Why The Catalog Number Crutch?

Having spent over a decade with Lighthouse and Schaubek preprinted albums for my European and USA collections (that use year, picture, color, perf, watermark, etc to distinguish issue), I'm left scratching my head at the number of people that use Scott number as a make or break for the purchase or use of pages.

I haven't seen anyone ever be desperate for Mi or Yv numbers, but some on this board seem to lose their minds if their pages don't have Sc numbers written on them for their American collections.

I'm not trying to antagonize anyone (really!). Odds are every US collector has a Scott catalog, and it's not as if US stamps aren't distinguishable by all the same criteria I mentioned above. So what's with the dependency on Scott numbers in their albums?

Personal perspective from a Worldwide collector.
1. I like the Scott Font
2. I like the separation Postage, Air, Semi Postal
3. It marries with my album page Steiner
4. I purchase Chirok pages ripped from the Scott Catalogue
have them OCR'd hence have a searchable catalogue,
saves enormous time.

Not a crutch, just common sense for me.

Where Scott is lacking, I use Michel (Gulf States)
I'll read Gibbons or Monographs when drilling down for info.

I don't know. But what I do know is the word defacto often used in computer and other standards. Something in fact, or in effect whether it's right or wrong. It's been chosen. It created boundaries for major and minor listings that forms structure to what would otherwise be more chaotic.

Do I agree with all the listings or the lack of transparency in them, no.

The word complete is impossible in collecting so people have to create subsets to make it work. Scott I think has the longevity here with managing that list of what is in our out and the numbers assigned. Expertization had fallen in line with it, which means if the high end stamps accept the standard, everything else follows in tow.

You could describe every stamp by year of issue, design, denomination, color and perf. Etc. Or you can simply cite the country and a few digits. I know which I find easier to use.

I use Steiner pages and pencil in the Scott number in each box. If I need to know what stamp I am working on or what stamps I need, the info is right there.

That's fair, I do something similar (but on stickie notes). But the lack of Sc numbers on Steiner pages didn't keep you from using Steiner pages. I'm amazed at the people that won't buy or use pages that don't have Scott numbers already on them. That's what makes me scratch my head.

Using printed albums is in itself a crutch, so it's probably unsurprising that collectors want a handrail as well. For their part, catalogue producers who also make albums, such as Yvert and Gibbons, include numbers - simply part of their offering, which helps sales, and reinforces collectors' expectation of numbers.

As has been said, I find it much easier to keep track of what I need in a particular album if a catalog number is written in. Obviously I don't want to write 4 different catalogs so we pick the one we are most comfortable with. I imagine most US collectors find Scott to be their go to so it logically makes sense. There are also countries I collect where it isn't obvious what catalog number a stamp is and if I can just lift the stamp up to see, it's an easy cross reference in the catalog rather than trying to compare against a variety of other factors (ie perf, watermark, etc etc). Much easier just to know the cat #!

All these reasons tie in nicely as to why someone may want to have the numbers there already; the work is already done and it is much neater if it's digitally printed in rather then scribbled.

Many European publishers of albums do not publish catalogues. When they service a mainly European market, they will find one region uses one international catalogue and another a second one (usually Yvert & Tellier, or Michel). Most countries have their local catalogues. It is unworkable to cater for all regions and countries at the same time.

Expanding to the UK would introduce Gibbons as a source for numbers and expanding to North America would introduce Scott.

Also, catalogue numbers can change. Finally, there may be many several numbers assigned to a certain type of stamp. That is very nice for specialist collectors, but who cares for number SG178 (lilac) when he has SG179 (same stamp, but deep lilac)?

What GeoffHa said.

classic_paper, I think you are making this into a bigger issue that it really is, based on a few posts here, perhaps. In the years I worked in stamp shops, I sold many albums and don't remember a concern over the lack of Scott numbers. People were basically concerned about presentation and degree of completeness.

Catalog numbers are just an abbreviation (language) so you do not have to provide denomination, subject, year, variety, etc.

It's really just a preference thing for me. I find that each world area that may produce a catalog has more specific information regarding that areas stamps. For instance, Scott is better at describing stamps in the US, SG is better describing stamps in the UK, Mi in Germany....

I agree that most US collectors have a Scott catalog. But glancing at my book shelf I find Scott Specialized, Stanley Gibbons, Unitrade, M. Roberts, Follansbee... And other catalogs specific to a country or world area.

Crutches are meant to help, to make life easier. If you collect US in particular, but many other Countries as well, Scott numbers are integral to the process. (Note: Unitrade uses Scott numbering) One of the only reasons that some album manufacturers do not have Scott numbers is licensing and paying for it. Not because they are bucking the system. "Sticking it to the man!".

I find Scott numbering to be like butchered meat and store baked bread. Amazingly convenient. I don't want to have to communicate and search for each stamp by "I have a 1927 second printing larger format three peso Mexican perf 10.5 x 12 unwatermarked carmine and slate blue airmail stamp depicting the dodo bird missing from my album. Do you have one?" and I certainly love having the crutch of knowing at a glance that it is just plain 'ol Scott 13498 because it says so right there in that space. Yippee!

Scott numbered albums make sense. They are logical in the extreme. Non-Scott numbered albums are illogical. You are going to search for your stamp purchase by Scott number. Sellers will use Scott numbers almost invariably. Communicating with other collectors uses Scott numbering as a universal component of the language.

Scott did a phenomenal job at brand recognition. Kudos to them.

Post removed

I see 2 sides to this. My Scott catalog is my #1 reference. Many collectors can identify scott numbers of stamps on sight and it helps in communication. I don't have as much issue with the valuations as others do. The Scott values are starting points, and are for stamps in better condition than the "average" stamp of a type.

The internet is great, but there is a place for a big phone book you can hold and browse through.

Starting out, I used printed albums which has Scott numbers in them. After using them for a few years, I got enough knowledge to create my own pages that have spots for what I want to collect regardless of catalog number, but I would not have gotten here without albums filled with Scott numbers and pictures of the stamps, or catalogs to help me understand that I have a few #9s and do not have a #5.

The numbering of stamps in the catalogs are inconsistent and horribly complicated for US stamps with lots of minor varieties getting major catalog numbers (#5, for example). But having a crutch to get started and then a shorthand way to refer to stamps is invaluable. Without catalog numbers, creating want lists or searching for the stamp you want in an auction or preparing a list of stamps to sell would be much more difficult.

Don convinced me to forego catalogs. I will let you know how it works out.

It rather seems as if some of you have changed the exam question from "why insist on a printed album with Scott numbers" to "how can I live without my stamp catalogue" ...