Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Bruce
Login to Like
this post
Postcards that are 25 years old are not vintage.
Vintsge would be pre-WWI.
The highly collectible period of pre-1900 & 1900 to 1914, in postcards are referred to as vintage.
25 year old cards, are really modern, but that does not make them undesirable, and would still make for a good auction lot whether used or unused.
All postcards, regardless of year are collectible. For instance, we have the new National Postcard Week cards produced for the first week in May, which was last week, are highly collectible, so it all depends on the
individual, and what their interests are.
To end this email, I would say, put them in the auction.
Richaard
Login to Like
this post
In addition to Richaard's comments, there is now a picture-postcard display class in philatelic exhibitions, and for several years we've been able to include picture postcards (as well as postal cards, of course) in Display Class exhibits and in other types of exhibits in which they are used as collateral items.
Yes, by all means, offer anything you want, including modern postcards.
Bob
Login to Like
this post
I second Bob's encouragement; we've been including unused post cards all along. thanks for asking.
Login to Like
this post
Thanks, Richaard for the informative reply and welcome terminology correction, and thanks to Bob and David, too.
Bruce
Login to Like
this post
Maybe a category "Postcards" would be a good addition to the auction website. Unused cards should not be in the "covers and postmarks" category because of the lack of postal hitory significance.
If the card has been used, however, I encourage all sellers of postcards to go the extra mile and to scan both sides of the card as the card may have collectors' value for either the front or back (postmark, stamp etc.) Actually quite a few cards were interesting to me for their postmarks, and I put in a bid (or would have put in a bid) but the cards sold higher for the view than warranted for the postmark (but you never know). Also, if the card is unused or the stamp was taken off this should be stated in the description as to not let anybody guessing if there is a postal history gem hidden on the back of card.
Otherwise I welcome the current string of postcard offerings on our auction. Most are not for me, but they are still nice to look at.
Arno
Login to Like
this post
I believe that postcards are considered to be covers, even though it's not logical. Since I collect postcards mostly for their images, and occasionally for the messages written on used ones, all that I need is an indication of whether a postcard is unused or used.
I certainly agree with Rhinelander that it's contingent on sellers to provide images of the back of not only used postcards, but used covers, assuming there is ay information on the back of the cover. No one would buy a dozen eggs without opening it to see the condition of the eggs. Likewise, knowledgeable buyers are less likely to buy a cover if they can't see the back of it.
Bob
(Message edited by Bobstamp on May 16, 2010)
Login to Like
this post
I added an extra category in the Auction for Postcards. It all seems to working fine. Please let me know if you see a problem.
Regards ... Tim.
Login to Like
this post
I have been dealing in picture postcards since 1969, and have never heard of a post card being referred to as a cover. A cover is an envelope that has something such as a paper message in it.
Richaard
Login to Like
this post
Well, Richaard, now you have heard of a definition for cover that includes postcards! 
I was certain that I had once read a definition of "cover" that included postcards. However, since I can't quote it, and can't google any such definition, I will concede the point, or at least part of it.
While a postally used envelope is a cover, a cover not necessarily an envelope. And at least one on-line philatelic glossary includes postal cards in the definition of "cover" — the "Ask Phil" definition reads thus: "Cover: 1. any postally used envelope, folded letter sheet, postal card or other piece of postal stationery."
In several on-line philatelic glossaries, I found the following (or similar) definitions for "cover":
• "wrapper for letters and packets"
• "Folded letters that were addressed and mailed without an envelope and the wrappers from mailed parcels are also covers"
• "letter-sheet or wrapper"
Bob
(Message edited by Bobstamp on May 16, 2010)
Login to Like
this post
THNAK YOU Tim! You're unique!
Avi
Hoboken NJ
Login to Like
this post
Isn't "entires" the compact term-of-art for covers & cards & wrappers & postal money orders & parcels & documents ...
Login to Like
this post
09:38:59pm
"Isn't "entires" the compact term-of-art for covers & cards & wrappers & postal money orders & parcels & documents ..."
No. The word "entire" is used pretty much exclusively to refer to a postal stationery item, whether an envelope, postal card or wrapper in order to differentiate it from the "cut-square", which is the indicia cut from such an item.
Roy
Login to Like
this post
Thanks, Roy!
Login to Like
this post
Very concise, Roy....as usual!
Login to Like
this post
In the U K "entire" usually means a cover plus contents ( normally the letter or other document(s) ) - although by definition (rather than common usage )it would include a postcard or complete lettersheet/aerogramme.
Malcolm
Login to Like
this post
As Malcolm stated, I have found this to be so in the UK and indeed in British Commonwealth catalogues issued in other countries.
Login to Like
this post
01:20:43pm
Would it be appropriate to post unused vintage nature postcards (about 25 years old) from Hawaii in the auction? It seems we have some interest in postcards, but I want to make sure since these are not postally used.
Bruce
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
Postcards that are 25 years old are not vintage.
Vintsge would be pre-WWI.
The highly collectible period of pre-1900 & 1900 to 1914, in postcards are referred to as vintage.
25 year old cards, are really modern, but that does not make them undesirable, and would still make for a good auction lot whether used or unused.
All postcards, regardless of year are collectible. For instance, we have the new National Postcard Week cards produced for the first week in May, which was last week, are highly collectible, so it all depends on the
individual, and what their interests are.
To end this email, I would say, put them in the auction.
Richaard
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
In addition to Richaard's comments, there is now a picture-postcard display class in philatelic exhibitions, and for several years we've been able to include picture postcards (as well as postal cards, of course) in Display Class exhibits and in other types of exhibits in which they are used as collateral items.
Yes, by all means, offer anything you want, including modern postcards.
Bob
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
I second Bob's encouragement; we've been including unused post cards all along. thanks for asking.
Login to Like
this post
03:08:48pm
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
Thanks, Richaard for the informative reply and welcome terminology correction, and thanks to Bob and David, too.
Bruce
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
Maybe a category "Postcards" would be a good addition to the auction website. Unused cards should not be in the "covers and postmarks" category because of the lack of postal hitory significance.
If the card has been used, however, I encourage all sellers of postcards to go the extra mile and to scan both sides of the card as the card may have collectors' value for either the front or back (postmark, stamp etc.) Actually quite a few cards were interesting to me for their postmarks, and I put in a bid (or would have put in a bid) but the cards sold higher for the view than warranted for the postmark (but you never know). Also, if the card is unused or the stamp was taken off this should be stated in the description as to not let anybody guessing if there is a postal history gem hidden on the back of card.
Otherwise I welcome the current string of postcard offerings on our auction. Most are not for me, but they are still nice to look at.
Arno
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
I believe that postcards are considered to be covers, even though it's not logical. Since I collect postcards mostly for their images, and occasionally for the messages written on used ones, all that I need is an indication of whether a postcard is unused or used.
I certainly agree with Rhinelander that it's contingent on sellers to provide images of the back of not only used postcards, but used covers, assuming there is ay information on the back of the cover. No one would buy a dozen eggs without opening it to see the condition of the eggs. Likewise, knowledgeable buyers are less likely to buy a cover if they can't see the back of it.
Bob
(Message edited by Bobstamp on May 16, 2010)
Login to Like
this post
12:21:19pm
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
I added an extra category in the Auction for Postcards. It all seems to working fine. Please let me know if you see a problem.
Regards ... Tim.
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
I have been dealing in picture postcards since 1969, and have never heard of a post card being referred to as a cover. A cover is an envelope that has something such as a paper message in it.
Richaard
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
Well, Richaard, now you have heard of a definition for cover that includes postcards!
I was certain that I had once read a definition of "cover" that included postcards. However, since I can't quote it, and can't google any such definition, I will concede the point, or at least part of it.
While a postally used envelope is a cover, a cover not necessarily an envelope. And at least one on-line philatelic glossary includes postal cards in the definition of "cover" — the "Ask Phil" definition reads thus: "Cover: 1. any postally used envelope, folded letter sheet, postal card or other piece of postal stationery."
In several on-line philatelic glossaries, I found the following (or similar) definitions for "cover":
• "wrapper for letters and packets"
• "Folded letters that were addressed and mailed without an envelope and the wrappers from mailed parcels are also covers"
• "letter-sheet or wrapper"
Bob
(Message edited by Bobstamp on May 16, 2010)
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
THNAK YOU Tim! You're unique!
Avi
Hoboken NJ
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
Isn't "entires" the compact term-of-art for covers & cards & wrappers & postal money orders & parcels & documents ...
Login to Like
this post
BuckaCover.com - 80,000 covers priced 60c to $1.50 - Easy browsing 500 categories
06 Jun 2016
09:38:59pm
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
"Isn't "entires" the compact term-of-art for covers & cards & wrappers & postal money orders & parcels & documents ..."
No. The word "entire" is used pretty much exclusively to refer to a postal stationery item, whether an envelope, postal card or wrapper in order to differentiate it from the "cut-square", which is the indicia cut from such an item.
Roy
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
Thanks, Roy!
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
Very concise, Roy....as usual!
Login to Like
this post
12:52:21pm
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
In the U K "entire" usually means a cover plus contents ( normally the letter or other document(s) ) - although by definition (rather than common usage )it would include a postcard or complete lettersheet/aerogramme.
Malcolm
Login to Like
this post
re: Terminology in Vintage Postcards
As Malcolm stated, I have found this to be so in the UK and indeed in British Commonwealth catalogues issued in other countries.
Login to Like
this post