Postage Stamp Chat Board & Stamp Bulletin Board Forum
 

I have watched this train wreck with interest. Without doubt The Researcher is trying to attempt to have us look outside the square with respect to these issues, and that is something I applaud.

However, it appears to have generated a passion which is totally out of proportion to the reality regarding these items.

I would ask, of everyone, that the focus remains on the original posit of this topic; i.e. research on the LOW issues.

_________________
FORESTS OLD, PASTURES NEW
(An expert is one who knows more and more, about less and less, until they know absolutely everything about nothing at all)

Tuvalu still produces some of the weirdest stamp issues in the world (50th birthday of Diana?, Obame meets Gillard?), but they don't produce a set for every Island, Atoll and low tide hitching point! They just do "Tuvalu". Why not? Because it was a stupid idea that was laughed at and still is. It destroyed the philatelic collecting reputation for years.


At least the AAT stamps have face values that are current postage rates. And in the recent past they were shipped or flown down to be processed. Your comparing chalk and cheese. Not recognised by the world community? Well mainly that's Japan, due to it's whaling practices. It's been British/Australian since 1841.

Sisophon, you're almost arguing to make every cinderalla sand dune "stamp" valid for postage. How many naked lady stamps, or the Kings and Queens of England issued by the Arab states do you think have ever been posted? They'd probably have taken your hand off for touching them, if they ever even were delivered into the country and not just stuck in kiddies packets of world "stamps" in the 70's.

We are critisizing certain countries (and stamp "entrepenuers") practices of 30 years ago, not the whole other argument of what they do today to raise a dollar.

_________________
Greg - Looking for Goulburn Australia Cancels and Grangemouth Scotland Cancels and Covers
Member of the S.T.A.M.P Club for Slightly Twisted And Mad Philatelists - Motto: "Bring back the lick!"

This is enough research for me. You can't give Leaders of the World away, even if they are imperf proof sheets.





Progressive colour proofs from reputable issues are worth a motza. This seller has already sold 14 of these and has more than 10 available at the same price as the first lot.

Scarce material.

TRAINS ST VINCENT Colour MNH Proofs 100 MNH SHEETS of 20 To $2(2000 Stamps)

_________________
We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.

Hello, can I ask what years the LOW stamps were issued ?
I might have missed it in the thread, there is a lot wade through, I realise it was the 80's, but when exactly.

_________________

Collecting - Stamps, poster stamps and covers that feature Kangaroos.
Wanted: Illustrated Tourist cover of "Waratah Park", Sydney, NSW. Australia

From his opening post.

_________________
We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.

Boy I am dumb.

Here I was, brainwashed at last, that those those meanies stating MILLIONS off these worthless things exist were WRONG. And that hardly any exist any more.

I really must have dreamed of the cartons of them I bought and sold decades back, but back to my problem.

If they are rare and exaggerations of "MILLIONS" are false, how can we explain these away.

As Traralgon points out this one seller has a STACK of similar lots.

On sale for about a penny apiece. As many as you want. True RARITIES of the first order.



Now this one alone has has 26 parcels sold at 2000 in each set = 52,000 units right here.

He has more for sale, so lets say 100,000 on hand on this small line. In fact I clicked on 25 units, and the order was accepted, so he has MORE than 1000,00 units of this one.

Take his other lots and it looks like a MILLION units here - just from one seller in Poland.

But my Dilemma is, our "RESEARCHER" tells us claims of "MILLIONS" of units existing are all FALSE.

RARE stuff .. yeah, about as rare as grains of sand on a beach. Just ONE ebay seller answers the Poll question -


.

That's fabulous! I need a feature wall to cover in the stamp den with a nice themed wallpaper, gum included!

_________________
Greg - Looking for Goulburn Australia Cancels and Grangemouth Scotland Cancels and Covers
Member of the S.T.A.M.P Club for Slightly Twisted And Mad Philatelists - Motto: "Bring back the lick!"

There are only 4 countries which recognise Australia's claim over AAT. The 4 countries are what also claim lands in Antarctica, it's the reason why they recognise AAT. As a matter of fact, the 1961 Antarctic Treaty which now has 49 signatory nations taking up 80% world population clearly states that it does not recognize territorial sovereignty claims.

I tend to consider intention rather than technical mumbo jumbo. If a stamp set is to milk collectors, it makes no difference if it is a 5v set or 50v set, or if it is 1 set per year or 10 sets per year. The stamps are simply junk. This is why I bring out AAT, the stamps are just as "undesirable" as LoW, but people tolerate AAT and it is because Australia is a major country while Tuvalu is merely some coconut shells floating somewhere in the Pacific Ocean. Once condemned, the 1893 US Columbian Exposition 16v set is now much sought after ..... again, because US is a major country. It is not chalk and cheese comparison, it is the pot calling the kettle black.

LoW is 30 years ago thing, but stamp flood has been around for decades earlier, most countries have been getting to vomit stamps. It was in the 2nd half of 1980s when China violated UPU regulations, commemoratives were not longer sold at post office counters, did the philatelic community say a word? No.

BTW, if a stamp issue is printed in millions, I have the idea that millions of full sets are available, rather than "millions of stamps in total are there". I perceive Glen's poll "Do you believe each Leader of the World Issue was produced in the millions?" as the former meaning, but it seems to me Glen is talking about the latter. Is it I take it wrongly ?

Its not Glen's poll.

_________________
Greg - Looking for Goulburn Australia Cancels and Grangemouth Scotland Cancels and Covers
Member of the S.T.A.M.P Club for Slightly Twisted And Mad Philatelists - Motto: "Bring back the lick!"

Sorry, I was typing a question about the wrong Islands!

_________________
Greg - Looking for Goulburn Australia Cancels and Grangemouth Scotland Cancels and Covers
Member of the S.T.A.M.P Club for Slightly Twisted And Mad Philatelists - Motto: "Bring back the lick!"

Here is the problem with keeping people anonymous. It hides the possible biases of the individuals conducting the research. For example, if they have significant stocks of these issues and are attempting to sell them then it is in their best interest to promote these as legitimate issues as it would help to sell them.

All research needs to cite a source and disclose any possible biases involved.

Hello all,
I see some good intelligent posting has been done as I was sleeping.
this is a rather long post as it pertains to the CityCollectible lots which I knew would be coming up in this thread.

Noting you are looking at CityCollectibles lots. they have been running for about the last 6 or so months.

What he is selling is the St.Vincent/Nevis side of the Police Evidence stock. The majority being the LOW trains/cars issues. I have purchased quite a few myself for the research.

Now my first and foremost point on the lots is you will notice they are random. As in a variety of the progressives from all St. Vincent and dependencies covering all series of the Locomotives issues. Please remember each progressive set is 7 and in some cases 10 different panes. All of these lots have anywhere from 1 to sometimes all 7 if your lucky of a given value. I have purchased approximately 15+ different lots and have been able to reunite approx. 60% of the older issues into given full sets with lots of duplicates.
Older issues being the panes of 25 pairs.

With the later issues (panes of 10) I purchased about 6 different lots and have reunited approx. 80% into the given full sets with lots of duplicates.

You see several of the crates were purchased by CC (or associates) several years ago in auction after the release of the material in 2008. The massive (yes I agree with the term) quantity and mixed up condition of the packs were "apparently" to difficult for the seller to sort into organized lots. In some cases not so difficult as in the ST. Vincent and St. Vincent Grenadines Ships issues. These appear to have been sold out. So the seller just started grabbing the packs and putting them into random lots.

The count is the same for all. 3,000 progressive color proof (please excuse my term) sets for each value. 5,000 Limited printing imperforates. If you do the math that is a lot of panes!

The price paid, I have gotten from good sources, was peanuts for the crates. Therefore CC is able to afford to sell them for yes, in a sense "peanuts", and make a huge profit. Once they are sold they will not be at the price level as you can already see in the completed sets and individual duplicate panes that are now starting to show up on eBay from the buyers.

The form of selling has spread the panes all over the world and now the only way for people to reunite the full sets is to buy and sell their duplicates which several are beginning to do. A fair price being $3-5.00 a pane. The way these lots were sold by CC is probably in a way a good selling tactic. Looks like a lot in each lot. Being random makes buyers come back for more to try to complete sets.

I have been watching the sales for a long time. Judging from the number of lots sold of the Ships, Cricket Players and Football issues it all falls into the exact realm of evidence proving the 3,000 sets produced for all. Based on the St. Lucia side which I am in possession of and the numerous invoices and such on file the conclusion is the same. The printing standard for the progressives is 3,000 sets.

I have placed certain series of the St. Lucia Trains and Cars up for sale as research is complete on the counting and logging what still exists. All are complete sets and handpicked for the best quality possible whereas the damaged panes are to be cut into singles and pairs. Some sets are valued a bit higher than others as the damage to some was extensive and thus less exist. Read the info on the lots to understand. Make an offer. Rediculous offers will be automatically declined.

Of course part of the research is about making sales as all is in one way or another in stamps. but as I have stated several times I am not going to depend on them to make a living. We all buy stamps for either the hobby or for research. In turn we sell them back hopefully at a profit. the offers are there. If you don't want them....don't buy them.

I will tell you though...I am the only source you will find that has the complete pane sets of the LOW trains and cars from St. Lucia. You will not find any in CC's lots nor in the world.

Ending this reply with a saying:
To understand something one must not just look at what is on the face for what is behind it can be quite different.

P.S. Kevin...it also causes lawsuits

Sisophone.
The wording covers both. Either it be singles or full sets it does not matter.
Millions of a single stamp or pair nor millions of a certain set were ever produced.

Yes, millions of stamps if you count all issues from all countries and add all varieties.
Twisting the words as it seems some so commonly do won't work

I agree the price may fluctuate in the future but that price also may go down. Just because there is only 3,000 sets total in the world doesn't mean that there is enough demand to make them worth more. I would submit that the price probably will go down after CC sells out since then everyone who wants one will have it (as already shown by having started to reduce the price)



What would you consider to be a reasonable offer? Maybe $5 per set of panes?



So you have cornered the market on the panes and now have realized the minimal demand and are attempting to create some hype for the sets?



Does this quote apply to your research?


Are you saying your research could be the source of lawsuits? Is it because you are hiding something or because of the bias that you are showing?

The bigger dealers have purchased most of them. He puts them on sale all the time. He can afford to.



Denied.



Research started long before these became available. I don't care about minimal demand. they are available and cheap to run. I have years. Already sold some. Waiting for CC to get over with as obviously his lots are hurting everybodies sales atm.



Obviously.



If one names names or businesses when pertaining to who is selling at overinflated prices...who is a liar....on and on yes, those kind of entities like to start lawsuits. We do not wish to waste our time with them. We are only trying to input facts on quantities produced and what was produced. Others (will not name names) want to twist this thread away from the point of the thread for whatever biased reason of their own.

The poll only shows your belief. The point being.....you believe. Just as in religion or an ad on TV. You believe something without doing the research. At one time I believed and would have answered yes to the poll. Since I found out it was all an overexaggerated folly developed by
Now I oppose them. they don't like it. tough. Some are here in this forum. I go for the heart.

What would you consider to be a more fair price for these since you "denied" my offer of $5 for a set. CC sells 100 for $50 or 50 cents a sheet. 50cents x 7 sheets is $3.50 so my offer of $5 is fair.

I also belive that CC's sales should be helping your sales not hurting them by getting pictures of them out there and having people buy them and then wanting yours to complete their mac truck full of sets.

I also fail to see how you show that they are worth more than that since you fail to prove any demand for the items in question other than a few sales. I remember reading in Linns years ago about the sale of 3 of 5 known items from one of the indian states going for only a couple of thousand dollars due to lack of demand.

Go ahead and try completing a set Kevin. Buy from CC. When you get done.....ask me again.

Think when admin gets his 25 lots he ain't going to be too happy. Might have waited and seen my last posts.

Have to go. Good reads...mostly.

I have offered you a premium on the full set.

You still fail to state what you feel is a fair price and answer with contempt.

You also fail to show how there is demand for these items. I'll believe you that there is "only" 10,000 sets available or so but that doesn't not in and of itself make them worth more than my offer if only 500 people around the world want them

Kevin,
This has nothing to do with research on the subject.
It is 3,000 sets. And I am not playing these games anymore.
Look at what the others are pricing panes at and then maybe you will get an idea. They do not think your basis is sound either..
more will be joining too.
It has just begun.

Off to work.
won't be back for quite a bit.

If you are done playing games on this subject then can you provide proof that there was only 3,000 produced?

How does one know there was not another 10,000 given to another distributor?

Also how do you contend with the notation in Scott that states when the printer was liquidated sets were sold at a fraction of the face value. Like you said many records were destroyed so I think your "research" cannot meet proper standards. Perhaps you could go to Tuvalu and look at government records which I believe are kept better than a bankrupt printer's records.

Lucky they got a fraction of face since Tuvalu demonetised the issue to be worthless years ago.
They can't be used for postage even though in the correct currency.

It seems that the current postal rate is 20c. I can't find what the domestic postal rate for 1987 was? It seems to be 15c
Can anyone confirm this as there is no info on the Tuvalu websites that I have checked?
Actually I can't find what any of the postal rate were or are for local and overseas postage.
Can't even find if they have more than 1 postoffice.

_________________
Greg - Looking for Goulburn Australia Cancels and Grangemouth Scotland Cancels and Covers
Member of the S.T.A.M.P Club for Slightly Twisted And Mad Philatelists - Motto: "Bring back the lick!"

Has anyone compared these to the imperforate sheets offered by Australia Post in recent years. Limited edition runs or 500 to 750 full sheets if my memory serves me correctly.

Much much rarer than 10,000 or even 3,00 sets of LOW, and issued in more respectable circumstances.

And what is the value of these? Not much more (retail) than the issue price.



If nobody wants them because of the stink of corruption and fraud surrounding their creation, you are holding toilet paper.

_________________
We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.

If only you thought for a moment on the wonderful irony of that comment.

It seems that TheResearcher is playing us along, and wants to build 'hype' and 'discussion' and then can blow us all away in amazement when he finally decides to reveal his 'big discoveries' (which will probably be shouted at us in garish colours on his website).

He kept insisting he didn't have any proof of pure commercial covers with LOW (love the acronym ) issues, and then, taa-daa, along come 3 (with a condescending smilie added--for good measure? a smirk of grandiose one-upsmanship?)

Guess we won't know what he thinks is a "fair" selling price for these items until he decides to offload his holdings post-big announcement.

CC sends random handfuls of sheets, simply counting out a stack of 50 or 100, fair enough. Maybe its because they can't be bothered sorting the sheets into complete sets (after all, there can be what, 20 or 50 values in a set? ); maybe they do it deliberately so that when you realize "oops, I am missing this and that value" you'll buy another--in the end it just becomes a 'lucky-dip', and one ends up, as TheResearcher says, with a mountain of duplicates for the sake of assembling some complete sets.

In the latter case, its thus the price a reseller will ask for a complete set is simply to cover their costs incurred in putting together that complete set in the first place? Obvious who the 'winner' was in that case then.

_________________
Collecting Mongolia; Thailand; Indo-China; Mourning Covers; OHMS.
My online 'store': http://stampsfromaethelwulf.blogspot.com/

Note the handwritten numbers: 4195 and 2466 and, most tellingly, "Act. 2466". "Act." = Account? Philatelic Bureau Account? If so, then not true commercial usage IMHO.

The Bureau at Funafati I am sure used some of this wallpaper if collectors asked for it.

Mongolia and Bhutan did the same.

I am still waiting to see a cover postmarked NUI with the NUI in stamps on it etc.

Well one of those covers can't be commecial?
60c airmail and then $1.80 airmail to the same address same 2466.

_________________
Greg - Looking for Goulburn Australia Cancels and Grangemouth Scotland Cancels and Covers
Member of the S.T.A.M.P Club for Slightly Twisted And Mad Philatelists - Motto: "Bring back the lick!"

Gary ... it's obvious the $1.80 airmail had more B.S. in it.

For fun I put Tuvalu into Google Earth. They showed the entire South Pacific, and I had to zoom in quite a bit before I could see any land.

The 'main island', hosts the international airport, university campus, a hospital and 1 post office.

Couldn't see anything labelled with the islands/atolls for which 'regionals' were issued. So I typed in Nui, and it took me to a speck quite a ways off from the main island; these Pacific Island countries have a surface area as big as an Aussie or Texas ranch. The map gets inconclusive at this point. Google dropped a pin at the base of the bottom of the island chain, beside an island labelled Fenua Tapu. That one has roads shown at least; but no buildings marked. Wayyy up at the top of the chain, sitting off in the water a tad, is the label Nui.

So I guess Nui refers to that sub-group of islands within the Tuvalu group? And its only that largest island in the Nui atoll, Fenua Tapu, that has any roads (about a dozen, most pretty short). Maybe 100 people living there?

Having rate information for Tuvalu would be instructive in knowing what's going on here. Well, 99% of us agree that the sets were far beyond "the postal needs of the country" and that the values "did not match existing rates", but if we want to have the full picture of what's going on...or maybe the clerks at the (and it is apparently literally the) Tuvalu PO are like the well-known case of clerks at the PO in Cambodia--they just make up the rate on the spot, depending on how much they think they can get out of you.

_________________
Collecting Mongolia; Thailand; Indo-China; Mourning Covers; OHMS.
My online 'store': http://stampsfromaethelwulf.blogspot.com/

Spot on Aethelwulf - Here's a image of the Nui atoll:



and a map showing the separate islands in the atoll:

_________________
Nigel

At least there are people living on Nui. Not like some of the islands that the LOW (and other 'offending') countries issued stamps for whose resident population is nothing but goats.

The simple graphics of Google Earth didn't full respresent the place. Your satellite image at the top there makes the place look rather nice. From google's schematic I had the impression it was a chain of separate islands, but it appears its landmasses connected by sandbars/coral reef? Which thus could come-and-go in a typhoon?

_________________
Collecting Mongolia; Thailand; Indo-China; Mourning Covers; OHMS.
My online 'store': http://stampsfromaethelwulf.blogspot.com/

Usage from the philatelic bureau allowed full SG catalogue status for the first set of Montserrat OHMS overprints, SG O1-O6, and also Sierra Leone 11sh on £1, SG 269. The difference between these two examples and the Tuvalu islands is that mint stamps were not offered to the trade.

It is clear that some stocks of the Tuvalu islands stamps got as far as Funafuti and were used operationally, not just on first day covers, on mail from the philatelic bureau. The stamps were accepted by the postal authorities in the recipients' countries.

The stamps were clearly not necessary for any postal needs; issues inscribed simply "Tuvalu" continued, and there was no political break-up which might have required stamps for the individual islands. Also, no evidence has yet been presented that any of the stamps were available for sale at their respective island post offices (which certainly did exist pre-Independence and probably continued).

To attempt a summary with regard to SG: sold over the PO counter and not available to the trade is acceptable for full listing (e.g. Anguilla 1967 Independence); official use but not sold over the counter and not available to the trade is also acceptable (Sierra Leone and Montserrat examples above); not sold over the counter or "limited" sales over the counter but available to the trade is not acceptable (e.g. Ghana Lord Boyd Orr and Belgica overprints of the early 1970s, certain St Lucia Statehood offerings).

Regardless of the catalogue editors' decisions, in the end we collectors must make up our own minds about whether or not we want these issues, and in what state (mint, CTO, FDC, operational use on cover, manufactured proofs and varieties) we will accept them.

Phil

Including this in the argument is to introduce a red herring. There are very few circumstances in which the postal authority in the receiving country can reject the stamps of the sending country. When it happens it is usually political (BRD - DDR, Independent Rhodesia - GB). Otherwise the postal authority of the sending country is the sole arbiter of what is right and acceptable; that's why Postage Due is not levied in the receiving country if the sending country has not marked the mailpiece.

_________________
Ian Billings - Norvic Philatelics GB stamps info: http://www.norphil.co.uk - also /catalog for our ecommerce site, blog.norphil.co.uk, shop.norphil.co.uk and Ian_norvic on twitter

I think that most of us accept this concept. Whether there is 3,000 complete sets, or 300 or 3,000,000 is to some of us not an issue.

The real question is, does anybody care? The market will decide, and a Blog stating how "rare" these things are is not going to start a rush by any collectors on stamps from uninhabited/semi-inhabited Tuvulu Islands where there is probably not even a Post Office. How many Tuvulu specialists live on Planet Earth? 20? 50? 100? 3,000 sets will go a long way between them!

And there is not going to be a worldwide stampede to invest in "rare" el cheapo stamps because there are only, well, however many copies. I think I said early on this thread that TonyMcG who probably has more knowledge about Indian Uglies than anybody on the planet can cite Indian States stamps which exist in under 100 copies which still sell for peanuts. I cited Seebecks, over 100 years old which you would still be lucky to get 10 cents each for. Less in bulk!

The General "World" collector? I am one, but this is the sort of tat that I only keep if it turns up in junk boxes, and if it is unlisted in Gibbons , it goes into a different box completely (as a Kiddies giveaway) rather than grace my collection.

Several of us have pointed this out to The Researcher , but he has basically hand waved it away by talking about Topical/Thematic collectors who will flock to it because of so-called rarity.

But some, dare I say many, topical collectors don't give a damn about rarity or value or resale value or even if it is a real stamp. If it's a Voltswagon stamp they will collect it because it is what they collect, real or otherwise.

I am beginning to agree that The Researcher's thread is simply to try to "talk up the market", but "the market" aint buying the hype, and maybe using his stock to start a B-B-Q would be more productive.

He came to the wrong shop.

Norm

_________________
Geelong, VFA Premiers 1878, 1879, 1800, 1882, 1883, 1884, 1886, AFL Premiers 1925, 1931, 1937, 1951, 1952, 1963, 2007, 2009, 2011, .

Ian

"There are very few circumstances in which the postal authority in the receiving country can reject the stamps of the sending country. When it happens it is usually political (BRD - DDR, Independent Rhodesia - GB). Otherwise the postal authority of the sending country is the sole arbiter of what is right and acceptable; that's why Postage Due is not levied in the receiving country if the sending country has not marked the mailpiece."

Agreed, but it does indicate that the issues were not repudiated by the Tuvalu authorities, i.e. they were not seen as "illegals". In my opinion this is a relevant point.

Phil

Agreed, but you wrote:

"The stamps were accepted by the postal authorities in the recipients' countries. "

_________________
Ian Billings - Norvic Philatelics GB stamps info: http://www.norphil.co.uk - also /catalog for our ecommerce site, blog.norphil.co.uk, shop.norphil.co.uk and Ian_norvic on twitter

English ... shminglish.

As Norm suggested, I think the original author et al should hold a barbecue, and then afterwards come back and see if they still want to do such 'research' (and I use the term loosely).

Ian, if the stamps had been declared illegal by the Tuvalu authorities, then the postal authorities in the recipients' countries could have been asked to reject any that got through. As far as I can tell from this thread, the stamps were not declared illegal and so the recipients' postal authorities had no reason to reject them. Is that better?

Phil

Phil

I see the point you were trying to make, but I don't see it as an important factor. The destination country is most unlikely to do anything (surcharging, rejecting) incoming mail unless the sending country has marked the mailpiece in some way. Let's face it, our postal authorities have enough trouble trying to weed out internal mail that's underpaid or franked with non-stamps without worrying about what might be coming into the country.

Two examples. I have an modern cover unstamped and surcharged by Royal Mail as if internal, even though it came from Australia. The Australians missed it, Britain had no reason to surcharge it as unpaid in Australia.

Ex-Soviet Union 1990s. A huge number of provisional stamps and postage paid marks, and bogus/forged 'stamps' were used when there were no stamps, including some handstamps which had previously been used as Postage Due (Doplatit) marks. I have not seen any which were surcharged in Ukraine, Belarus etc, and certainly Royal Mail (USPS, Deutsche Post, Israeli Post) accepted anything that was sent to them. And it is most unlikely that these provisionals were sent to the UPU for distribution so there was nothing to check. No, the office of posting accepted them and they were passed through to the destination country.

So the point I tried to make was that the onus was on (in this case) Tuvalu and that no destination country would give two figs about the stamps used if they item was not marked as due by the Tuvalu PO.

_________________
Ian Billings - Norvic Philatelics GB stamps info: http://www.norphil.co.uk - also /catalog for our ecommerce site, blog.norphil.co.uk, shop.norphil.co.uk and Ian_norvic on twitter

I could lick a piece of white selvedge on a cover to anyone overseas here, and the machine would cancel it as it has the machine facing activate in it.

As Ian says Royal Mail couldn't care less (assuming anyone noticed it there) as it is not them losing the revenue.

I have said before, domestically Chinese commemoratives are not sold over counter, but available to limited membership subscription from philatelic agent. So why are the Chinese commemoratives in all catalogues? The so called UPU rules are merely on paper, no one follows them, they are only used by people to attack countries/issues which they do not like.

Is Tony the director "McG" behind the Mission:Impossible films?

If I were going to invest money in stamps of which there were limited numbers, I'd take Indian States material hands down.

A) Spend $500 on a stamp of which there were only 50 to a couple hundred produced, and come from a region with a population over a billion which is on the rise economically.

B) Spend $500 on a load of modern wallpaper that's being flogged in bundles of 100 at 50 cents a sheet, has to be given a 'sale' price to move it, has dozens of such lots available, is of a limited thematic interest, and of which the supposedly "proof" sheets alone were printed in a quantity of 3000 apparently.

_________________
Collecting Mongolia; Thailand; Indo-China; Mourning Covers; OHMS.
My online 'store': http://stampsfromaethelwulf.blogspot.com/

The first stamp from jennys' lot is from Nukufetau and the postmark looks as if it is from there:

viewtopic.php?f=28&t=36470

However it might still be CTO

_________________
My wantlist for Malta Revenues

Doesn't look like a "NUI" postmark to me, doesn't look like a cover, and doesn't look like a 'Leaders Of The World' Train issue that you may not have noticed is what we are discussing here.

But you are right - it IS a stamp.

I know it's not a LOW train/car stamp (although this discussion has extended to other bogus stamps/labels), but at least the postmark is from the island that the stamp is from.

I posted it here for the simple reason that at least some stamps from the atolls of Tuvalu were used (or weren't noticed by the PO workers and still got cancelled ), and none are listed in the catalogue.

_________________
My wantlist for Malta Revenues

Well lots of debating going on which is good.
I therefore conclude my end on this thread as I have stated all I need too.

1.)Announcing the presentation of the study of quantities produced for the LOW Automobiles/Locomotives issues produced by the Format International Security Printers via the internet.

2.)Showing by polling just how many BELIEVE each of the "Leaders of the World" issues were produced in the millions. Thus showing that the exaggerated statements and twisted wording in articles, comments and word of mouth have embedded into the collecting community as a whole by a few un-named entities this belief which is TOTALLY false.

3.)To show how some so fervently wish to keep this research from surfacing and will try to deferre it in any way possible from being known by the collecting community and the world as a whole.

4.)To show that all the issues were valid postage no matter how they were sold or used despite the objection of some versus the agreement of others as the debate here shows.

5.) To show that the sales of the varieties of the LOW Automobiles/Locomotive issues (and others) that were confiscated by the British Metropolitan Police so many years ago and held in their holding until 2008 has begun. Also showing that on the St.Vincent side of the holding that the way they are being sold "looks" like there are millions when in fact if you were to take each value and count the panes as a whole you would find the exact numbers exist and in many cases less as is shown in the presentation on the web pages.

6.) Finally to show that so far nobody has shown any proof as in documents nor pictures showing counts higher than what is being portrayed via the research. Why is this? Because they have no evidence to back up their claims.

I am done with arguments that do not have anything to do with the topic of the thread of which much of the comments are.
I am done posting to this thread except for posting a small announcement when each country page as in St.Lucia, St. Vincent and Dependencies, Nevis, Bernera Island and Davaar are complete and go live which takes a lot of work and time.
I do not have time to continually post on any forum as that is not what I do. I do research and have a life. This thread alone has interferred with that time that could be used much more efficiently in the research and developement of pages getting the information out.

You can call it what you like as in "talking up the market" or "hyping" etc; but in reality it is as I point out above. Verified information of what exists and that is all.

Let the debate continue as it only shows what I knew it would show. And this is good.
Please understand this...I will not be posting on this thread except for the announcements of the new pages stated above. Information is on the pages and does not need to be repeated here.

I encourage members to post more images of usage as some seem to want to argue against this. The 3 covers I posted I found in 10 minutes on the internet auctions and they are or were for sale. I have seen many others. The argument

is invalid as have you ever thought about weight of a letter? Heavier....more postage.

HalfpennyYellow
I agree with admin in a way. I would say the stamps imaged are probably either removed from a FDC (although they are on brown paper) which leads me to believe they are from the Tuvalu Philatelic Bureau cachet covers which in turn despite arguments is valid postal usage. But the debate will carry on.

good luck to all. don't have a heart attack over it The subject matter has been heatedly debated for many years.

I submit that you have failed on multiple accounts of what you claim to have accomplished



You show that the philatelic centre used them instead of a free frank, but do not show they were valid postage for the general population



It clear that they have a significant supply running in the hundreds of thousands of printers waste. These panes are nothing more than items that the printers should have destroyed but for some reason were not.



I noted your research has also failed to actually prove the counts produced. Maybe you need to go to Tuvalu and see sales from the philatelic centre. These are government records and need to be kept for a significant period of time. Then you can add this to the boxes and boxes that were sold after the printer went bankrupt to come up with an actual amount of production.



Or it could be looked at to determine a better way to get your research and attempt to defend it which you have failed to do. PHD students have to defend their studies but any time someone comes up with a valid point against you, it is summarily dismissed

4 pages of a thread, 1 single image of an invoice which may or may not be real, no replies or information of any background reasearch to questions that have been posed, total avoidance of any requests to actually explain, prove or show your evidence and you think, "The Researcher", that the world will fall over backwards to beleive what you haven't actually written?

You have proven nothing at all and refuse to show any actual research. Now you don't have time to post any more as you have a life?

PS- Yes I considered the weight of the letter. Did you consider that for 3 times the rate they might have posted a sheet of lead? But I wouldnt know and I doubt you know as you haven't given any input as to what was the postal rates at the time.

Proof is not YELLING words at people, telling us it's all hush hush with any concrete evidence and then hiding behind "annonymous" information to avoid litigation. If your proof, records and information is true, how can you be sued?

To add insult to injury, you then scoff at the intelligence of those who answered your poll in the affirmative as proof the rest of the world is nuts.

This thread just goes around in circles to end up back where it started - which is nowhere.

_________________
Greg - Looking for Goulburn Australia Cancels and Grangemouth Scotland Cancels and Covers
Member of the S.T.A.M.P Club for Slightly Twisted And Mad Philatelists - Motto: "Bring back the lick!"

This is actually a pretty standard process on a lot of BBs, particularly Religious, Conspiracy Theory and Sceptical discussion relating to things like Bigfoot, Homeopathy, "We Never landed on the Moon", Obama was born in Kenya et all.

1. Post an unverifiable hypothesis with no documented evidence.
2. Ignore all responses when responding, without actually responding to the questions raised OR providing evidence.
3. Claim VICTORY and then leave.

Pretty standard woo really.

Alternitavely

1. Post an unverifiable hypothesis with no documented evidence.
2. ?
3, Profit

Norm

_________________
Geelong, VFA Premiers 1878, 1879, 1800, 1882, 1883, 1884, 1886, AFL Premiers 1925, 1931, 1937, 1951, 1952, 1963, 2007, 2009, 2011, .

"The Researcher" wants us to only know PART of the story. The part that suits him.

He clearly has a house full of this wallpaper and is praying he can hype is up to many times the level the guy in Poland seems NOT to be getting easily on ebay, and make a killing.

From Tuvalu here are actual FACTS of the matter as reported in the press of the time.

http://www.tuvaluislands.com/stamps/LOW_story.htm

FACTS, that no-one was sued about, not more hot air from "The Researcher". His "HERO" Feigenbaum - "The Galileo Of Our Time" - was highly litigious, and if one word of this was untrue, you can bet court action would have occurred.

These reports show Feigenbaum was found guilty of Contempt of Court, for breaching the Court order not to produce more Tuvalu stamps, and fined £3000 for it, and on appeal, a 3 month prison sentence was revoked. Some "Galileo" visionary.


==================

TUVALU AND THE LEADERS OF THE WORLD – A PHILATELIC SCANDAL


Compiled by Brian Cannon

Word processing by Amanda Levecque

Although this article is written based on the legal proceedings initiated by the government of Tuvalu, stamps of other countries were also involved, including Gibraltar, the Republic of Kiribati, Saint Kitts-Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Montserrat, the Virgin Islands, and St. Lucia.

The Tuvalu Philatelic Bureau was established in December 1975, shortly after legal separation of the Ellice Islands from the Gilbert and Ellice Islands Colony, which occurred two months earlier.

The first postage stamps of the new colony, renamed to Tuvalu, were to be released on January 1st, 1976. This was the date that full administrative autonomy would be transferred to the capital, Funafuti.

Earlier in 1975, a British firm called Philatelists Limited approached the soon-to-be administrators of the new colony and were able to secure a contractual agreement whereby they would undertake the management of the Bureau and help with stamp subject issues. This firm already had a similar contract with the government of St. Vincent in the West Indies, which was a successful venture at the time.

Philatelists Limited had been aggressively approaching smaller countries with the offer of establishing a philatelic service, complete with staff training and recommendation on “wise” policies, recommended stamp issues, and staff training.

For this service the company might typically receive 25% of the gross sales or ask a 20% shareholding in a Government Controlled Limited Liability Company specifically set up to run a Bureau on commercial lines.

The only additional charge was in respect of the salary, travel and accommodation expenses of a trained Bureau Manager whom they could provide. Philatelists Ltd. could provide all capital required to set up and equip a Bureau and then be reimbursed as a first charge on subsequent profits.

In 1976, printing of Tuvalu’s stamps was contracted out to the Crown Agents of London, responsible for similar tasks for many other colonies for well over 100 years. However, with the first stamp issue in 1977, Philatelists Limited also took over control of the designing and printing of all issues.

In effect, they gained complete control of the production of Tuvaluan postage stamps, once a new issue had been approved by the Tuvalu Stamp Advisory Committee. No doubt they had considerable influence on the stamp subjects, especially given the obvious lack of philatelic knowledge by the government of the new colony of Tuvalu.

In 1980, the firm’s name was changed to Philatelists (1980) Limited, under the control of Ronald Grover of England.

On December 19, 1983, Tuvalu undertook a contract with Philatelic Ltd. and Philatelist Caribbean Ltd. and those companies acquired the rights to produce and distribute Tuvalu stamps. Participating in the program for the series, Leaders of the World (LOW), Tuvalu released Locomotives, Part 1, on February 29, 1984.

This issue consisted of 4 values, see tenant (8 stamps) and during that year alone a total of 24 sets consisting of 246 stamps were issued in the LOW programme. Dates of contracts and their details are not known.

On January 15, 1987, receivers were appointed at Philatelist which were thought to have £20 million of LOW unsold stock. Issue No. 13 of this magazine reported the Tuvalu Government appointed a UK solicitor to purchase and dispose of all stock of Tuvalu stamps and that printers were paid directly for these.

Format International Security Printers, Ltd. was also in financial difficulties through their association with the LOW issues and Clive Feigenbaum acquired 60% of the shares.

Also in January 1987 the London and New York International Stamp Company Ltd. (LYNI) and Philatelic Distribution Corporation Ltd. (PDC) paid £300,000 for the right to reprint certain stamps whether reprinting was subject to the Tuvalu Government giving consent is not certain.

The Government of Tuvalu entered into a contract with Philatelic Distribution Corporation Ltd. (PDC) in June 1987. PDC under a further agreement purchased from the Tuvalu government some 16 million stamps for £65,000. Over 2 million were alleged to be flawed.

A further contract, which was to give rise to litigation, was made on the 17th of October 1987 between PDC and Tuvalu. Tuvalu gave PDC strictly defined rights to design, produce, sell and distribute thematic stamps for Tuvalu and its Islands.

Clauses in this contract required stamps to be produced “under the supervision of PDC by a security printers acceptable to the government” and required PDC to “uphold the integrity of the Government”. PDC used the printers, Format International Security Printers, Ltd.

By March 1988, the Tuvalu Government suspected this contract was being breached. They were concerned about advertisements which offered flawed Tuvalu stamps.

During a series of communications with Clive Feigenbaum at PDC, Tuvalu were misled about the relationship between PDC and Format; nor were they informed that Format had been instructed to print a substantial quantity of flawed stamps.

Instead, Tuvalu was told that Format were extremely reliable and made every effort to minimize the risk of errors during printing. However, the Tuvalu Government made it clear that Format were not to be used as printers but PDC continued to give orders to Format.

On the 3rd of March, the Tuvalu Government terminated the contract of the 7th of October, 1987. They also sought and were granted injunctions restraining any production or dealing in material bearing the name of Tuvalu or the use of printing materials.

The ‘ordered material’ were described as: “all and any stamps or other articles of Philately and all plates dies artwork materials and other goods….bearing the name of Tuvalu or any of its islands and produced by or for or at the direction or at the direction of any of the Defendants.”

Variations to this order were agreed. March 7th, Mr. Fred Hughes, on behalf of Format, undertook not to use any ordered materials including a number of plates locked away on their premises.

On April 25th, Mr. Roger Apsey, stock controller of PDC, Mr. Allan Hayward, financial adviser and controller of the group of companies, Mr. Clive Feigenbaum and LYNI undertook not to dispose of or remove or tamper with ordered materials with the exception of certain authorized and unflawed stamps.

Feigenbaum stressed the losses that might be made without these variations. (For example, LYNI would suffer a loss of £465,000 and be liable to pay compensation to its customers).

Meanwhile, on the 18th of April, an employee of PDC gave an order to Format to print Tuvalu stamps and Format complied. In accordance with the then existing arrangements with PDC, Format was required to print approximately 21,000 sets of unflawed stamps and 14,000 sets of flawed stamps, a total order of almost 4 million stamps with a rough value of £2 million.

This was essentially a repeat of an order made prior to any court proceedings. In addition, the marketing manager of Philatelic Collections, Ltd. had placed an order for album pages for Tuvalu stamps. Breaches continued until the beginning of May, 1989.

On April 27 1988, Scotland Yard Fraud Squad together with officers of the Gibraltar Fraud Squad executed a search warrant at Format’s premises where Detective Constable Faulds saw a substantial quantity of Tuvalu stamps which had just been printed. On May 14th, they removed thousands of stamps bearing the name of Tuvalu as well as other material.

In July, 1989, Mr. Feigenbaum, as Chairman and Managing Director of PDC was held guilty of contempt of the court in breaching the order made on 3 March, 1989 and was committed to prison for three months and fined £3,000.

F. Hughes, Managing Director of Format and Roger Apsey, Stock Controller of PDC, were given suspended sentences and fines of £750. They were ordered to pay costs on an indemnity basis.

Clive Feigenbaum appealed and on the 20th of October, 1989, the Judge of the Court of Appeal “felt the imposition of a prison sentence a very grave punishment’ in view of Mr. Feigenbaum’s ‘good record and character’. The sentence of three months imprisonment was quashed and there was no order for costs.