Australian Commonwealth Official CTO stamps discussion

[RodT]

Clive, it's pretty simple really. If it qualifies for ACSC Catalogue status it is CTO, anything else is per favour. That is my opinion, in any case.

I think you're 99.99% correct Peter.

Here are two 1995 stamp collector packs containing the 1994 95c and $1.20 Lifesaving Stamps, which are unlisted in the ACSC.

[PeterS]

Clive, I agree with what you say. However, the catalogue status is very clear in my mind. The CTO referred to in the ACSC is for those stamps that were included in Specimen sets (plus some Presentation sets). Anything else, regardless of being full gum etc, has to be per favour.

Now, I am not convinced the 1d Violet couldn't have come from the Millers Bros. sheets and, therefore, be perfectly legitimate as a catalogued CTO.

As to how other people describe CTO and per favour cancels, we can't control that. And CTO has greater or lesser collectibility, depending on where it comes from as so forth. There is no doubt the Eastern Block issues of teh 1950s and 1960s were CTO, but the quantity is such that nobody values them.

[PeterS]

Clive, it's pretty simple really. If it qualifies for ACSC Catalogue status it is CTO, anything else is per favour. That is my opinion, in any case.

I think you're 99.99% correct Peter.

Here are two 1995 stamp collector packs containing the 1994 95c and $1.20 Lifesaving Stamps, which are unlisted in the ACSC.

Rod, for one simple reason...these are remainders being sold off, not as specimens of current issues. Specimen sets ceased to be in around 1970, so nothing after that currently meets the catalogue definition.

[RodT]

... A few pages back on this thread, Rod posted a picture of the best block of 4 of the KGV 1d violet anyone is ever likely to see, complete with 'correct' CTO cancellation. But it can't, by 'ACSC catalogue' definition be CTO - I wonder if I should put a question mark here.
Clive

Yet, on page 4/9 of the ACSC KGV Catalogue, right next to the explanation of CANCELLED-TO-ORDER, these blocks are illustrated to show the three types of Melbourne CTO datestamps



No wonder I'm confused.

[RodT]

Clive, it's pretty simple really. If it qualifies for ACSC Catalogue status it is CTO, anything else is per favour. That is my opinion, in any case.

I think you're 99.99% correct Peter.

Here are two 1995 stamp collector packs containing the 1994 95c and $1.20 Lifesaving Stamps, which are unlisted in the ACSC.

Rod, for one simple reason...these are remainders being sold off, not as specimens of current issues. Specimen sets ceased to be in around 1970, so nothing after that currently meets the catalogue definition.

I understand the case of specimen sets ceasing around 1970, however ACSC lists stamps at least up until 1997 as CTO, albeit from stamp collecting kits.

By way of explanation, the two packs I've illustrated were never issued in stamp collecting kits as such, but were giveaways distributed with a magazine at the time. The card with the stamps could then be used to get a $2.00 discount off a stamp collecting kit.

[Clive]

Rod, Peter,

The discussion is great. Rod, you said

No wonder I'm confused.

Yes, no wonder! And I think Peter has some doubts, too, or is at least softening his view a little bit.

Now, I am not convinced the 1d Violet couldn't have come from the Millers Bros. sheets and, therefore, be perfectly legitimate as a catalogued CTO.

Rod's block may well have been ex Miller Bros. However, it remains a fact that no mutliple ever made it into the collectors' packs, so by your own definition Rod's block is disqualified from the cherished CTO status.

In theory, according to the ACSC catalogue, Rod's block can't be CTO. Yet if he splits it up into four singles, voila! 4 x CTO singles.

Rod, mate, I'm not so much confused as puzzled.

Clive

[RodT]

Rod, mate, I'm not so much confused as puzzled.

Clive

It must be a Tasmanian thing.

With Andrew also chiming in earlier, maybe we've intimidated some of the other States that have yet to contribute to this thread.

[PeterS]

Rod, Peter,

The discussion is great. Rod, you said

No wonder I'm confused.

Yes, no wonder! And I think Peter has some doubts, too, or is at least softening his view a little bit.

Now, I am not convinced the 1d Violet couldn't have come from the Millers Bros. sheets and, therefore, be perfectly legitimate as a catalogued CTO.

Rod's block may well have been ex Miller Bros. However, it remains a fact that no mutliple ever made it into the collectors' packs, so by your own definition Rod's block is disqualified from the cherished CTO status.

In theory, according to the ACSC catalogue, Rod's block can't be CTO. Yet if he splits it up into four singles, voila! 4 x CTO singles.

Rod, mate, I'm not so much confused as puzzled.

Clive

Now Cive, don't put words into my mouth.

The sheets of stamps that Millers Bros. got were produced for Specimen sets. The fact that a dealer was able to buy bulk stock during the 1930s is an abberation that wasn't, subsequently, repeated.

It is the purpose for which the cancellations were applied that matters. Nothing I have said, therefore, invalidates the correctness of blocks being CTOs. In fact, I find them highly desirable, because they are a rarity within a scarce collecting area.

[GlenStephens]

I have been following this discussion with great interest and would like to what members think about this block of 4 , it has a Philatelic Bureau Melbourne, First Day of Issue May 28 1963 cancel on it.

Could this be a CTO or has it been soaked of a cover, there isn't any gum on the back?

Thanks

Paul

Let's get this clear.

That crisp cds above was used MILLIONS of times in the 50s to 70s era especially.

Half the dealer FDC's serviced in oz had it, and many of those FDC bore blocks of 4 - which is where that block originated.

It was available for everyone with a pulse to get it, so it has no place in this thread OTHER than to record its existence!

If the cds has the word PHILATELIC on it ... guess what ... it IS!

[Clive]

Glen,

If the cds has the word PHILATELIC on it ... guess what ... it IS!

So what do you say to this, then, which comes from an authentic 1965 collector's pack (as do all its little mates, which I won't put up here, yet?

Clive

[Global Administrator]

Clive, it's pretty simple really. If it qualifies for ACSC Catalogue status it is CTO, anything else is per favour. That is my opinion, in any case.

Rod, for one simple reason ... these are remainders being sold off, not as specimens of current issues.

Specimen sets ceased to be in around 1970, so nothing after that currently meets the catalogue definition.

Sorry Peter, but that is wrong - by nearly 25 years!

The PO openly sold sets for $2 in the early 1990s that contained dozens of current issues CTO with gum.

The ACSC fully notes that pack, and to your surprise possibly, fully lists and prices the stamps that were inside it!

It has exactly the same "Specimen" pack status as anything else on this long thread.

ACSC has notes on these on pages 9/xxxiv and say "early 94" but their listing on the CTO ones misses many I know that were in this packet.

AP back then sold a little pack aimed at kids for $2. (But anyone with $2 could buy it off them.) It had about $40 face or something crazy in there -- 100% CTO with gum. Or maybe it was £40 cat in there ... was near 20 years ago so I can't recall precisely, but for certain nothing postally used in them.

Each pack 50 was identical. With Aust and AAT and Xmas and Cocos issues in there to $2 face value each.

Things like 1992 Barcelona + 1992 space Year sets, (see scans of cds below) SH Bridge pair, the 45c cricket pair from Aust and 1993 Dinosaur, and AAT 1992/93 Defins etc.

As SG cat was massive on these, I bought 1000 packs and had a kid break them down into 1000 of each stamp design, and sold them wholesale, mostly to the UK. And made a fortune!

Things like the AAT 1992/3 Defin set had a face of near $10 and a cat of about £15-20 so I got a lot more more per set for those AAT than the entire packets cost, even selling per 1000.

The balance sold easily for about $10 the lot, in 1,000 lots, so there was a nice easy $10K profit on the deal.

Peter Johnson from APW in MEL took legal action against AP, claiming AP had cost him a fortune as he bought large number CTO at FACE of these issues - which was true. He prevailed, and got a lot of money from them, as I recall.

[Clive]

Peter,

Now Cive, don't put words into my mouth.

Perish the thought, Peter, but it was you who opened this line of discussion.

The sheets of stamps that Millers Bros. got were produced for Specimen sets. The fact that a dealer was able to buy bulk stock during the 1930s is an abberation that wasn't, subsequently, repeated.

True, but I'm unsure how that assists your line of reasoning. In any case, it can't be claimed with any certainty that the piece is ex Millers'. Also, the KGV 1d violet was replaced by the 1d green in 1924 which, by my guess, would be too early for Miller Bros involvement. Either way, the cancel seems 'right'.

It is the purpose for which the cancellations were applied that matters.

That's a really interesting but highly arguable position, yet it isn't supported by the authority you have been citing, i.e. the ACSC.

(later edit) Another thought: what was the purpose for which the cancel was applied to this block? Self-evidently not for inclusion in a collector's pack, but rather for sale by other means to the increased profit of Miller Bros.

Nothing I have said, therefore, invalidates the correctness of blocks being CTOs.

I'm not getting into a quarrel about this but can I just say, in all good humour and friendliness, that your reasoning appears, to me, to be inconsistent.

In fact, I find them highly desirable, because they are a rarity within a scarce collecting area.

Absolutely agree.

Clive

[Global Administrator]

As a relevant sidebar to the above, only last year a dealer dying of severe cancer in the next few weeks who I knew for 30 years, sent me a note.

His staff had torn up all the sheets and made the PO CTO packs in the early 1990s.

He told me in the note he would not live long, and wanted to clear his stock, and tidy up his affairs. As he trusted me, if I was agreeable, was going to send me a carton of things "on his floor", and had no energy to list them out up front.

He wanted $200 for it, and he knew I was the only one who would buy such a strange thing sight unseen. And take "the lot".

I trusted him implicitly, sent the $200 in advance, by next mail - and a week later got a HUGE carton in the mail.

Many times bettter than I could ever have dreamed of. It was like Alladin's Cave opening that carton. He sadly passed away the next week from the cancer.

It contained many $10,000s face value of just this issue show below alone! Many 100s of full sheets. And endless other issues all in neat bundles 100 CTO, and many also in full sheets. All from these $2 packs.

These were the "overs" (coff) that he told AP he needed, to "cover the high wastage". (His staff were so experienced ripping sheets into singles, they'd probably only wreck one stamp in a million!)

So I offered these here for 5% of face value, or something silly, to get rid of them.

https://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=14004

So, vaguely like Miller Brothers, a sheet like this clearly was NOT bought from the PO, however a single from this sheet is exactly what the ACSC lists and prices as "CTO". Confused?

The "G.P.O. Melbourne" CTO cancel on a single of these, has EXACTLY the same status as on a £2 Roo.

[PeterS]

Peter,

Now Cive, don't put words into my mouth.

Perish the thought, Peter, but it was you who opened this line of discussion.

The sheets of stamps that Millers Bros. got were produced for Specimen sets. The fact that a dealer was able to buy bulk stock during the 1930s is an abberation that wasn't, subsequently, repeated.

True, but I'm unsure how that assists your line of reasoning. In any case, it can't be claimed with any certainty that the piece is ex Millers'. Also, the KGV 1d violet was replaced by the 1d green in 1924 which, by my guess, would be too early for Miller Bros involvement. Either way, the cancel seems 'right'.

It is the purpose for which the cancellations were applied that matters.

That's a really interesting but highly arguable position, yet it isn't supported by the authority you have been citing, i.e. the ACSC.

(later edit) Another thought: what was the purpose for which the cancel was applied to this block? Self-evidently not for inclusion in a collector's pack, but rather for sale by other means to the increased profit of Miller Bros.

Nothing I have said, therefore, invalidates the correctness of blocks being CTOs.

I'm not getting into a quarrel about this but can I just say, in all good humour and friendliness, that your reasoning appears, to me, to be inconsistent.

In fact, I find them highly desirable, because they are a rarity within a scarce collecting area.

Absolutely agree.

Clive

Clive, at the time of the Millers Bros. purchases, obsolete issues were included in sets (to promote flagging sales). No reason whatsoever to think that the 1d Violet was not amongst them. The 6d Engraved was still included in the 1940s! I have a set in a folder, which I wish I could put my hands on, that has CofA Specimen Roos, 5/- Bridge Die II, all OS overprints and many OS perfs, plus GV and GVI defins of various values and a 6d Engraved Kooka.

I think you have beem misunderstanding me, I have never said that blocks of obviously CTO stamps (with the appropriate cancel) were not CTO, not from the early period (up to George VI) in any event. The 5d Blue Mountains is a different issue entirely. No blocks were being officially provided in Specimen sets by that time.

[PeterS]

Glen, I take your point. I guess modern issues just do nothing for me and I consider all those modern, printed, CTO cancels to be a way of using up remaindered items. Nothing like the scarcity or 'genuineness' of the Pre-Decimal era, in my view.

However, I am sure there are collectors of such items and far be it from me to invalidate their collecting interests.

[GlenStephens]

Glen, I take your point. I guess modern issues just do nothing for me

A sentiment widely held in 1913.

And 1920

And 1930

And 1940

And 1950

And 1960


Hence the low sales and hence the high value of such items to this day!


I kid you not .. an Un-opened $2 Kiddies pack above is probably saleable at $40, as a "specimen" pack.

I do not have any, but tore up 1000s and threw them in the bin.

This is as valid as a 1913 pack.

[PeterS]

This is as valid as a 1913 pack.

Well, there we have to agree to disagree. The 1913 pack had the specific purpose of providing an example of every face different stamp then on issue. It was a Specimen pack. The $2 packs were designed to use up remainders that would otherwise be destroyed and were aimed at kids pretty much exclusively. There was no suggestion that you would get a currently available set of postage stamps.

As I say, far be it from me to decry someone else's collecting interests. In 1913 I would probably have been interested in the classic period and not wanted to have anything to do with these new 'Australia' issues. Who knows?

[plsllvn]

Glen,

If the cds has the word PHILATELIC on it ... guess what ... it IS!

So what do you say to this, then, which comes from an authentic 1965 collector's pack (as do all its little mates, which I won't put up here, yet?

Clive

According to my 1996 Queen Elizabeth II 1952-1966 ACSC ( I know it's outdated but it was on sale) there was a cds used for CTO's that is described in the cat as the "Philatelic Sales Center cds".
Can anyone confirm if this information remained the same in later catalog printings , I'm just trying to get a better understanding of CTO's.
Thanks
Paul

[PeterS]

Paul, your catalogue is correct. That is what Cive was alluding to, in his disarmingly cryptic way.

[RodT]

Glen, I take your point. I guess modern issues just do nothing for me and I consider all those modern, printed, CTO cancels to be a way of using up remaindered items. Nothing like the scarcity or 'genuineness' of the Pre-Decimal era, in my view.

However, I am sure there are collectors of such items and far be it from me to invalidate their collecting interests.

Readers may be very surprised at the scarcity of some of the printed CTO stamps issued since 1994.

To quote from the ACSC:- "...Some of these stamps seem to exist in only very small quantities, but at present the demand for these is small".

[RodT]

Not wishing to desecrate this thread, but I thought Peter might like to see some images of printed CTOs from the 1990s, seeing though he hasn't got any of these in his collection.

[Tassie_Stamps]

The CTO stamps shown in the above post are similiar to some of the issues I sell in the bulk mixed lots of 600 for $45, on this board.

Some of the CTO's that exist out there are scarce, but not that many people are interested so as you say, demand is low.

[GlenStephens]

Tassie .. yes in 10 years time, readers of this thread will be astounded 600 of these were offered for as low as $45.

They'll near all have spread around the globe by then, and big lots will no longer be seen.

I can remember when bundles of 100 used 6d, 9d, 1/- and 2/- Roos were freely available for a few bucks a bundle of 100.

Now a few bucks per STAMP. All in 25 years or so.

[Clive]

Gee, this has developed into a cracking thread.

It is really good to see such lively discussion of ALL Australian Commonwealth Official CTO stamps here, just like the title of the thread says.

According to my 1996 Queen Elizabeth II 1952-1966 ACSC ( I know it's outdated but it was on sale) there was a cds used for CTO's that is described in the cat as the "Philatelic Sales Center cds".
Can anyone confirm if this information remained the same in later catalog printings , I'm just trying to get a better understanding of CTO's.
Thanks
Paul

Paul, yes, as your ACSC says, most QE2 pre-decimal collectors' packs stamps were cancelled with this postmark. Much, much harder to find than might be thought.

The other thing that the ACSC throws up in the bit you quoted is that there is a number of QE2 commemoratives for which no official CTO cancel can exist. I think this may be why there seems to have been an increase in the number of 'cancelled-to-order' (per favour) blocks in the later 1950s and early 1960s.

It seems to me that QE2 pre-decimal CTOs are a bit neglected, a bit unloved, by most collectors.

Clive

[Clive]

This is the pack from 1965, which contained CTO Australian definitives, and those of Australian Antarctic Territory and Cocos (Keeling) Islands. (I keep the stamps in separate Hagners because the packs are obviously not made of high-grade archival standard material).

The added bonus in this pack is the four pre-decimal Navigators overprinted 'Specimen'.

Clive

[Clive]

And here are the other stamps from that 1965 pack.

These, too, fall within the definition of 'Australian Commonwealth Official CTO stamps'.

Except for that 5d brown, top row middle which, as luck would have it, has not been cancelled!!

Clive

[PeterS]

Tassie .. yes in 10 years time, readers of this thread will be astounded 600 of these were offered for as low as $45.

They'll near all have spread around the globe by then, and big lots will no longer be seen.

I can remember when bundles of 100 used 6d, 9d, 1/- and 2/- Roos were freely available for a few bucks a bundle of 100.

Now a few bucks per STAMP. All in 25 years or so.

Glen, you are no doubt right. I just balk at the thought of buying stamps with pre-printed cancels (i.e not just extracted from stock and a CTO applied)! Harks back to Eastern Europe and is not the sort of thing I am going to start collecting.

Luckily, just collecting pre-decimal Australian CTOs is a lifetime task.

[davpot]

Amen to that Pete! And Clive, What a Great collector Set!! Wow!!
Dave

[PeterS]

This stamp is also CTO with Melbourne cancel, but was not included in Specimen sets. Rather, it was included in Presentation sets.

[PeterS]

Another example, this one with a clear cancel date that shows it was canceled prior to official issue date.

[Clive]

Rod, Tassie,

That was a fine display of modern CTOs you posted for us. This thread is becoming a marvellous record and resource.

Clive

[Clive]

Another collector's pack, the first of the decimal era.

This pack didn't have the glassine strips to hold the stamps, but rather some piddling little glassine packet secured by what seems to be a dab of glue and a bit of sticky tape.

Clive

[davpot]

Nice set Clive: From what I gather, there were 2 issues of this set. Is that correct? Ive heard the word "reprint" used.
Dave

[Clive]

Dave,

From what I gather, there were 2 issues of this set. Is that correct? Ive heard the word "reprint" used.

Did you mean the stamps themselves, or the pack? I don't think the stamps were 'reprinted'.

However, I have another 'first decimals' pack which has a different printer's identifying number on it. Both packs have the same 22 stamps.

The stamps from the first pack I posted are datestamped March 1966; the stamps in this second pack are datestamped February 1967.

Presumably demand for the packs was so great they ran out of the original packs and did another batch of the packs themselves late in 1966, which then served until the contents of the packs changed again in 1968. Not really sure about this - I'm not at all clued up on decimal-era stuff.

Clive

[PeterS]

The final Decimal Specimen pack included the 1968 Flowers as replacements for the 1966 Birds. I stand to be corrected, but I think the Decimal packs never contained any commemoratives. Certainly the first set, from Feb 1966 didn't...there were no commems issued at the time.

[Clive]

Rod T wrote

I also suspect there are many dealers out there who don't understand the true worth of genuine CTOs. I still pick them up being sold as VFU, and amazingly, at FU prices!

That is so true. Thank goodness!

This buy included a decent 'dark hill' but it wasn't of course CTO. Not the best centred of all time but quite acceptable nevertheless, and I thought they were something of a bargain.

I got them just last week on eBay, for $A16.55, advertised as VFU (but with an atrocious scan that must have put some people off bidding - when will sellers learn to present their wares properly?).

Clive

[Clive]

Peter S

The final Decimal Specimen pack included the 1968 Flowers as replacements for the 1966 Birds. I stand to be corrected, but I think the Decimal packs never contained any commemoratives.

This 1968 pack, which had the flowers definitives replacing the birds (why I can't begin to guess) would presumably also have had the 5c blue QE2.

Has anyone seen, or better still, got a 1968 collector's pack? I've never seen one, nor know anyone who has, and have never seen one for sale.

It seems to be the case that they were on sale until c1970 (?) and then collectors' packs/specimen packs were discontinued, replaced after a mint sort of fashion by post office packs.

Also, do I vaguely recall that, at one stage, Australia Post produced (annual?) CTO packs or possibly even a type of year book with CTO stamps, or am I sliding fast into mental decay? (If I am, please don't say so).

Clive

[Global Administrator]

Also, do I vaguely recall that, at one stage, Australia Post produced (annual?) CTO packs or possibly even a type of year book with CTO stamps, or am I sliding fast into mental decay? (If I am, please don't say so).

Clive

Never bought or seen one, but I recall to this day they offer the year's issues in CTO?

Quite a new option I think?

[PeterS]

Peter S

The final Decimal Specimen pack included the 1968 Flowers as replacements for the 1966 Birds. I stand to be corrected, but I think the Decimal packs never contained any commemoratives.

This 1968 pack, which had the flowers definitives replacing the birds (why I can't begin to guess) would presumably also have had the 5c blue QE2.

Has anyone seen, or better still, got a 1968 collector's pack? I've never seen one, nor know anyone who has, and have never seen one for sale.

Clive

Clive, from the mid 1940s all obsolete issues were withdrawn from Specimen sets. Fronm then on they only ever contained the current issues. The 1968 sets were necessary because the Birds had been replaced with the Flowers and so, following the rules, any remaining 1966 packs had to be removed from sale and updated to reflect current issues.

I haven't seen a 1968 pack (that I remember) but I have seen CTO individuals of the Flowers stamps. I would be very surprised if sales of any of the packs after about 1944 were more than miniscule. After all, one of the major selling points (the obsolete and not easily available) were gone.

[Clive]

Hi Peter,

When I said

This 1968 pack, which had the flowers definitives replacing the birds (why I can't begin to guess) would presumably also have had the 5c blue QE2.

Sorry, my post was not clear. Yes, I know the policy about current definitives only and no commems or special stamps. What I couldn't 'begin to guess' is why they actually replaced the bird series at all, let alone with what were in my view rather dull flower stamps. And, of course, it all just went downhill from there.

Clive

[stampchris]

Also, do I vaguely recall that, at one stage, Australia Post produced (annual?) CTO packs or possibly even a type of year book with CTO stamps, or am I sliding fast into mental decay? (If I am, please don't say so).

Clive

Never bought or seen one, but I recall to this day they offer the year's issues in CTO?

Quite a new option I think?

Yes, these first appeared in the 2008 Impressions catalogue, and again in the 2009 catalogue (see the image below). I have never purchased one of these so can't comment on the contents. I would doubt that stamps have a printed CTO cancel, but if anybody has bought a collection could you post an scan of one of the sheets (or a scan of one of the sets of stamps), so we can confirm whether or not the cancel is printed onto the stamp or not.

[mstary1]

Nice thread.

I take it this pair of 1D roos are CTO?


Cheers.
Mark.

Thanks for your help on these ones fellas. Won the auction for $20
The guy had quite a few CTO roos, Including a 4D orange, broken Value tablet variety CTO with selvege and with the scarcer 3 printing. It went for about $55.

[Global Administrator]

Also, do I vaguely recall that, at one stage, Australia Post produced (annual?) CTO packs or possibly even a type of year book with CTO stamps, or am I sliding fast into mental decay? (If I am, please don't say so).

Clive

Never bought or seen one, but I recall to this day they offer the year's issues in CTO?

Quite a new option I think?

Yes, these first appeared in the 2008 Impressions catalogue, and again in the 2009 catalogue (see the image below). I have never purchased one of these so can't comment on the contents. I would doubt that stamps have a printed CTO cancel, but if anybody has bought a collection could you post an scan of one of the sheets (or a scan of one of the sets of stamps), so we can confirm whether or not the cancel is printed onto the stamp or not.

As folks know I have a prettty good "nose" and I'd be socking away a set of 2 of these while they are still on hand.

No-one bought specimen packs from 1913 to 1965 either, as they too were regarded as "CTO CRAP" bascially.

[stampchris]

As folks know I have a prettty good "nose" and I'd be socking away a set of 2 of these while they are still on hand.

No-one bought specimen packs from 1913 to 1965 either, as they too were regarded as "CTO CRAP" bascially.

The 2009 collection can still be ordered online at http://www.stamps.com.au/impressions/collections/sku/0307335" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting how the CTO pack has all the strips of five intact while the yearbook always splits them into 3+2 strips!

Zooming on the enlarged image they appear to be postmarked with a 'GPO MELBOURNE' cancel which includes a date. Appears to be quite similar to a printed postmark, but I have also seen this on CTO stamps supplied by the Bureau.

[PeterS]

Also, do I vaguely recall that, at one stage, Australia Post produced (annual?) CTO packs or possibly even a type of year book with CTO stamps, or am I sliding fast into mental decay? (If I am, please don't say so).

Clive

Never bought or seen one, but I recall to this day they offer the year's issues in CTO?

Quite a new option I think?

Yes, these first appeared in the 2008 Impressions catalogue, and again in the 2009 catalogue (see the image below). I have never purchased one of these so can't comment on the contents. I would doubt that stamps have a printed CTO cancel, but if anybody has bought a collection could you post an scan of one of the sheets (or a scan of one of the sets of stamps), so we can confirm whether or not the cancel is printed onto the stamp or not.

As folks know I have a prettty good "nose" and I'd be socking away a set of 2 of these while they are still on hand.

No-one bought specimen packs from 1913 to 1965 either, as they too were regarded as "CTO CRAP" bascially.

How long did it take for the pre-war CTOs to become collectible in their own right?

If only I was younger and had the time to wait till these actually became worth something. Alas, that will not be the case I fear.

[Clive]

Mark,

Thanks for your help on these ones fellas. Won the auction for $20

I haven't learned how to copy pictures from previous postings, but if this auction you won for twenty dollars includes that side-by-side pair of CTO 1d roos then congratulations - must be a candidate for bargain of the year.

I'll give you forty bucks for them!

Clive

[Clive]

This C of A wmk 1½d brown may be CTO. Or it may not.

Issued in October 1936 it had a 'life' of eighteen months before being replaced. Quantity printed was, according to ACSC, 2¾ million. ACSC catalogues the 'normal' used stamp at $10, the CTO version at $20. Interestingly, in the previous (1999) ACSC the prices were $12 and $10 respectively, so someone clearly had a bit of a re-think.

Anyway, how many of these stamps in CTO have you seen for sale in recent memory? Do you have a CTO copy?

Clive

[PeterS]

Clive, I have a few of these CTO. I bought some sets some time ago for $20 a set (from memory). I suspect they are pretty much as common as anything of that era in CTO. This was because the PO was adding new stamps, as they were issued, into the packs. There they stayed till obsolete issues were withdrawn in about 1944.

Personally, I think postally used examples of this stamp are somewhat harder to find in good condition. This is especially so if you want them on cover!

[RodT]

Clive, I just have one copy CTO of the C of A wmk 1½d brown, sitting on the right here with my VFU copies.



I'm really enjoying all the contributions to this thread by the way.

My real interest has always been collecting VFU, but this thread has enlightened me to the true scarcity and elusiveness of CTO.

I'm certainly going to be on the lookout for ANY CTO from hereon, while prices are still ridiculously cheap.

[mstary1]

Thanks Clive, yeah, i think for $20, the side by side CTO roos was a good buy.
As RodT said, I never paid much attention to CTO either, Scarce covers are my game.
But I may dabble now and then