| Author |
Replies: 15 / Views: 997 |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community

723 Posts |
|
|
So I immediately bought this cover I found on online. It cost a shade over $5 delivered. At first glance it seems kind of ordinary as it was a popular one.  Does anyone know what makes this special?
|
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
361 Posts |
|
|
I'm guessing something must be on the back because I see nothing of note on front |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community

723 Posts |
|
|
The back is blank. No markings.
edit: * To my knowledge this is a standard Artcraft a. version. Not relevant. * The stamps are properly tagged in standard phosphor tagging. Not relevant. * The side by side handstamp indicates it was a typical Handstamp (vs a Machine which would have 4 lines w/o FDOI or would lack the Moon Landing marking) first day cancellation, which is one of several used. This was a reproduction of the 'Moon Landing U.S.A' cancellation applied by the astronauts to the "Moon Letter". Not relevant.
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by rismoney - 10/09/2023 4:43 pm |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Netherlands
6526 Posts |
|
|
Moderator

United States
5094 Posts |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community

723 Posts |
|
|
Sept 9, 1969 is the proper issue date. July 20, 1969 is the when Armstrong put his left foot on the moon.
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community

723 Posts |
|
|
More info:
Interestingly, the following were used: Experimental Masters, Experimental Plates, Lithographic Plates, Master Plates for Actual Printing, and Intaglio Plates. Intaglio plates were used exclusively for production and as such only Intaglio is available to collectors.
This particular block stamp was indeed printed Intaglio.
According to Mystic, 152,364,800 were printed.
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by rismoney - 10/09/2023 5:23 pm |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community

723 Posts |
|
|
Maybe it's not exciting... [I don't know]
The quick answer is plates 31371-> 31405 (technically 31411,31415 weren't sent to press, and not every number in between was used). All were Intaglio and sent for printing.
The scarcest of ALL plates is by far 31378. I recently double-checked my notes as I was missing this PB forever. I searched up the "Moon landing Scott c76 cache catalog" (by Monte Eiserman and Harry Anderson), and this plate only has 34,298 impressions (as compared w/ plate 31382 which has the next scarcest at 71000 impressions). Nearly everything beyond that is "popular". There are a few 31382 out on the bay, if you have patience to search.
I just don't recall ever coming across a 31378 PB, particular with the FDOI of it. It is effectively the rarest FDOI possible of c76 that went public. Now I know c76 could be more rare/scarce, ie if it went to the moon, is missing tagging, or a color, or the cover could be in the Smithsonian, or signed by the astronauts, or be on some fantastic cachet. I am not implying it to be anything like those.
I don't have a Durland catalog, or know if this is even in there, and not sure if I overpaid or it's worth more or less. The value is hardly important. I guess my point here, is that not everything needs to be a banger in cost. The joys of philately come in many different forms, and this time like most for me, the hunt was the best part. I'd be curious if anyone else has come across this. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
United States
10594 Posts |
|
|
Moderator

United States
12330 Posts |
|
|
I looked that plate up when you first posted in an 2012 Durlands, they showed all plate number (including 31378) at the same value of $1.25, so I didn't think it uncommon. For what it is worth (not much), I have not seen a 31378 before. Don |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community

723 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
361 Posts |
|
|
My papa taught me something about business once: there's a cover for every pot |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community

United States
1055 Posts |
|
|
As with Durland, Hebert's price for plate singles is the same for each number, so neither catalog considers them scarce, but perhaps they should get a slight premium. I have used plate singles in all 4 positions for more than half the numbers. Some numbers I have just 2 or 3 positions. 31378 is the only number that I have just one position (LL). While my collection is clearly not representative of the universe, it does match the pattern that 31378 is the scarcest plate number of C76 that I own. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
24 Posts |
|
|
As a newb I am blown away at the depth of knowledge here. To know releases down to the plates and the impressions from those plates is amazing: kudos. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
762 Posts |
|
|
Classic supply and demand. Small supply of 31378 but even less demand so there is enough for everyone who wants one.
The best part of the story is finding an item one has been looking for for years.
rlsmoney, if you write this up and get it published you may increase demand enough to raise the price. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Moderator

United States
12330 Posts |
|
|
Quote: ...if you write this up and get it published you may increase demand enough to raise the price. I am not sure that this would have a longterm impact on demand. I do agree that it might increase demand and price at least for a while... then in about 15 years folks will be coming into this forum and wondering why it isn't worth as much as they paid for it 'back in 2024'.   Don |
Send note to Staff
|
|
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 997 |
|