Yes Robert that is a nice find. It appears to be a double print as the seperation of the two strikes is clearly evident in the peak of the 4. If it were a slip I do not think there would be any separation in the strike itself, just a wider appearance over all. Since the image of the stamp shown is not very clear, is the image of the stamp you show the one with doubling or the regular one. And does Canada show doubling at all?
I stand to be corrected, but last I read, the Unitrade Specialised catalogue features the Scott Numbering System as noted on the front cover, so it is liscensed to use the Scott Catalogue numbering system.
So in essence everyone is correct in using either Scott or Unitrade for the main issue numbering as they are one and the same.
The Unitrade numbering system has to be used when and because of extra letter/numbering suffixes for specialised varieties not listed in the regular Scott catalogue for clarity and ease of reference.
Mike, I agree with you, however, I believe it is a matter of courtesy and respect. I may have overextended here, but Wert continuously uses the "Scott" number when referencing detailed listings only reflected by Unitrade.
Hello John If I can remember correctly, Mr. Harris once told me that a normal stamp is considered a Scott number until there is a variety/oddity/etc. assigned to a stamp, and then becomes a Unitrade number. I was not aware if my stamp was an actual Unitrade 1169i or just a regular Scott 1169.
I guess I could have used the title as ""Is this a Scott 1169 with a slip print or a Unitrade 1169i double print..??
Now, the problem of creating a title is if you have what you think is a new variety, you can only call it a Scott number until Unitrade accepts a stamp that is now considered a new variety. Unitrade is a great Catalouge and shows many, many varieties.