. The FDOI was Nov 5, 1988, so this cover is dated nearly seven months later. I wonder if Linn's carried a report in 1989 when the tagging omitted variant was first noticed? My guess is that when it was first reported, somebody created this cover ASAP. But that still leaves open the possibility of actual earlier know use. It wouldn't bother me if that were the case, and I'd be happy to know and indicate in the description that it is NOT (or no longer) and EKU.

Googled { arnold tagging omitted site:www.linns.com }

Returned { We Found Arnold Tag#8206; // 1) Arnold Tag's Phone 2) Address 3) Age & More. Search Free! }

Once upon a time, a Serious Philatelist admonished me that EKUs are a suckers game; no sooner do you pay that premium - at his level, that premium would be a nice piece of change - than an earlier use surfaces.

I have no idea what Certified Mail means in the context of an unaddressed hand-back piece of not-really-mail, but I admire the optimism, and hope the originator enjoyed his reward(s), and that you enjoy your cover ... I know I would.

Cheers,

/s/ ikeyPikey

blcjr, I think your description is right on the money.... "a philatelic creation designed to mimic a first day cover."

The certified mail sticker leaves me guessing.

Certified mail would probably explain the rate, done in the hope of making it seem a bit less "philatelic".

While I mostly collect FDC's, I have a special interest in all things relating to Hap Arnold. I'm keeping my eyes open for an actual (non-philatelic) use of the untagged stamp.

Revcollector may be right about the basis for it being registered. What was the rate for registered mail in 1989?

Cart & horse. First, 2x 65c stamps. Then, why Certified? "Might as well?" "More distinguished?" "Less philatelic?" "More postal?"

I agree the registered mail may have been an afterthought. But I'm still curious what the rate was in 1989.

Certified mail in 1989 was 85¢. Postage pays correct rate for 2 oz. weight (25¢ first oz., 20¢ additional oz.).

I don't know why I've been asking about registered mail. I wasn't looking at the cover very carefully, obviously! The cover weights less than an ounce though, so $1.10 would have been sufficient.

blcjr:
Perhaps some additional information: the cachet is signed, small case b in lower left of cachet. If authentic, this would indicate cachet done by William H. Bayless. Maybe something in "First Days" about this, certainly worth a search?
Respectfully submitted:
jrc531

jrc531,

Thanks for the tip. I'll look into it.

Basil

Basil, is this your cover? May we see the back, if so? (Or is there nothing there?)

KGB, nothing to see. It did come with a blank receipt.

A couple of people who knew Bayless have confirmed to me that this is one of his cachets. He was an active producer of FDC's and had a special interest in tagged issues.