2018 Scott Catalogue To Be 12 Volumes?

TheArtfulHinger,

No kidding. I'd kill for a regional model Scott. I don't use Scott on a regular basis because as a German specialist, Michel is my Bible. But I do like to include Scott equivalents on my website for those who use Scott. The same areas covered by Volume 1 of Michel's Germany Specialized take me 6 volumes of Scott under their old, pre-split model.

I purchase catalogue to ID stamps and organise them, so I have very few interest in the price ( for what it worth anyway ) . I found Scott , Michel and others do so little for the purpose of ID stamps and the change they made from one year to the other, don't justify the price they ask for it. I put my money in better usage and purchase country specific specialised catalogues. Would you buy Scott catalogues for Canada and Provinces ? It's spread in so many volumes, the logic choice is to go with the Unitrade. For Hungary and Austria, Michel and SG have them in the same catalogue.

I thought that Scott had moved the Candian provinces to right before the Canada listing so they were all together... or is that only in the Classic Specialized?

Oups bad exemple, Honestly I never look for Canada in Scott ..... I think I have not purchase a Canadian stamp since I return from Philippines in 2000. I strike it......In my new Classic they are group it's in the old classic they was spread , in the 2013 world they are after Canada like Unitrade and in the old World they are in the same volume as US

So, is each volume going to be the same price? Is the price of the catalog going to effectively double?

Amos needs to embrace the digital age and create a database, not a catalog. Adding another book to the end is unsustainable. And don't even get me started on their digital solution...

$99 for each 2 volume set from Amos. It's an increase, but nowhere near a doubling.

They're spinning it as a "reorganization", when it is nothing of the sort. Splitting one volume into two isn't reorganizing a damned thing.

Sigh...

It's too bad the market is too small for a true competitor to emerge. The only thing I really use Scott for is US. For Ireland I use Stanley Gibbons and for Ukraine I use Michel.

I still think these companies need to collaborate. How could would it be if the Germany section of Scott was written by Michel, and the England, Ireland, Australia were done by SG. And all the other catalog makers used Scott for their US section.

In the UK SG has a competitor in Stoneham which is now on its 16th UK edition - few people use its numbering system but some of its stamp identification tips are better than SG and pricing is far more realistic

I suppose the problems of collaboration - eg between Scott and SG - are around stamp valuations and the structure of the listings. But actually, I suspect that most general collectors aren't worried about a perfect catalogue ...

SG is an over inflated fairytale and does not represent true stamp values in any respect!
You are far better off watching ebay?!! Of course as long as you dont fall fail of double bidding by the same person.
as Geoff has pointed out to me via a proper Auction site, just to see what people will pay.
The only good thing about cats are is the information but not price guides.
I have stamps that do not even sell yet according to Gibbons they are worth £6 a piece!!

Hey Deltic they look real smart those Stoneham's Cats , however the way forward with any of these Cats is to produce them online but then we should see a massive price fall but knowing the UK and what a con with live in it will not happen.
However in saying that I shall see what prices these Stoneham cats go for, if it is considerably less I may fork out the money.

Yes, it's true. Scott says (both in a video and an article on its own website) that it's "reorganizing" its catalogues. Now, what does "reorganizing" mean to you? To me, it means moving things around to their proper places, etc. But, Scott isn't doing that at all. Instead, it's doing the simplest (and, personally, the dumbest) thing of all: Lopping each large volume into two smaller volumes. This is the level of cleverness and creativity Amos/Scott operates by. Instead of a serious reorganization of the catalogue, instead of creating separate regional volumes (Latin America, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, etc.), and instead of moving colonies and other precursors to where they really belong, Scott does the least clever thing of all. It's a perfectly fine catalogue. But it's published by people who have no vision or cleverness whatsoever. Plod, plod, plod along.

Making one buy pairs of volumes is the act of a bean counter and not a true philatelic service company. Shame on them.

In Amos's defense, they are a business, not a charity, and their first responsibility is to turn a profit so they can stay in business. Given Amos's importance to the hobby as a catalog and album publisher, I hope they do stay in business. I've done my share of second guessing their business decisions, but I trust that their decision was based on the benefit to their own bottom line. Any other competent business would do the same.

Scott is "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic". Collectors want regional, or specialized catalogs. They do not want to pay for something when they won't use 95% of it.

If libraries didn't buy these "dinosaurs", Scott would likely be history.