2024 Flag Stamps - Differences Between Bca And Ap Printings?

Hi all!

Last week the new flag definitives were issued, featuring four different designs.




The designs were issued in convertible booklets of 20 and in coils of 100, 3000 and 10,000. Two printers were involved, Banknote Corporation of America (BCA) and Ashton-Potter (AP).

Does anyone know how to tell the difference between the two printer's versions? In years past the difference usually has been due to placement of microprints, but looking at scans of the stamps online I am not seeing any microprinting that jumps out (or just my bad eyes aren't catching them).

If anyone knows of how the two printers' versions differ from each other please let me know.

Thanks!

DJCMH

According to the postal bulletin, there appear to be tagging differences for the two printers. For Ashton Potter, tagging on both booklets & coils is specified as Non-Phosphored Block tagging. For BCA, the booklets are Phosphor tagged block ... the coils are overall tagged. Have been away from the tagging scene long enough that I'm not sure how these translate to what you might see under short UV.

Also, there is a difference between the 2024 Flag APU small roll (100 stamps) and the APU large roll (3k & 10k). The difference is the size of the image on each. I don't know if they will have different Scott numbers.

2024 US Flag APU small (100) roll:
Image Area (w x h): 0.7037 x 0.8391 in. / 17.8740 x 21.3130 mm
Stamp Size (w x h): 0.8438 x 0.9800 in. / 21.4330 x 24.8920 mm
Plate Size: 768 stamps per revolution

2024 US Flag APU large 3k &10k rolls:
Image Area (w x h): 0.7300 x 0.8400 in. / 18.5420 x 21.3360 mm
Stamp Size (w x h): 0.8700 x 0.9800 in. / 22.0980 x 24.8920 mm
Plate Size: 594 stamps per revolution.

The image size difference should be enough to ger them their own cat numbers, but there is often a difference n the die cut between the small and ;large rolls too.

Thank you for detailing the difference between the AP and BCA 2024 flag coils.
Is there any image difference between the booklets issued by AP and BCA. I have the 4 designs from each but not the booklet panes and cannot tell which is AP or BCA. Thanks.

Regarding the two booklet items 5883-86 and 5887-90, as I understand it, there are no design differences, no microprinting, or even variation in perforations between either BCA or AP. If the only difference is the tagging, why the separate Scott numbers? Why not designate one as 5883 and the tagged version as 5883a? For those of us that have no interest in tagging, this appears to be completely unnecessary flyspecking.

In my opinion tagging has nothing to do with flyspecking - it adds an additional print layer


Peter

Completely agree.

At the risk of beating a dead horse, I still have questions. First, has there ever been a previous case where Scott has created a completely different series of numbers for two stamps that are physically identical in every way except for tagging? There are many cases of stamps with a slightly different perfs, etc, with tagging that have received their own distinct Scott number, but none that have received it based solely on tagging. I've conducted a random search of my U.S. collection back into the'60s, and can't find a single one. If I'm wrong, please correct me. Based on this new turn of events, does this mean, when I go to the post office in the future to get new issues, I should bring my UV light with me so I can be certain that I am purchasing both types? There are those of you that are obviously very happy checking for tagging on stamps, but I would suggest that is not the vast majority of collectors. I'm upset that Scott now seems to be attempting to drag us into an area of collecting that most of us simply don't care about.

Just tagging differences from the same printer get a minor listing. Different printers have always gotten different catalog numbers going back to the banknote era. You don't need to check tagging or anything else if you can see the plate numbers when you buy your booklets.

Point of clarity: I understand there is a visual difference between the two 2024 Flag booklets: Scott #'s 5883-5886 versus 5887-5890.

Scott #5883-5886 has a design measuring 18.75 x 21.5 mm.

Scott #5887-5890 has a design measuring 18.25 x 21.0 mm.

This is what I have utilized the readily distinguish these two sets in my album.

PS: My source of information was the "Scott New Listings Update" on page 75 of the August 2024 issue of "Scott Stamp Monthly."

regarding " I'm upset that Scott now seems to be attempting to drag us into an area of collecting that most of us simply don't care about."

No need to be upset, this misses a fundamental principal of Scott over a century -- they list what collectors are interested in. "common collector" (general collector) differences get Major #s, anything else gets minor #s OR only an unnumbered mention OR only a footnote.

Have you seen the 2020 Scott Specialized, for instance? Theres an article feature on the Fourth Bureau Series "special paper" section, and now they have "made it in" for specialists because there was now, presented to Scott, a body of work and history on this variety of "sufficient mass" to do the work to add new catalog entries (e.g., #563b 11c Hayes). It's been this way for most of the kinds of varieties in Scott. "Tagging" was and is no different. If you got impression Scott was foisting something on us, you must not have any inkling they actually withdrew minor #s for certain tagging varieties in the 37c Flag regulars (years 2002-20050 and some others of same time, and only use footnotes for them now.

Acanalizo said:




Three posts after that LPMiller asked:




After that everyone was off to the races about tagging. It pays to read every post to follow the story. Of course, now we can take Scott to task for assigning catalog numbers for design size.

Thanks, Bluejay2, for the information on the design size. Seems like you were the only one that really helped clarify this issue. Again, thanks.