Where Do You Draw The Line And Stop Collecting New US Issues?

I agree with everyone's sentiments here. There's just too much to collect now and I often here people call newer stamps "stickers". Sometimes there's a diamond in the rough which I simply like for it's artistic appeal, like the moonlanding commemorative from last year I believe, and then there's stamps that appeal to me because they represent pieces of childhood (of course the usps knows this), like the scooby doo and sesame street stamps.

Never in my life have I ever bought non forever stamp postage at the post office. Makes you think about the future of denominations if they can get so much more for a sheet of forevers than for a sheet of 1c stamps. I don't know, maybe I'm just too young to know better.

To Climber Steve yes agreed, another fairly recent issue too (1983). Do you remember the incident that really launched Joplin's career? Those of us old enough to remember she didn't get any traction in the industry for her musical talent which is questionable. Or... I suppose you think Neal Young is a great singer too. She didn't even get noticed at all until she actually did things with a mic - on stage that I won't mention on a public forum. She's a real role model alright. I don't think Babe Ruth did anything like that at a game, although he did show up drunk.

1993 for me since that's what fits in one volume (Scott Minuteman) and not one year more!

My father gave me his father's collection around 1975. Gramp died in 1964 and collected up to the day he died. I originally picked up where he left off, but new issues in the 1970's had many plate strips of 20 rather than plate blocks of 4. Since I was 14 or 15 years old, I decided I needed a new approach. I ended up deciding that I would collect up to 1964 and forego anything after. I now only collect 19th century US, but I have an attraction to the Pan-Am Issue, so my new collecting 'end' is now 1901, I guess. When I buy a box/collection/pile of USA with post-1964 stamps, I use them for postage, or throw them in my ever-expanding 'USA Remainder Lot'.

About 20 years ago, I bought a WW collection in Big Blues - I bought the collection for the albums. My WW collection is my playtime. I am a space-filler for my WW. I MIGHT try to complete a set where only the low values have spaces, but usually not. The album set that I bought ends in 1975, so that's my end-date for WW.

As a topical collector -- US Airmail and aviation topical -- the decision for me of what to collect is made by the USPS. They stopped producing Airmail stamps with Scott C150 in 2012, so I'm done with US Airmail stamps (still collect FDCs for these issues however). Last aviation topical stamp to catch my interest were the two US Airmail 100 year commemoratives (Scott #s 5281-5282) in 2018. I produced FDCs for those two issues.

2016...after debating for 10-15 years I finally caved in due to declining perceived stamp appreciation of modern issues, acquisition cost, USPS difficulty, and the need to fill in more sheets instead of singles. There have certainly been issues to collect recently, but not comprehensively.

I love the modern day "stickers" -- great for shipping ebay items with lots of shipping tape.

1950

Except for a few topical items (i.e. Air Mail and Priority and Express Mail), I stopped collecting stamps issued after the last gummed stamp was issued. Even prior to that, I only collected gummed stamps - none of those @#$% self-adhesives!

When a discussion about a cut-off date for a U.S. collection turns into comments about people on stamps you don't like, stamp collecting starts to seem like the old and cranky hobby a lot of non-stamp collectors think it is. I have some Hitler stamps in my Germany collection. Is that okay? And how about those Mussolini stamps? And Juan Peron and Francisco Franco. Some Mongolia stamps show Genghis Khan, who may have been the world's #1 mass murderer as well as a rapist, on its stamps. I have Stalin stamps I don't like, but there they are. Lots of stamps have subjects we might be offended by. Collect them -- or don't collect them. It's entirely your choice. As for Janis Joplin, she was an extraordinary singer who appealed to millions of people and like millions of other people, also had an alcohol problem. Are alcoholics banned from stamp collections now? I've got news for you -- better get your album out and start removing a lot of stamps.

As for cut-off dates, there's clearly no "best" date, as the evidence here shows. Each person has their own reason for choosing a date. Some years back, I used 1990 as my cut-off date (before most self-adhesive stamps and the flood of mini-sheets), but now I don't have any date. I collect modern stamps I like and don't aim for "completion" at all. I don't have a cut-off date. Well, I sort of do. Maybe 2010 now. But maybe that will get moved up eventually. The only reason for a "cut-off date," as far as I can see, is that you have a collection dictated by the album you use. If you don't do that, you can add whatever stamps you like. Add blank pages -- or make your own pages. Problem solved. Drawing boxes on blank pages isn't that hard to do. Or use quadrille pages. Plus, you'll end up with a more personalized collection in two ways - your favorite stamps and your own page layouts. That's kind of cool and it's much preferable to printed album pages, in my opinion.

As for alcoholic rock singers and drug addicts and other awful people:

Elvis had a drug problem. Billie Holiday had a drug or alcohol problem, too. JFK had sex with women who weren't his wife and regularly took drugs for his Addison's disease, so he's out. Harding clearly had a drinking problem-- and a womanizing problem, so he's out. Ronald Reagan completely ignored the AIDS epidemic, broke the law very badly in the Iran-Contra Affair, and tripled the federal budget deficit. So his stamp is out. Nixon was a liar and a cheat. So his stamp is out. Eisenhower had a girlfriend outside his marriage, so his stamp is out. Jefferson owned slaves. Out. The United Confederate Veterans stamp honors traitors. Out. Judy Garland was an alcoholic. Out. The Breast Cancer semi-postal stamp has the word "breast" on it. Out. Paul Robeson on the Black Heritage stamp was a communist. Out. Malcolm X. Out. The Dr. Seuss stamp. Out. Did I mention Elvis had a drug problem? I'm joking (needless to say) but politics or social shaming -- or whatever this is -- does not go well with stamp collecting.

A couple of times at stamp shows (remember stamp shows?) I heard a dealer ranting about some political issue or person they disliked. It's completely inappropriate to do that with customers. As my Daddy used to say, "Son, we don't talk about politics, religion, or sex at the dinner table." It makes stamp collecting uncomfortable. Political views are out of place at a stamp show, so I just get up and leave. If you want to ruin stamp collecting, this is how you do it.

And while I'm my soapbox, people do make this claim a lot, but the U.S. government does not issue stamps in order to "fleece" collectors. The income they get from stamps purchased but not used is pretty small. Stamps are issued to appeal to the general public, to honor people and events, and to appeal to various interest groups and others so they'll buy and use stamps. The postal service may or may not want to accommodate the needs of collectors, but since they're a business, that's their choice. In a nation of 330 million people, issuing lots of new stamps every year doesn't seem all that surprising. It's maybe just a few too many, though, I admit. Have you ever looked at the number Japan now issues every year? Now there's a postal agency which needs to develop some self-control.

I don't know what the claim that collectors have "supported them virtually from the beginning of the issuance of stamps" means. Collectors were not lining up to buy the 1847 stamps. And in the early years -- like today -- the Post Office Department depended very little on purchases made by stamp collectors. Unless somehow has evidence to the contrary? There have been some stamps issued which seemed mainly to appeal to collectors, but I'm not sure you could "prove" that. The high value Columbians were pretty silly and so were a few others. But these are the exception, not the rule. Today's high-value stamps serve a purpose -- Express Mail packages. Why would anyone feel obligated to "spend several hundred dollars on new issues each year"? No one's making you do that. Stop it.

As for stamps you buy "may never increase in value . . . ," where does it say they're supposed to increase in value? How many sheets of 3c commemoratives do you need to own before you realize that, beyond the inflation rate, most stamp values don't increase much? If that bothers you, stop buying them.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to supporting the U.S. Postal Service by working on my socially and politically-approved stamp collection, all of which were purchased so they would increase in value. Actually, that's another way you could collect stamps, isn't it? Just leave out all the stamps you dislike. If that's what you like, go for it. No Marilyn Monroe stamps, though. She died of a drug overdose. The 1948 Poultry Industry stamp is okay, though.

Drew (and before anyone blows a gasket, this is meant to be humorous, not political) but if ethics or honesty were a prerequisite for a politician/elected official being on a US stamp; there would be a ton less stamps with old guys' faces on them! Woodrow Wilson could easily be added to that list.

Interesting to see why and where people cut off or don't cut off their collections though; guess that is the great thing about this hobby. There are so many avenues/genres and so forth to collect.

Edit: Hopefully there are no vegans here that are offended by the chicken in my avatar, tasty as they are.

I must be in the minority cause I still collect US mint sheets (along with FDCs another dead area).

Andy, I like your avatar. I sometimes put leftover chicken in an omelet just so I can eat two generations in a single meal!
Don

@Drew M: well said. And for jconey, I do like Neil Young. And I was in early college when Big Brother & The Holding Company made it big in the music business, at least for a while. I remember their lead singer, who you don't like.

Drew mentioned: "how many sheets of 3 cent commemoratives do you need to own...." Got that covered, thanks to my late father passing away at the end of 1992. Without breaking up any 3 cent sheets, I still have a ton of old 3, 4, 5 cent commems left. I've taken to sticking one or two on certain letters, along with the 55 cent stamp, just to move them.

For my USA collection, around 1934/35. Commonwealth, 1952. Everything else in Europe, 1945 (though China will be 1949). The only country I follow to anything close to the modern era is Czechoslovakia et al, still get the yearly issues.

I like well-defined breaks like the end of a war, change in government, national independence, etc.

My cutoff date is driven by the albums I use. For Worldwide, it is 1940, the end date for Scott International Volume, My Minkus albums go almost to 1990. And birds, I will collect regardless of when issued.