Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Some information here
https://www.stampcommunity.org/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=75024
Don
Login to Like
this post
Even though some actually believe that it is a true printers error (not intentional), this error was, as this 'error' can only be found in the more expensive albums, if they weren't intentional why are they not in the cheaper album as well?
Such an error would have been detected when the stamp was originally issued to the post office for sale to the public (these are reprints printed especially for the album), no such error was ever discovered, it only exists in the end of year post office deluxe and executive albums.
So it can only be described as a deliberate error to help sell the more expensive album, I would identify it as a manufactured error.
Login to Like
this post
There is no cheaper album. There are 2 editions, the $159.95 Executive edition, and the $129.95 edition, designated as deluxe.
https://auspost.com.au/shop/collectables/collections
Login to Like
this post
Thanks Jill, I was later informed about that. I'm going to look into the error as to the status it may hold in philatelic rarities. As the stamps are not commercial issues I can only view them as a curiosity rather than a stamp of great interest.
I'll know by tomorrow afternoon.
Rob
Login to Like
this post
I bought a copy today, and local P.O. has more. If anyone wants me to get one for them at A$129.95 plus postage send me a pm
Login to Like
this post
Rob1956 said
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Even though some actually believe that it is a true printers error (not intentional), this error was, as this 'error' can only be found in the more expensive albums, if they weren't intentional why are they not in the cheaper album as well?
Such an error would have been detected when the stamp was originally issued to the post office for sale to the public (these are reprints printed especially for the album), no such error was ever discovered, it only exists in the end of year post office deluxe and executive albums.
So it can only be described as a deliberate error to help sell the more expensive album, I would identify it as a manufactured error.
As this would probably constitute a Federal offence carrying a hefty jail term I hope Rob1956 has absolute proof of his claim.
Regards
Frank
Login to Like
this post
Rob1956 offered his opinion on this so called error. Nothing more, nothing less. He doesn't need to provide proof of his belief.
Regards, oldmanemu
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
It isn’t a Federal offence to create manufactured reprints by a governing body; it’s only an offence if a member of the public reproduces a stamp for sale as an original. If it were illegal why then can a person legally remove the stamps and use them as mail.
Also the free replacement block of 4, is the offer from the post office for a replica mini-sheet replacement without the variety or a replacement of an original block of 4 stamps, if the latter, why replace replicas with originals, the originals will not be mini-sheets as mini-sheets were never issued for the “Art of the Desert” series.
There is suspicion that the stamp had been manufactured for collectors, remember, it is just a suspicion. Let’s say for arguments sake that I’m wrong about the stamp in question being intentionally manufactured.
The mini-sheet is a reprint of the original “Art of the Desert” series, and the “error” is not an error but a variety and a common one at that.
I’ve been collecting stamps for quite some time, nearly 45 years, and most of that time collecting scarce and rare errors (which I have displayed), and studying them for a book I am writing titled “THE ERRORS & VARIETIES OF KGVI & QEII”.
An error is a stamp(s) found only on one sheet; a variety is constant and found on many sheets, such as the variety in the 2020 Post Office yearbook, approximately 6,000 albums were printed, and every book has that variety, so that means there are about 6,000 printed, not scarce or rare by any means, it is common.
The mini sheets in the yearbooks did not exist with the original stamps that were issued on June 9, 2020 and the originals will still be publicly on sale until June 30, 2021.
Pulled proof mini-sheets would have been printed for inspection, that variety would have been discovered and corrected before the mini-sheet is printed in bulk but it wasn’t, unusual considering the state-of-art computer technology being used today to detect such mistakes when it comes to printing stamps and high-quality books, but it wasn’t, the variety was kept in as the post office knew that it would sell.
As a rarity it is not, this variety may create a small premium later but nothing to be excited over.
The gullible who are buying these albums for hundreds of dollars on eBay will have their fingers burnt when the novelty dies down as was the experience with the 2016 Adelaide 30 cent emergency labels (remember that frenzy).
I received negative feedback for my comment, some quite abusive, but at the end I was right, those who spent literally thousands of dollars buying those labels off greedy opportunists hoping to have a future golden nest egg, found out the egg was made of fool’s gold and their money long gone.
This variety is on the same road, and the gullible will be making the same old mistake for the same old reason – the hope of scoring a future golden nest egg.
The attachment is from the Stamp Bulletin No. 365. May – June 2020; where does it mention the sale of a mini-sheet?
Now back to that suspicion, the variety may have been manufactured to boost the sale of the 2020 yearbook (the sale of the newly formatted design of the 2020 yearbook is very successful thanks to that erroneously described “error”), those past yearbooks were never a successful profit maker for the post office and definitely not one for the buyer.
Rob
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Crimes Act 1914
85G Forgery of postage stamps etc.
(3) A person shall not make, use, have in his or her possession, or sell or otherwise dispose of, any paper or article that has affixed to it, or printed on it, a mark, label or design resembling, apparently intended to resemble or pass for, or likely to be mistaken for, a postage stamp, knowing it is not a postage stamp.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 5 years.
Regards
Frank
Login to Like
this post
Looks like the Government will be charging itself then!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
"Crimes Act 1914
85G Forgery of postage stamps etc.
(3) A person shall not make, use, have in his or her possession, or sell or otherwise dispose of, any paper or article that has affixed to it, or printed on it, a mark, label or design resembling, apparently intended to resemble or pass for, or likely to be mistaken for, a postage stamp, knowing it is not a postage stamp.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 5 years.
"
I believe I already covered that point, this is what I said "It isn’t a Federal offence to create manufactured reprints by a governing body; it’s only an offence if a member of the public reproduces a stamp for sale as an original. If it were illegal why then can a person legally remove the stamps and use them as mail."
The governing body is Australia Post. They have created albums of posthumous stamps, I have the 1999 issue of the early pre-decimals, it is a scarce printing. A posthumous proof is a reprint created from the original dies of the stamps produced for these albums, but there are obvious differences to tell the original and the posthumous stamp apart.
If I used the original dies, regardless of any altering of the stamp I can still be charged for printing forgeries, even if they are posthumous proofs. Australia Post has being doing it for years and immune from any type of prosecution.
Login to Like
this post
Hi to all
Sorry if I have missed the answer
The "Error" is in both the general 2020 collection album and the expensive one.
Regards
Horamakhet
Login to Like
this post
Hi Horamakhet
There are 6,000 of those varieties.
Rob
Login to Like
this post
Hi Rob and all
I was in the post office yesterday and the one I went to still had plenty of the cheap edition on sale, but they are now on display, so I think it does beg the question if this was a deliberate attempt to create a variety. I have noticed that since the pandemic began, more and more stamp forums are popping up on social media and to me it would make sense if with the increase of younger persons now beginning to collect stamps, especially here in Australia, that the Australian Post Office "created" the variety to encourage the sale of the year books, whose sales have been dropping in the last few years.
I am surprised that the only reporting of the variety has been on social media, and not in the local newspapers, as if it is being carefully manipulated re the information of the variety.
The post office themselves does not call it an error, or a variety, but an irregularity, which in itself is a strange wording, nor is the information sheet provided to purchasers on the official post office letterhead here in Victoria. I do not know if the post office information sheet in other states is on the official post office letter head, perhaps some-one the forum can advise if it is?
To paraphrase & misquote William Shakespeare "Me thinks the post office do not protest enough"
Regards
Horamakhet
Login to Like
this post
Hi Horamakhet
There is approximately 6,000 of those varieties issued, I believe why they are now on display is because the frenzy had died down and they are left with excess stock. Of course a well-known crook will buy as many as he can and then grossly inflate the cost, convince the gullible the error is a valuable rarity and then rip-off the naïve.
Like other over-inflated speeches from this person the victim will always realise their blunder when they are trying to sell their “golden nest egg”.
I have noticed that stamp collecting is starting to increase with the younger generation, and of course there will be the vultures in the form of a known crook and others as well as the post office will be hovering nearby looking for a victim.
I have spoken to influential philatelists and they too are suspicious about this “variety” and also suspect that it could have been manufactured to boost the sale of their annual post office album, as it is on record that those albums since 1981 (the first year of release of the post office albums), that the post office lost revenue.
And you have a point about it not being in the newspaper, the 2016 Adelaide emergency stamp was mentioned, and that was because a well-known crook made sure it was in there, it is amazing he didn’t mention this one, and considering 6,000 is not a rarity, and too common to be a variety of worth, his only safe bet and he has done that to achieve notoriety was to lie to those who think he is a philatelic guru.
First the post office mentions that it is an error, now they say it’s an irregularity, if it’s an irregularity then it would have been a created one.
Login to Like
this post
Hi Rob
Unfortunately as you have said, the so called crook is already trying to manipulate the market.
I feel sorry for all the persons who are going to buy it from him, as there is still lots of stock in the post offices around me.
Gibbons will possibly say what you have said, that it is a variety but because of the number "issued" will be of nominal value.
Have a great new year to all
Regards
Horamakhet
Login to Like
this post
6,000 of the variety. Say 90% remain in the yearbooks, and 10% are removed. What price for used on cover? THAT might be worth a shot
Login to Like
this post
Hi Dave
Even though the stamps can be legally used on cover, they are not from the original printing and were printed specifically for the album, removing this particular variety from the album and used commercially will not alter them being a replica.
All stamps that are printed and used commercially have a First Day Cover, the album printings do not have one, It will not make a difference if used on a cover.
If a cover or one of those stamps were to be sent to Chris Ceremuga for expertizing, he would roll on the floor laughing.
Login to Like
this post
Why on earth would anyone pay to send a cover for a certificate if it carries a stamp that is legally available for use as postage? To say that there would be no premium for it on cover is a little naive.
I'll guarantee that in a few years when all these year books come up in auction, dealers will be ripping the sheets out to use as postage (it's the funniest thing to see at an auction, dealers pulling the stamps from the year books and throwing the year books away. I saw an absolute frenzy once at Prestige).
Catalogues will list all these stamps (not just the one in question) as "imperf from year book" or some such, and I will wager that these will carry a significant premium.
Login to Like
this post
I was referring to the “variety”. Of course there would be a premium but it would be so insignificant it wouldn’t even make a ripple.
I was verbally abused when I wrote on numerous sites about the 2016 Adelaide emergency stamp; I said it was a label and that the amounts of money handed over to charlatans in that frenzy from the gullible will lose their money, my warnings turned out correct and people lost their money (Even the SG catalogue referred to those labels as labels).
I was missing a full year of common stamps, I went to the local dealer and he had very little of that year in stock so he sold me a year book at the price of the stamps I wanted which was way below the original value of the book, I took the stamps out and threw the album into the bin.
Depending upon what catalogue you are referring to, auction or stamp catalogue, I doubt any auction will be making such a fuss with the current “variety”.
If there were a variety in past year books it would be a real variety as they used the actual stamps then from past issues.
The so-called missing “Australia” stamp will never reach scarcity level, let alone carrying a significant premium for the album.
There would need to be a provenance stating with evidence that the stamp is not a replica and that the variety was not intentional. I doubt any of that evidence will ever be provided.
I can assure you that the 2020 album will never have any future significant premium.
BTW - I collect all varieties of KGVI and QEII (no flyspecks), this one I will not even consider adding to my collection until it is recognised as a bona-fide flaw, which I doubt will ever happen.
Login to Like
this post
We'll agree to disagree on this one. This will be SG listed at some point, and would, I imagine, appear in the ACSC. Perhaps you could run it by Geoff Kellow?
Login to Like
this post
Okay Dave, I know Geoff well, He's going to laugh at me but I'll ask. I'll even ask Chris (Ceremuga) when I see him next.
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Some information here
https://www.stampcommunity.org/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=75024
Don
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Even though some actually believe that it is a true printers error (not intentional), this error was, as this 'error' can only be found in the more expensive albums, if they weren't intentional why are they not in the cheaper album as well?
Such an error would have been detected when the stamp was originally issued to the post office for sale to the public (these are reprints printed especially for the album), no such error was ever discovered, it only exists in the end of year post office deluxe and executive albums.
So it can only be described as a deliberate error to help sell the more expensive album, I would identify it as a manufactured error.
Login to Like
this post
07:29:08am
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
There is no cheaper album. There are 2 editions, the $159.95 Executive edition, and the $129.95 edition, designated as deluxe.
https://auspost.com.au/shop/collectables/collections
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Thanks Jill, I was later informed about that. I'm going to look into the error as to the status it may hold in philatelic rarities. As the stamps are not commercial issues I can only view them as a curiosity rather than a stamp of great interest.
I'll know by tomorrow afternoon.
Rob
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
I bought a copy today, and local P.O. has more. If anyone wants me to get one for them at A$129.95 plus postage send me a pm
Login to Like
this post
04:28:10am
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Rob1956 said
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Even though some actually believe that it is a true printers error (not intentional), this error was, as this 'error' can only be found in the more expensive albums, if they weren't intentional why are they not in the cheaper album as well?
Such an error would have been detected when the stamp was originally issued to the post office for sale to the public (these are reprints printed especially for the album), no such error was ever discovered, it only exists in the end of year post office deluxe and executive albums.
So it can only be described as a deliberate error to help sell the more expensive album, I would identify it as a manufactured error.
As this would probably constitute a Federal offence carrying a hefty jail term I hope Rob1956 has absolute proof of his claim.
Regards
Frank
Login to Like
this post
05:35:08am
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Rob1956 offered his opinion on this so called error. Nothing more, nothing less. He doesn't need to provide proof of his belief.
Regards, oldmanemu
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
It isn’t a Federal offence to create manufactured reprints by a governing body; it’s only an offence if a member of the public reproduces a stamp for sale as an original. If it were illegal why then can a person legally remove the stamps and use them as mail.
Also the free replacement block of 4, is the offer from the post office for a replica mini-sheet replacement without the variety or a replacement of an original block of 4 stamps, if the latter, why replace replicas with originals, the originals will not be mini-sheets as mini-sheets were never issued for the “Art of the Desert” series.
There is suspicion that the stamp had been manufactured for collectors, remember, it is just a suspicion. Let’s say for arguments sake that I’m wrong about the stamp in question being intentionally manufactured.
The mini-sheet is a reprint of the original “Art of the Desert” series, and the “error” is not an error but a variety and a common one at that.
I’ve been collecting stamps for quite some time, nearly 45 years, and most of that time collecting scarce and rare errors (which I have displayed), and studying them for a book I am writing titled “THE ERRORS & VARIETIES OF KGVI & QEII”.
An error is a stamp(s) found only on one sheet; a variety is constant and found on many sheets, such as the variety in the 2020 Post Office yearbook, approximately 6,000 albums were printed, and every book has that variety, so that means there are about 6,000 printed, not scarce or rare by any means, it is common.
The mini sheets in the yearbooks did not exist with the original stamps that were issued on June 9, 2020 and the originals will still be publicly on sale until June 30, 2021.
Pulled proof mini-sheets would have been printed for inspection, that variety would have been discovered and corrected before the mini-sheet is printed in bulk but it wasn’t, unusual considering the state-of-art computer technology being used today to detect such mistakes when it comes to printing stamps and high-quality books, but it wasn’t, the variety was kept in as the post office knew that it would sell.
As a rarity it is not, this variety may create a small premium later but nothing to be excited over.
The gullible who are buying these albums for hundreds of dollars on eBay will have their fingers burnt when the novelty dies down as was the experience with the 2016 Adelaide 30 cent emergency labels (remember that frenzy).
I received negative feedback for my comment, some quite abusive, but at the end I was right, those who spent literally thousands of dollars buying those labels off greedy opportunists hoping to have a future golden nest egg, found out the egg was made of fool’s gold and their money long gone.
This variety is on the same road, and the gullible will be making the same old mistake for the same old reason – the hope of scoring a future golden nest egg.
The attachment is from the Stamp Bulletin No. 365. May – June 2020; where does it mention the sale of a mini-sheet?
Now back to that suspicion, the variety may have been manufactured to boost the sale of the 2020 yearbook (the sale of the newly formatted design of the 2020 yearbook is very successful thanks to that erroneously described “error”), those past yearbooks were never a successful profit maker for the post office and definitely not one for the buyer.
Rob
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
10:10:42pm
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Crimes Act 1914
85G Forgery of postage stamps etc.
(3) A person shall not make, use, have in his or her possession, or sell or otherwise dispose of, any paper or article that has affixed to it, or printed on it, a mark, label or design resembling, apparently intended to resemble or pass for, or likely to be mistaken for, a postage stamp, knowing it is not a postage stamp.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 5 years.
Regards
Frank
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Looks like the Government will be charging itself then!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
"Crimes Act 1914
85G Forgery of postage stamps etc.
(3) A person shall not make, use, have in his or her possession, or sell or otherwise dispose of, any paper or article that has affixed to it, or printed on it, a mark, label or design resembling, apparently intended to resemble or pass for, or likely to be mistaken for, a postage stamp, knowing it is not a postage stamp.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 5 years.
"
I believe I already covered that point, this is what I said "It isn’t a Federal offence to create manufactured reprints by a governing body; it’s only an offence if a member of the public reproduces a stamp for sale as an original. If it were illegal why then can a person legally remove the stamps and use them as mail."
The governing body is Australia Post. They have created albums of posthumous stamps, I have the 1999 issue of the early pre-decimals, it is a scarce printing. A posthumous proof is a reprint created from the original dies of the stamps produced for these albums, but there are obvious differences to tell the original and the posthumous stamp apart.
If I used the original dies, regardless of any altering of the stamp I can still be charged for printing forgeries, even if they are posthumous proofs. Australia Post has being doing it for years and immune from any type of prosecution.
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Hi to all
Sorry if I have missed the answer
The "Error" is in both the general 2020 collection album and the expensive one.
Regards
Horamakhet
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Hi Horamakhet
There are 6,000 of those varieties.
Rob
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Hi Rob and all
I was in the post office yesterday and the one I went to still had plenty of the cheap edition on sale, but they are now on display, so I think it does beg the question if this was a deliberate attempt to create a variety. I have noticed that since the pandemic began, more and more stamp forums are popping up on social media and to me it would make sense if with the increase of younger persons now beginning to collect stamps, especially here in Australia, that the Australian Post Office "created" the variety to encourage the sale of the year books, whose sales have been dropping in the last few years.
I am surprised that the only reporting of the variety has been on social media, and not in the local newspapers, as if it is being carefully manipulated re the information of the variety.
The post office themselves does not call it an error, or a variety, but an irregularity, which in itself is a strange wording, nor is the information sheet provided to purchasers on the official post office letterhead here in Victoria. I do not know if the post office information sheet in other states is on the official post office letter head, perhaps some-one the forum can advise if it is?
To paraphrase & misquote William Shakespeare "Me thinks the post office do not protest enough"
Regards
Horamakhet
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Hi Horamakhet
There is approximately 6,000 of those varieties issued, I believe why they are now on display is because the frenzy had died down and they are left with excess stock. Of course a well-known crook will buy as many as he can and then grossly inflate the cost, convince the gullible the error is a valuable rarity and then rip-off the naïve.
Like other over-inflated speeches from this person the victim will always realise their blunder when they are trying to sell their “golden nest egg”.
I have noticed that stamp collecting is starting to increase with the younger generation, and of course there will be the vultures in the form of a known crook and others as well as the post office will be hovering nearby looking for a victim.
I have spoken to influential philatelists and they too are suspicious about this “variety” and also suspect that it could have been manufactured to boost the sale of their annual post office album, as it is on record that those albums since 1981 (the first year of release of the post office albums), that the post office lost revenue.
And you have a point about it not being in the newspaper, the 2016 Adelaide emergency stamp was mentioned, and that was because a well-known crook made sure it was in there, it is amazing he didn’t mention this one, and considering 6,000 is not a rarity, and too common to be a variety of worth, his only safe bet and he has done that to achieve notoriety was to lie to those who think he is a philatelic guru.
First the post office mentions that it is an error, now they say it’s an irregularity, if it’s an irregularity then it would have been a created one.
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Hi Rob
Unfortunately as you have said, the so called crook is already trying to manipulate the market.
I feel sorry for all the persons who are going to buy it from him, as there is still lots of stock in the post offices around me.
Gibbons will possibly say what you have said, that it is a variety but because of the number "issued" will be of nominal value.
Have a great new year to all
Regards
Horamakhet
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
6,000 of the variety. Say 90% remain in the yearbooks, and 10% are removed. What price for used on cover? THAT might be worth a shot
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Hi Dave
Even though the stamps can be legally used on cover, they are not from the original printing and were printed specifically for the album, removing this particular variety from the album and used commercially will not alter them being a replica.
All stamps that are printed and used commercially have a First Day Cover, the album printings do not have one, It will not make a difference if used on a cover.
If a cover or one of those stamps were to be sent to Chris Ceremuga for expertizing, he would roll on the floor laughing.
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Why on earth would anyone pay to send a cover for a certificate if it carries a stamp that is legally available for use as postage? To say that there would be no premium for it on cover is a little naive.
I'll guarantee that in a few years when all these year books come up in auction, dealers will be ripping the sheets out to use as postage (it's the funniest thing to see at an auction, dealers pulling the stamps from the year books and throwing the year books away. I saw an absolute frenzy once at Prestige).
Catalogues will list all these stamps (not just the one in question) as "imperf from year book" or some such, and I will wager that these will carry a significant premium.
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
I was referring to the “variety”. Of course there would be a premium but it would be so insignificant it wouldn’t even make a ripple.
I was verbally abused when I wrote on numerous sites about the 2016 Adelaide emergency stamp; I said it was a label and that the amounts of money handed over to charlatans in that frenzy from the gullible will lose their money, my warnings turned out correct and people lost their money (Even the SG catalogue referred to those labels as labels).
I was missing a full year of common stamps, I went to the local dealer and he had very little of that year in stock so he sold me a year book at the price of the stamps I wanted which was way below the original value of the book, I took the stamps out and threw the album into the bin.
Depending upon what catalogue you are referring to, auction or stamp catalogue, I doubt any auction will be making such a fuss with the current “variety”.
If there were a variety in past year books it would be a real variety as they used the actual stamps then from past issues.
The so-called missing “Australia” stamp will never reach scarcity level, let alone carrying a significant premium for the album.
There would need to be a provenance stating with evidence that the stamp is not a replica and that the variety was not intentional. I doubt any of that evidence will ever be provided.
I can assure you that the 2020 album will never have any future significant premium.
BTW - I collect all varieties of KGVI and QEII (no flyspecks), this one I will not even consider adding to my collection until it is recognised as a bona-fide flaw, which I doubt will ever happen.
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
We'll agree to disagree on this one. This will be SG listed at some point, and would, I imagine, appear in the ACSC. Perhaps you could run it by Geoff Kellow?
Login to Like
this post
re: 2020 year book with error ?? or deliberate
Okay Dave, I know Geoff well, He's going to laugh at me but I'll ask. I'll even ask Chris (Ceremuga) when I see him next.
Login to Like
this post