Difference In Cv Between Scott And Stanley Gibbons

I've made some recent purchases on the Delcampe site and while looking at what was on offer noticed what I first thought were inflated catalogue values. For instance a Newfoundland SG #208 was advertised with a CV of £55 or about $74. I checked a 2016 copy of SG and it supports the advertised CV. The 2016 Scott CV is $25. A quick comparison of the same issue shows this same difference.

WHat are your thoughts? Is this a North America vs. Europe market thing?

Also, if you were to bid on an item with this difference do you just ignore the CV and bid based on average prices gained?

Thanks,
Terry

*** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum. ***

Any catalog can feed you bad information. Really, you have to rely on your experience with the marketplace to have a better idea of the price or value of a particular stamp.

Here is another example, but with values in the opposite direction. Stanley Gibbons values this Singapore 496a (Leigh -Mardon printing) at 1.50 pounds. In my experience, this is probably a correct catalog value. How does Scott price the same stamp, their #458a? Scott catalog says $37.50 US. Go figure.

I think that most of us who use Gibbons are used to applying a rough-and-ready rule of around 10% of CV for most foreign material, maybe 20% for Commonwealth material. I suspect similar percentage calculations can be made for Yvert and Michel. Of course, for scarcer or prime material, that rough approach won't work, but I'm not in that territory!

There are a few nuances to consider when comparing the 2 catalogs.

* While SG is considered a "standard" for Commonwealth, it must be remembered that it is a retail price list describing what you'd pay for the stamp in the desired condition if ordered from SG. Scott is legitimately a general purpose stamp catalog and the parent company does not sell stamps. Scott attempts to follow some algorithm of market value, however the market they follow is the US market.

* To continue that point, the market for Br. Commonwealth in Great Britain is significantly more robust than in the US, thus Gibbons pricing reflects their home marketplace. Since the market for US stamps is much more robust here than in Britain, you'd expect Scott pricing to reflect that difference vs. catalog and marketplace prices for US stamps on the market in the UK or Europe.

* For many years, Scott did not list any MNH pricing for Commonwealth stamps issued before about 1953. Since the late 1990's, Scott has gradually priced most KGVI stamps both hinged and MNH. All SG Commonwealth pricing is for MNH starting in 1937 (beginning of the reign of KGVI). As a result of these historical approaches by the 2 catalogs, there are places where Scott has lagged compared to Gibbons on pricing.

* English collectors are somewhat different than American collectors, especially with regard to varieties. Scott has generally endeavored to list Commonwealth perf varieties (though there are still some significant gaps, especially for line perf 14 stamps), but has had far less interest in shades. Scott's position on shades historically is they are hesitant to list shades (or anything else) that can easily deceive collectors. The concern, perhaps appropriate, is that sellers will too-frequently offer a stamp as the scarce or rare shades at the expense of the uninformed buyer. This is both good and bad. It makes certain shades "invisible" to the US market so that collectors are generally paying a lower price for the scarce shade. That said, Scott in some cases has averaged the pricing for multiple shades which means you are almost always overpaying for a basic stamp because the scarcer shades pull the price up in Scott's. In the UK, where collectors study the different shades, basic stamps are priced lower by SG as they are not trying to average pricing out. The other downside is that Scott's does list some rare shades that less than 5% of dealers in the US can identify (e.g. Bermuda 12/6 lemon-yellow keyplate and the Falklands 5/- indigo shade). If you are trying to protect collectors, why tempt sellers with very high priced shade varieties that the sellers simply cannot correctly identify? Scott's strategy ultimately is quite flawed.

The upshot to it all is that on paper, the 2 catalogs have quite different primary intentions, reflect conditions in 2 different marketplaces, and have at least 60 years of historically different approaches to MNH stamps and varieties that are still influential today.

shermae,

Thank you for an enlightening and cogent explanation of the situation. This is the greatest thing about this sight; a million dollars worth of expertise from folks willing to share.

Terry

Yep, there are definitely some areas where Scott's value is ludicrously high, those Singapore issues are among them. Some relatively recent Hong Kong stamps are the same. I usually figure this out after getting about my 5th example of a (supposedly) $20 stamp acquired via penny packets. After the first one, I usually consider myself lucky. After the 2nd one, I usually think I'm really lucky. As they keep turning up, I start to realize that I'm not all that lucky, just that the catalog is just that far out of whack with reality.

The market in GB is not THAT much stronger than it is in the US to account for the difference on Cat value of Scott $25 and SG £55. If it was. all the CW material would have flowed over to GB long ago.

I would like to add my 5 cents. SG has been in financial trouble for quite sometime. As we all know, they carry a large stock and if their catalogues reflected the real market place prices of stamps, the value of their inventory would have to be drastically marked down and they would be immediately considered insolvent!