Is this cover Commercial OR Philatelic? Post your candidates

pertinax · **Posted:** Wed Sep 22, 2010 09:00:56 am

On the other hand, this is not philatelic. :wink:

Anyone seen another?

GlenStephens · **Posted:** Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:23:23 am

Scott I've never looked.

3½d was the postcard rate for the entire British Empire so one imagines others are out there, but like so many things in this era, all long torn off, to soak as "used" :shock:

pertinax · **Posted:** Wed Sep 22, 2010 16:21:53 pm

GlenStephens wrote:

Scott I've never looked.

3½d was the postcard rate for the entire British Empire so one imagines others are out there, but like so many things in this era, all long torn off, to soak as "used" :shock:

I know.

I haven't seen one before. Mind you I hadn't seen a 3d blue Kookaburra postcard either - until after I bought it and then I found another 10!

Scott

clemo · **Posted:** Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:00:37 am

This parcel piece is using stamps covering the reign of three monarchs. Am unable to decipher the year of cancellation.
I would like to know if it was philatelic or commercial use.
Any ideas??

admin · **Posted:** Mon Nov 01, 2010 10:52:57 am

Clemo the SECOND we see a 1913 1d Engraved on the same parcel as 2 x KGVI issues, and 2 x 19th Century QV States stamps, it is 105% PHILATELIC!

In a lot of countries you can use stamps for many decades after issue date, and we were no exception.

Here is a strange one I bought today, to a Dentist in Ulverstone Tasmania, from Victoria, in 1950.

Using for the correct 2½d postage, a strip of 5 x ½d Roos .. SG#1!

Used 37 years out of period. Issued same year as the 1d Engraved on your piece.

And foolish - as a MUH strip of 4 is $80 or so - and the cover is only $40 in my stock, simply as a strange SG#1 curio piece!

clemo · **Posted:** Mon Nov 01, 2010 11:41:50 am

Glen,

Thought it would be philatelic, can't imagine many people having QV, KGV, KGVI stamps in their writing desk for aeons without them being used, mind you, stranger things have happened in the philatelic world!

admin · **Posted:** Mon Nov 01, 2010 23:54:13 pm

Yes but the 2/6d Abo was a heavily used stamp, so when you see that strange lot adding up to 2/6d, you KNOW it is Philatelic! :mrgreen:

Some are not so obvious. This WW2 1942 cover with a later than expected use of 6d CofA Roo looks rather odd.

However rate is correct at 8½d - 3d Reg'd Fee and 5½d airmail fee, seeing the War Tax was introduced on December 1941.

The careless and smeary boxed BLUE Caulfield South cancel (itself probably scarce .. have never seen that type before) and the overall messy look have nothing whatever philatelic about it.

What do others think?

heldo1 · **Posted:** Tue Nov 02, 2010 02:55:08 am

Here's a nice candidate for commercial usage I would think.

regards Heldo1

PeterS · **Posted:** Wed Nov 03, 2010 08:18:06 am

I would say Philatelic, based primarily on the stamps utilised. The TWO PENCE overprint was long obsolete and the 6d Kangaroo a bit late as well. The only 'current' stamp was the little ½d.

PeterS · **Posted:** Wed Nov 03, 2010 08:20:32 am

heldo1 wrote:

Here's a nice candidate for commercial usage I would think.

regards Heldo1

Agree. I am just trying work 0ut what the extra 1d was for? Postage should have been 1d plus 3d Registration? The date is 1917 isn't it?

heldo1 · **Posted:** Thu Nov 04, 2010 01:48:25 am

Hi Peter,
Yes the date is Dec 1917. and the combined rate for registration and delivery was 4d at the time. Has anyone got an explanation for the additional 1d at this time?
It cert doesn't have the look of a philatelic item.
I spotted this many years ago and liked the shade of the 1d and took a 'punt' thinking it might be a G27 on registered cover.

regards heldo1

aethelwulf · **Posted:** Thu Nov 04, 2010 02:14:05 am

heldo1 wrote:

Yes the date is Dec 1917. and the combined rate for registration and delivery was 4d at the time. Has anyone got an explanation for the additional 1d at this time?

Late Fee?

Or was there a 1d charge for Saturday delivery or somesuch?

PeterS · **Posted:** Thu Nov 04, 2010 06:15:34 am

aethelwulf wrote:

heldo1 wrote:

Yes the date is Dec 1917. and the combined rate for registration and delivery was 4d at the time. Has anyone got an explanation for the additional 1d at this time?

Late Fee?

Or was there a 1d charge for Saturday delivery or somesuch?

I was thinking Late Fee too, but then it should have got a Late Fee cancel. I suppose Morpeth may not have had a separate Late Fee canceller.

heldo1 · **Posted:** Thu Nov 04, 2010 12:40:37 pm

Hi all,
Good comments so far, but there is no Late Fee marking on front or back.... anymore from the crowd?

regards heldo1

PeterS · **Posted:** Thu Nov 04, 2010 12:48:34 pm

Well, the only other possibility I can think of is that it was overweight and required 2d postage. But, again, there is no indication on the front.

mstary1 · **Posted:** Thu Nov 04, 2010 18:05:18 pm

Picked up this one cheaply.

Commercial? I always worry about Booklet panes but couldn't resist :roll:

heldo1 · **Posted:** Thu Nov 04, 2010 18:27:50 pm

Quote:

Well, the only other possibility I can think of is that it was overweight and required 2d postage. But, again, there is no indication on the front.

Thanks Peter,
And none on the reverse either.

heldo1

samkelly · **Posted:** Thu Nov 04, 2010 18:28:17 pm

I don't see any difference between commercial usage and postally used.

Every cover sent through the postage system is postally used.

Every stamp cancelled through the system on cover is a stamp commercially used.

These covers then break up into a collectors preference of collecting. Preference of collecting is 'many and varied'.

Sam

PeterS · **Posted:** Fri Nov 05, 2010 06:24:44 am

samkelly wrote:

I don't see any difference between commercial usage and postally used.

Every cover sent through the postage system is postally used.

Every stamp cancelled through the system on cover is a stamp commercially used.

These covers then break up into a collectors preference of collecting. Preference of collecting is 'many and varied'.

Sam

Except that, in most cases, philatelically contrived covers do not accrue any real premium and certainly do not qualify for on cover pricing.

To be commercial the cover has to have stamps that were used 'in period' (during actual period of availability at the PO) and be for the correct postage rate, not deliberately overpaid to include more (or higher face value) stamps. That is why usages of some decimals attract high prices. Otherwise, since all decimal Australian stamps are still valid for postage, you could churn out thousands of otherwise scarce items.

norvic · **Posted:** Thu Nov 11, 2010 07:15:41 am

Four Special Delivery candidates. Correct postage rates - Special Delivery £1.50, basic 1st class postage first 15½p then 16p from 5th April 1983.

London SW1 to Hull

Glasgow to Hull

Hull local

Opinions?

PeterS · **Posted:** Thu Nov 11, 2010 07:38:41 am

For what it's worth, I would call the first 2 commercial and the second 2 philatelic.

The first cover does use rather a lot of stamps but the address supports commercial and it's not that unlikely that whatever was available was used to make up the rate.

The second cover is easier, minimal stamps (I am guessing) to make up the rate and, again, a commercial address.

The third and fourth covers, with a mixture of defins and commems and with the commemorative logos just scream philatelic. To me anyway.

I notice neither of the ones I consider philatelic have any date or time recorded on the SD sticker, whilst the other 2 do?

plsllvn · **Posted:** Thu Nov 11, 2010 07:52:38 am

PeterS wrote:

For what it's worth, I would call the first 2 commercial and the second 2 philatelic.

The first cover does use rather a lot of stamps but the address supports commercial and it's not that unlikely that whatever was available was used to make up the rate.

The second cover is easier, minimal stamps (I am guessing) to make up the rate and, again, a commercial address.

The third and fourth covers, with a mixture of defins and commems and with the commemorative logos just scream philatelic. To me anyway.

I notice neither of the ones I consider philatelic have any date or time recorded on the SD sticker, whilst the other 2 do?

Peter

I think you are correct

The last two also don't have an address to deliver to?

Paul

PeterS · **Posted:** Thu Nov 11, 2010 08:01:36 am

plsllvn wrote:

PeterS wrote:

For what it's worth, I would call the first 2 commercial and the second 2 philatelic.

The first cover does use rather a lot of stamps but the address supports commercial and it's not that unlikely that whatever was available was used to make up the rate.

The second cover is easier, minimal stamps (I am guessing) to make up the rate and, again, a commercial address.

The third and fourth covers, with a mixture of defins and commems and with the commemorative logos just scream philatelic. To me anyway.

I notice neither of the ones I consider philatelic have any date or time recorded on the SD sticker, whilst the other 2 do?

Peter

I think you are correct

The last two also don't have an address to deliver to?

Paul

Paul, I am assuming that the addresses at the bottom of the envelopes are the delivery addresses.

norvic · **Posted:** Thu Nov 11, 2010 08:11:58 am

PeterS wrote:

plsllvn wrote:

PeterS wrote:

For what it's worth, I would call the first 2 commercial and the second 2 philatelic.

The first cover does use rather a lot of stamps but the address supports commercial and it's not that unlikely that whatever was available was used to make up the rate.

The second cover is easier, minimal stamps (I am guessing) to make up the rate and, again, a commercial address.

The third and fourth covers, with a mixture of defins and commems and with the commemorative logos just scream philatelic. To me anyway.

I notice neither of the ones I consider philatelic have any date or time recorded on the SD sticker, whilst the other 2 do?

Peter

I think you are correct

The last two also don't have an address to deliver to?

Paul

Paul, I am assuming that the addresses at the bottom of the envelopes are the delivery addresses.

I agree with some of the conclusions voiced so far - note also that the lower two have consecutive SD serial numbers, the lower one used after the higher one.

I don't think the commemorative stamp would automatically mean philatelic, if it was a current one, but the Christmas stamp is from the 1979 series, so no longer in the PO, and the horse is from 78.

These four and a bundle of Hull Bridge commemorative covers with special postmarks were in two eBay lots for which I paid £1.98 plus £2.50 OTT postage - he didn't reduce the postage for the two combined, which didn't do his DSR ratings any good :evil:

I'll get rid of the special postmark covers somewhere. What I haven't worked out is why these last two were done. On the same date as the last one he did two smaller envelopes with 23p rate (second weight step) although they are unsealed and may well have been a hand-back. One had a 23p solo, and the other a mix of Machins. Odd. Maybe it was the first time that particular office counter stamp was used. Anybody here from Hull??

plsllvn · **Posted:** Thu Nov 11, 2010 08:33:27 am

PeterS wrote:

Paul, I am assuming that the addresses at the bottom of the envelopes are the delivery addresses.

Peter

You maybe right, I thought they were advertising covers.

Paul

Maddog · **Posted:** Thu Nov 11, 2010 13:02:03 pm

Comercial or philatelic? cover dated 1970 5 cent issued 1966. Second one post marked 1993, postage was 43 cents, so over paid by 4 cents.

I am only posting these because, by definition these are philatelic when they are clearly comercial, by the addresses being sent to. These 2 came out of a lot of 40-50 covers so 4%-5% of this sample are just normal people using what they had on hand to pay there bills. So determining what is Philatelic or Comercial is very subjective to the collector and what he wants to keep in his collection.

This one is philatelic cause it came from a dealer yesterday. But at least I have some Mint Unhinged on cover too. :lol:

PeterS · **Posted:** Thu Nov 11, 2010 13:16:39 pm

Address is an important consideration. The first 2 are not addressed to individuals and I would class them as commercial.

pandadog28 · **Posted:** Fri Nov 12, 2010 08:33:53 am

Here is an interesting one, ( top cover only)

Did the PO run out of one of the 45 cent stamps?

"Inactive image - Link deleted by Moderator"

Faust · **Posted:** Mon Nov 29, 2010 20:34:57 pm

I received this cover this morning and I have some questions:
Is this registered cover commercial?
Can somebody give a value of this cover,

Faust

admin · **Posted:** Mon Nov 29, 2010 20:53:33 pm

Let me see .. form VITA STAMPS saying "stamps for exchange" - and using 2 different types of 3d se-tenant pairs .............. and a rate of 1/5d that was not Reg'd to Italy AFAIK - maybe PHILATELIC! :lol:

norvic · **Posted:** Mon Nov 29, 2010 20:54:08 pm

Well, it may pay the right rate - but there would have been a higher-value stamp to do that - but it's clearly from a stamp dealer, so it's philatelic.

Faust · **Posted:** Mon Nov 29, 2010 21:19:58 pm

Does this mean that all letters send by a stamp dealer are philatelic?
They must also do some business :?:

Probably this letter was to an Italian customer.
Faust

admin · **Posted:** Mon Nov 29, 2010 21:44:56 pm

Faust I addressed this to a member here an hour back.

Overpaid by 10% I will cancel it very nicely tomorrow.

That is COMMERCIAL in your view??!!! :shock:

kugelpost · **Posted:** Mon Nov 29, 2010 22:00:42 pm

Three Australian covers and one from K.U.T. for you to ponder.

#1: Opened neatly at top, crease down middle, blank on reverse.

#2: Opened neatly left side, blank on reverse.

#3: Info accompanying purchase claimed this was sent to member of the Royal Family. Opened roughly top and left, most of upper backflap missing, blank on what remains of reverse, hinge marks on reverse.

#4: Sent from Mbeya, K.U.T. to Berlin via Brindisi, Italy Nov 27, 1932. Both front and back pictured. Postmarks indicate it took nearly two weeks to reach Brindisi en route to Berlin. Trouble with flight?? Brindisi was a stop on the K.U.T. to Germany air route (but most likely not the sea route). An early flight, don't know if it is a first flight. Opened a tad roughly top.

Thank you one and all!

Kugelpost

admin · **Posted:** Mon Nov 29, 2010 22:39:07 pm

ANY First Flight cover by DEFINITION is philatelic for goodness sakes.

Diver Pete · **Posted:** Mon Nov 29, 2010 22:44:12 pm

kugelpost wrote:

Three Australian covers and one from K.U.T. for you to ponder.

#1: Opened neatly at top, crease down middle, blank on reverse.

#2: Opened neatly left side, blank on reverse.

#3: Info accompanying purchase claimed this was sent to member of the Royal Family. Opened roughly top and left, most of upper backflap missing, blank on what remains of reverse, hinge marks on reverse.

#4: Sent from Mbeya, K.U.T. to Berlin via Brindisi, Italy Nov 27, 1932. Both front and back pictured. Postmarks indicate it took nearly two weeks to reach Brindisi en route to Berlin. Trouble with flight?? Brindisi was a stop on the K.U.T. to Germany air route (but most likely not the sea route). An early flight, don't know if it is a first flight. Opened a tad roughly top.

Thank you one and all!

Kugelpost

Kugelpost,

If it is a first flight cover it is very rare that it is commercial, especially if it has "First Flight" typed on the cover! Therefore, IMHO, the first is definitely philatelic. AAMC # 137 with an untied Frommer 17a Qantas vignette that was issued in 1927. I have never seen this vignette used on a cover from this flight! :mrgreen:

The second is also a flight cover that is used on the flight previous to the above cover. AAMC # 136 and thence onwards to Greece. Also with an untied vignette but this time a West Australian Airways Label - Frommer 21a - the correct label for this flight. It most possibly has an "Earliest Delivery" vignette on the reverse. :wink:

The third letter is probably commercial but by paying 2 s 8d = 32d which is 1d over the 1½ oz rate, it has me pushing towards philatelic! The letter rate within Australia and the British Empire from 4th August 1930 was 2d per 1oz x 2+ 3d per ½ oz internal airmail x 3 + 6d per ½ oz Karachi-London airmail x 3 = 2x2 + 3x3 + 6 x 3 = 31d. A tricky one!

The fourth one is out of my expertise but a nice cover anyway! :lol:

I hope that helps!

Cheers

Faust · **Posted:** Mon Nov 29, 2010 23:50:34 pm

Glen, when overpaid it can not be commercial, but you must also do your business, so I think not all your mail is philatelic. The example you showed are stamps from 1980 used in 2010 what is also out of period of normal use. Where the Italian cover has stamps from 1950 and 1951 used in 1951, which is in the time frame when the stamps where available.

europhil · **Posted:** Tue Nov 30, 2010 01:10:09 am

Second cover - P. J. Drossos was a famous Greek stamp dealer.

Frank E Ring · **Posted:** Tue Nov 30, 2010 08:14:04 am

How about this one? Could be a tough nut to crack

norvic · **Posted:** Tue Nov 30, 2010 08:31:32 am

Frank E Ring wrote:

How about this one? Could be a tough nut to crack

Let's see. The Queen collects stamps and she lives at Buckingham Palace....

But the rate is right for a letter up to 20g (22p) + £1.50 Swiftair fee.

europhil · **Posted:** Tue Nov 30, 2010 08:46:58 am

Paul H Jensen RDP FRPSL, died in 2004. So yes, philatelic.

PeterS · **Posted:** Tue Nov 30, 2010 08:53:02 am

europhil wrote:

Paul H Jensen RDP FRPSL, died in 2004. So yes, philatelic.

I wouldn't be so hasty, personally. I would like to know if the stamps used were the only available values to make up the rate, just for a start.

norvic · **Posted:** Tue Nov 30, 2010 09:01:08 am

PeterS wrote:

europhil wrote:

Paul H Jensen RDP FRPSL, died in 2004. So yes, philatelic.

I wouldn't be so hasty, personally. I would like to know if the stamps used were the only available values to make up the rate, just for a start.

They were certainly the most logical ones to use: the highest value needed, and - in the absence of a 12p stamp - the other two needed to make up the rate. It is not a philatelically inspired franking, however much it may be between people involved in the hobby.

The £1.60 was issued 15.9.87 and was the last in this series. The rate didn't, in any case, increase until later in 1988.

It's absolutely in period. It is unlikely that the Keeper of the Royal Collection would have written to Mr Hensen and used a lot of low-value commemoratives of the period. There wouldn't anyway have been room for 4x 34p and 1x 26p Welsh Bibles (the most recent issue), which would also have made up the rate.

Not philatelic in the sense that most people would regard it, and I would rate it as a desirable cover with appropriate in period franking.

kugelpost · **Posted:** Thu Dec 02, 2010 13:03:41 pm

A belated thanks to all for interesting info on the three Australian covers and the K.U.T. cover I posted above!

Kugelpost

tonymacg · **Posted:** Thu Dec 02, 2010 16:18:35 pm

europhil wrote:

Paul H Jensen RDP FRPSL, died in 2004. So yes, philatelic.

Philatelic, but not contrived, so eminently collectible, I'd say.

Faust · **Posted:** Sat Dec 04, 2010 19:45:24 pm

A scan of a cover which I obtained this week.

Faust

PeterS · **Posted:** Sat Dec 04, 2010 20:38:15 pm

I believe there was a 45c stamp designed for this destination. The fact that someone has used the PNG Indpendence set and added a 2c to round up the rate screams philatelic to me I am afraid.

Jack · **Posted:** Sun Dec 05, 2010 00:31:04 am

An upside down 2c in the 'wrong' corner? No, commercial using stuff they had at home.

admin · **Posted:** Sun Dec 05, 2010 01:17:05 am

PeterS wrote:

I believe there was a 45c stamp designed for this destination. The fact that someone has used the PNG Indpendence set and added a 2c to round up the rate screams philatelic to me I am afraid.

And cutesey light corner perf cancel touches, at a GPO .. screams a COLLECTOR sender to me! .

Jack · **Posted:** Sun Dec 05, 2010 02:13:33 am

Collector who couldn't add up then...!


*Click For Our Newest Issues*	*Click for our Current Auction*	Internet Auctions-Buy & Sell Stamps	Melbourne 2013 - May 10-15

Postage Stamp Chat Board & Stamp Bulletin Board Forum

Is this cover Commercial OR Philatelic? Post your candidates

Who is online