Which Canada Stamp Is The Holy Grail Of Canadian Philately And Why?

Blaamand, agree with your logical conclusion re: Scott(Unitrade)24 and Scott (Unitrade)32. Unitrade mentions 3 copies of #32 in existence.

When I have more time (since today is Sept 4th)I will research in Duckworth's The Large Queen Stamps of Canada, 2nd Ed.....it should have something interesting......have a good Labor DAY !

Too many Unitrade Scott Canada catalogue number bashers on here. If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you don't like the numbers, don't use them. Capiche?

If your going to change laid papers to minor numbers you need to do it uniformly. There for #1 does not deserve a separate number nor #2 another, etc. Leave well enough alone accept what is and cease this nonsense.

LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE TRYING TO DEGRADE YOUR BIG CANADA UNITRADE SCOTT # 32 FIND.

A find like that can not be down graded even if a number doesn't exist. How many of you can say I had the third reported copy of any stamp???

Canada150 - No need for yelling (capital letters) - nobody is trying to degrade anything. Nobody is arguing that the 2c on laid paper is nothing but an extraordinary rare stamp - and naturally the discovery of the 3rd copy was such a find most collectors can only dream about.

With 3 known copies of #32 as opposed to estimated 100 copies of #3 there is no doubt that #32 is much more rare than #3. That are facts needless to discuss. Still it is a possibility that certain collectors would prefer the stamp that is not that extremely scarce anyway.

Blaamand,
You meant # 24 (Unitrade). This was just a discussion between stampers and not a political movement to change #32 (scarce.....3 copies....happy for the owners....2 copies in Duckworth's reference on Large Queens -1988)Good observation.

As for the negativity, I will not add

Renden, The third copy of #32 was discovered in early 2013 so would not be in the Duckworth book originally published in 1986. The first two copies were certified in 1935 so they are referenced in early works about the Large Queens. The copy I had was definitely around at the time the others were as it is estimated only two sheets of the 2-cent value were printed on laid paper. The copy I found is the only copy showing a date of usage (March 16, 1870). It had been hinged so was in a collection and had not been identified properly until I found it. You will probably be able to find recent news articles about it. Other information can be found at:

http://www.greenefoundation.ca/Repo...y152013).pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canad...n_laid_paper

https://goscf.com/t/36270

watermark,

impressive and thank you for sharing with me....read all your links....congrats !

Rene

exactly - and may I add - no movement or desire to change Unitrade. That is an absolutely excellent catalog, despite its weaknesses (as with any other catalog).

Going back to the question in the original post... I realize the topic is not necessarily directly linked to catalog value - but I guess a list of catalog values is relevant for the discussion non the less. Here's a list of the most valuable Canadian stamps - pulled from my database / inventory (acc Unitrade 2011).




I have not included all rarities in the list, so it's at best a comparison between the major numbers and most common varieties.

Some statistical facts: I have listed 2180 major numbers until 2000. The value of the 5 most valuable (major number) - that is 0,2% of the number of stamps issued - represent 88 % of the total value of a complete collection.
No. 32 alone represent 63 % of the total value of a complete collection - so that stamp alone is worth more than all the others.
(Let me specify that this comparison does not include rarities like the Bothwell wmks, re-entrys, inverts etc - but it includes #32 simply because it is not listed as such a rarity)

CANADA150: Get your facts straight before you start yelling. Nobody here has degraded the fantastic find Watermark made. What matter does it mean in terms of rarity that a stamp has, based on it's catalogue number, being major or minor? Look at US Scott C3a, the inverted Jenny. Maybe that should have been given a major number to increase it's popularity? Like it really needs it.

Many collectors, like myself, do not agree with the terribly inconsistent numbering system Scott has with Canada and many other countries, and like to express our opinions with logic.

You did not even have to bring in Unitrade. Scott sets the numbers, not Unitrade. Unitrade is an outstanding catalogue.




I don't and I don't. And I think most collectors are the same.




Well said.

I still use general catalogs as a starting point to get general numbers and identify the stamp in general terms. Since I collect constant plate varieties(re-entries/constant plate flaws), I then get out books on the specific issue I wish to study and when available actual stamp images, proof images or what ever other sources are available on the particular stamp and start studying each stamp to see if I can plate it. This determines in some cases the exact location of the stamp on the plate and the plate the stamp came from. Other information might even get it to a specific printing but that isn't very often. So I am way beyond a general specialized catalog. My numbers are made up of Catalog number, plate/position, re-entry number, flaw number/s and general description. General catalogs are useful but never satisfy a true philatelist who studies stamps in depth. Even specialized books have not got everything listed that can be found. The main thing is enjoy the hobby for what it is...An Enjoyable Hobby...and collect what you like. Enjoy the hobby the way you like.

Mike

Scott used a full whole number for U.S. 596 which is a rare variety of U.S. 581 as a Stickney rotary press sheet waste variety with different perforations. There is a similar variety of Scott Canada 164 which I have got expertized/certified and it was emailed to Unitrade but I have not yet received any response from them about it.

Care to post a picture jogil

Robert