A few thoughts on a recent Postal Card purchase.
Best to all,
*Postal Card collecting is relatively inexpensive.
*Buying them one at a time can add up quickly.
*Finding bulk purchases is cost effective (even with half as extra). Total cost (with postage) $52 = about 9 cents a card.
*Now have some more nice extras if I ever get around to trading.
*Spending a few days sorting was enjoyable
*Finding a few oddities was fun.
*Finding some with philatelic history made it interesting. (see the UX120's at the end)
eBay original posting stated 500+
What showed up. Total count 560
Typical of what I added to my collection (200+ each)
Unused, with cachet and un-cachet FDC's
Number of duplicates I did not need.(240 each)
Number of odds&ends I liked for various reasons (140 each)
7 cent in short rate period
Returned post card with address
Variety of Official FDC's
Colorado "Silk" FDC
Various message/reply FDC's
Different color FDC cancels
Set of ten national park Stations
Duel country FDC cancel
Various adhesive Airmails on postcards with cachet.
High speed canceling machine grabbed two. (How/why did the second get a bar code?)
Two different size hubs used for FDC.
For me this is the "Treasure" from the lot:
(From UPSS catalog:S137/Scott No. UX120 — ISSUE OF 1988 15¢ Bison/Prairie.)
N.B.-A private resort association contracted with the GPO to overprint the basic card (S137) to advertise that the Myrtle Beach, SC area was back in business after hurricane Hugo. Approximately 900,000 cards were printed. 760,000 cards were delivered to and used by the commercial customer, most probably at lesser presort rates. The USPS retained 140,000 cards to sell to collectors.
(See Postal Stationery: May-Jun 2003, pg 70-73)These cards are featured on the cover of this issue.
I don't know how much I can copy from an article, but it is a very interesting read on mass mailing and discounted postage.If you have access to the UPSS site, you should look it up.
An Insider's View of those "False-Franked" Hugo
By James Majka
(From the article)
"This article will consider the period of the Bison/Prairie Issue(S137), and focus on the Hugo golf cards from the late 80's as model examples of a discounted mass-mailing. The article will
demonstrate that most of these cards are, in fact, false-franked, ultimately costing Myrtle Beach Golf Holiday less than their apparent 15-cent face value."
(The various pre-sorts the club could have used to reduce postage costs)
I have the ones in red so far. Will continue to look for the others if they exist.
ZIP+4 (NONPRESORT) 5-DIGIT (PRESORT)
3-DIGIT (PRESORT) CAR-RT SORT (CARRIER ROUTE PRESORT)
NONPRESORT (e.g. ALL FOR ADC, etc., note: These would not qualify for discount postage rates)
It's impossible to know the actual distribution of the discount rates ultimately apportioned to the Hugo mailing, but in my experience, the Carrier Route presort discount usually accounted for approximately 20% of a typical mailing, with over half of the mailing qualifying at the basic presort discount. A lot depends upon the density of the localized concentration of names in the source mailing list(s) used. If we assumed that Myrtle Beach Golf Holiday got this kind of discount, they probably saved over $10000 on the cost of the mailing. Used cards are fairly scarce, but amongst those that exist, the carrier route presort discount are probably the most unlikely to locate."
Unused card (No way to tell if unused by the club, or held back by the PO)
This is the first one I found before the following group arrived. It would appear after three tries the PO got it to the intended target as there is no "return to sender"
(These six came in the card lot)
This one appear to have made it on the first try.
CAR-RT SORT (CARRIER ROUTE PRESORT)
This one seems to have made it to the intended address; with the ill placed returned reason checked "(Forwarding order)Expired", next to the hand-written "Deceased".
As stated in the article, most probably ended up in the trash; most survivors may be the ones returned as requested, with associated costs with that service.
This article was from 2003. Does anyone know if there in any updated information on this issue?
Thanks and appreciation to anyone who made it this far.