By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more

Should these stamps be listed ?

Penny red perf 16s with short perforations

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
Paul Davey 126/06/2019 20:44:28
416 forum posts
26 photos

Show me a vertical block of short stamps & I'll back any call for them to be listed! I still say it's a shifted comb.


Fred Sellars26/06/2019 21:14:24
205 forum posts
67 photos

Come on Paul,how could you have a vertical block of short perforates if they only come from the "A" row, what you say to me is illogical.

The stamp depicted is not 1 shifted comb but 2, making the stamp almost square in comparison with the majority of stamps on that particular sheet, therefore it must be a variety, no doubt you disagree.

Paul please tell me hand on heart, is this a variety or a novelty ?


Edited By Fred Sellars on 26/06/2019 21:16:30

Paul Davey 126/06/2019 21:37:08
416 forum posts
26 photos

Fred - my point exactly! - if you can't get a block it is not a separate stamp listing but a variety. Comb perfs puncture three sides of the stamp in one go. so if the next use of the comb is higher than it should be then a short stamp results. Too low and it's a tall stamp. Doesn't have to be the A row, could be any row in principle.

It is both a variety and a novelty but this is not a qualification for a catalogue listing IMHO. I quite like them and will pick up examples when I see them if they look pretty, particularly on cover.

Doctor blade flaws, shifted colours etc in the modern era are also not listed (unless so shifted they are missing!) should these be too?

Perhaps we can only agree that the difference in approach to such things is what makes it a great hobby!

Fred Sellars26/06/2019 21:59:53
205 forum posts
67 photos

Your reply to my question relates to the fact that you like to sit on the fence somewhat when giving an answer.

The one thing I can agree with you is that phiiately is a great hobby without a shadow of a doubt.


Paul Davey 126/06/2019 22:38:45
416 forum posts
26 photos

Collected - yes, listed - no

Fred Sellars26/06/2019 22:50:56
205 forum posts
67 photos

If the width of a perforation is different they are listed but if the stamp is 2 perforations short they are not.

It's a funny old world isn't it !

Fred Sellars30/06/2019 14:14:54
205 forum posts
67 photos

Good afternoon Paul,

As a moderator I'm sure you will pick this message up.

In the part 1 specialised the Archer Perfs are mentioned and listed.

In part 3 in appendix G perforators are also given space and even listed in the main body of the catalogue.

To name but a couple of incidences.

I believe that the stamps I have depicted should fall into this category,they are not even mentioned.

People that collect the perforation 16 stamps should be given information don't you agree.

If you reply please don't sit on the fence again.

Thank you

Edited By Fred Sellars on 30/06/2019 14:27:37

Fred Sellars01/07/2019 17:21:41
205 forum posts
67 photos

Dear Paul,

In our discussion I feel that you've got the wrong end of the stick I never stated that it should be listed as a separate stamp but as a variety, you agreed that it is a variety in your previous posting.

However some of the things I stated in my last posting still applies.

Your call, Fred.

Fred Sellars02/07/2019 08:46:15
205 forum posts
67 photos

Good morning Paul Davey 1,

This forum is designed so that philatelists can air their views on any given subject so related.

You appear to be rather dogmatic over this issue by not responding to my last 2 postings as I believe it is common courtesy to do so.

Therefore I can only quote you a little synonym I just thought up.

"Perhaps it's the CATalogue that's got your tongue"

Fred Sellars04/07/2019 15:53:52
205 forum posts
67 photos

Had the anomaly been on a Wilding or Machin stamp I would have expected the anomaly to have been listed (not as a separate stamp), but as a variety, this variety has been known for many years as there are only 17 vertical perforations compared with the normal 19.

This type of stamp should be given its correct status as it is not a "novelty".

As they say in chess Paul "check".

I believe it's your move !

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of Stamp Magazine? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find Stamp Magazine!


Support Our Partners
Universal Philatelic Auctions
Guernsey post November
Nordfrim April
varisell stamps
Purves Philatelics
Glasgow Stamp Shop
Tony Lester
British Stamp Market Values & British Coins Market Values

Subscription Offers

Subscribe to<br />    Stamp Magazine and receive a FREE gift