The future of philately with philatelic associations

This is partial translation of my blog written in Finnish (link). Teksti suomeksi on em. linkin takana.

What will the state of stamp collecting be in 5 years? What will it be in 10-15 years? What will happen to the prices of collectible postage stamps? Maybe people want to collect, and not think about such things? That can be understood, but it could perhaps be worth it.

I have been to philatelic events and meetings since 2019. Face-to-face and remotely. On social media. Browsed through philatelic magazines in the library. Talked to dozens of philately veterans. I have formed some idea of ​​what this philatelist activity is like on the ground level.

Collecting, like stamp collecting, is a voluntary hobby that operates on one's own taste preferences. Collectors of the same thing have decided to organize themselves into clubs and societies. Since the hobby has been essentially carried out through associations until now, they have significance and I myself am constantly interacting with them.

The good things about philatelic associations for me are the following:

- you can buy and sell material and also exchange

- you can get and share information and useful tips

- sociality: meet like-minded people and even make friends

My motivation for meetings and events is strongly auctions and the acquisition of material. The challenge is that very few people collect the latest new material or are interested in sharing experiences with it. Sadly, I also often encounter an attitude problem towards almost everything new and modern. Mourning for something that has become a thing of the past is perhaps understandable, but it is not a reason for me to be involved. 90 - 100% of the material at auctions is from the last millennium. I only have collections of the main types of stamps (Finland, Åland) and maybe I will look into it more closely when new production stops completely. Then the price level will have also come down quite a bit.

My position is illustrated by the incident when I came straight from the Helsinki main post office's first-day cancellation event to the club meeting. They didn't even seem to understand what I was talking about when I mentioned the matter. It's not like anyone wanted to know more.

The motivation to comment on the state of philately and philatelic associations (even if it is not asked) is related to a question that is repeated in the editorial of almost every member magazine. That as people get older, how do we get new members, how do we get young people and women involved in the hobby? And later in volunteer and responsible tasks in the associations.

As a DISCLAIMER: The following text includes criticism. It is of course easy to say that it would be best if, instead of criticizing, the critic took responsibility for changing things in the direction they want. Well, no substantial change is possible, because the tradition of philately must be preserved. Especially since senior members of the associations are likely to be opposed to any substantial reforms. I have heard experiences about this. The statement "Nominator first" can be a mere acknowledgment that one does not care about criticism.

In short: in my opinion, getting new members to traditional philatelic associations is difficult if possible at all. It seems that new hobbyists can start stamp collecting, but the associations do not benefit from it. I claim that the associations have 2 eternal dreams (or delusions), which are repeated, for example, in the editorials of the member magazines. 1) For philately to become popular (even to "revive"), it is enough to be active enough. That is, for example, to make publications, participate in Book Fairs, hold exhibitions and sales events. 2) The social activities of the associations (meetings, exhibitions) are attractive, as long as they can get newcomers involved.

 

Sometimes the challenges are acknowledged, but the general communication is that things are going extremely well. However, there is a risk that the appearances are being kept up: Hopes, fantasies and facts are mixed up, and action is not taken based on a realistic picture of the situation. Which I think would be necessary, if the hobby is to be revived.

Well, first of all, there are things that philatelic associations can do nothing about. Almost the entire culture and hobby of leisure has changed. The golden age of stamp collecting and philately was "the post-war pre-internet unified culture of Finland", as the writer Jari Tervo said of that time. A few decades, somewhere from the 60s to the 90s. It has been replaced by the culture of Western market liberalism, where commercialism, digitalization, individuality and immediate satisfaction of needs are present. The past millennium, the way of doing things that required concentration and long-term effort, focusing on paper formats, cannot compete. The need for paper letters and postcards is decreasing until it disappears with digital applications. One philatelic dealer spoke of a "structural change", meaning that there are now orders of magnitude fewer hobbyists than in the last millennium, as well as paper letter mail.

You also hear the misconception that collecting is dying. Collecting is perhaps more popular than ever, but in the current ideal of individuality, we may no longer be so interested in anything other than what we do ourselves, not what our friends collect. Collectors of sports cards, Moomin mugs and vinyl records have their own Facebook groups and events, but no organised associations, because they do not see added value.

About challenge 1) i.e. visibility. Haven't the associations in the field tried all the traditional tricks to attract new hobbyists, i.e. members, for quite a long time, with meager results. Some young and middle-aged people may be interested in philately, but they can get the information they need about it through the internet and social media. But the usual explanation that young hobbyists have simply disappeared into the world of social media, mobile phones and video games is too simple. It is also about the fact that the traditional association-based philately hobby of greying seniors is no longer attractive, even if there were no social media, mobile phones or games.

An example of a persistent dream is the stamp fair or Stamp Forum held in conjunction with the annual Helsinki Book Fair. I have been visiting there since 2019, also as a representative of the exhibitor. There are a couple of associations, a philatelic exhibition and some stamp dealers involved. 4 long days require a lot of volunteer resources and expensive participation fees. Although philately certainly gets visibility, I would think that experience has already taught me that the dream, gaining new members, is not something that the event can achieve. Now I've already read comments, gravel voices that the said stamp fair is at the end of its life. The reason why the routine is still repeated is probably that since it is difficult to assess the real impact, a dream image of the matter is maintained.

As for separate philatelic exhibitions, they reek of emptiness. Colin Fraser of F.I.P. called them "deserted frames". Very few non-philatelists are spontaneously interested in them, at least not without a separate presentation. It can't go on like this forever. Somewhere, perhaps a few dozen new exhibition philatelists have been recruited with great effort, but the dropout rate from the elderly is greater.

Paper membership magazines and guides are not new habits either, especially since they aim to communicate about the philatelic hobby to those who are already convinced of it, those who have come a long way. They should be paid for and why would new hobbyists pay if they get the information they need for free digitally on social media platforms. Paper publications could be seen as a way to withhold information related to the hobby: too few can get access to them.

Challenge 2) i.e. the social attractiveness of associations. Association leaders should consider what added value regular attendance at association meetings or exhibitions can have? Especially for younger hobbyists. Such that they could make time for it alongside other life challenges, such as work, family or studies. Or other leisure activities. Not to mention the hassle and cost of traveling to the meeting place - I have heard many hobbyists say that meetings are too difficult to reach.

The way a philatelic association operates is regular meetings at a clubhouse, as well as events and exhibitions. It has often been heard that a newcomer came to a meeting once or twice, but not after that. Young and middle-aged people are not interested in just sitting quietly listening to the speeches and presentations of seniors. For veterans, attending meetings can be a highlight of everyday life, otherwise perhaps in a slow-paced life. I would argue that they are less keen on changes or reforms. This could therefore be a stopper that prevents trying something new. And thus the interest of younger people.

Still about the added value. Philately has developed a tradition. It is considered a matter of honor that the tradition continues. If you look at philately's communication, i.e. magazines, guides, presentations, etc. published for members of associations, the cornerstone of the tradition seems to be philatelic exhibitions, to which competition has been added. These, in turn, involve sophisticated investigative pursuits and the creation and maintenance of rules. In public debate, the importance of investigative and exhibition philately is either downplayed or exaggerated, depending on the context. Critics are easily told that it is just a part of philately. On the other hand, in philatelic member magazines it is praised, and the content of the articles is largely investigative, sophisticated philately. This joint activity requires administration, which is handled by the association's officials and the Finnish Philatelic Association as a common gatekeeper. This, in turn, requires bureaucratic organization and decision-making, association meetings and union meetings. This, in turn, requires officials who have the desire and ability to act in such an official role. I don't think that kind of bureaucracy and hierarchical, authoritarian system interests modern collectors anymore - they simply don't see the need for it.

The principle of collecting is that everyone chooses what to collect, how to collect and how they approach their collecting. Collecting is therefore a very liberal, individual thing, although collectors in the same field can share their experiences and joy in the hobby when working together. The same applies to stamp collecting. But for example, collectors of Moomin mugs, vinyl records and sports cards do not have associations. They can get in touch with each other through digital channels and communities. All of this - in addition to the change in the world - is, in my opinion, one of the reasons why young people and even middle-aged people have been excluded from association activities.

Young people also do voluntary work, but for some other reason than the "holy traditions" of philately. In short, it is clear to me that philatelic association activities of Finland are dying out, to a large extent. For the reasons listed above, the young and middle-aged have disappeared decades ago. A large part of the members are over 70 years old and the average age is rising by a year every year. They will reach 80 years of age by the end of the decade. Recently, one has been able to read the obituaries of influential philatelists (Turku, SFS, Korso, Ilomantsi, Tampere) or spend quiet moments, and these departures will not end. One club's tradition of congratulating its members on their birthdays had to be stopped when it turned out that the birthday boy was actually deceased.

In the 2030s, the clubs in the largest cities may still be alive, but the smaller associations in rural areas will have died out or merged into larger clubs. To which the still active members have joined or continued collecting on their own.

My other motivation for commenting is that the hobby, which is controlled by the associations, supports my own collecting to some extent, but too little. It is even against my own goals. The tradition of association activities seems to be made up of values ​​and a worldview that I do not share. Associations are creations of the culture of the baby boomers, i.e. tradition. They hope for young members, but they do not want or know how to modernize the content.

The real renewal may happen after the boomers are gone, sometime in the 2030s - depending on what is left of the philatelic associations - and the hobby -. In those associations where there are slightly younger people still active, continuing the hobby of their school days.

For the association of associations, the Finnish Philatelists' Union, I predict nothing but a downward trend and ever new, ever greater challenges. The remaining members' belief that the activity is worth investing in is maintained. Not to mention the belief that everything will continue the same into the foreseeable future. Prestige, social significance will disappear forever with the letter with a postage stamp. The association claims to be for all philatelists, but that may just be a feeling. Elite philatelists share this belief, but they are a small minority. In recent years, the association has tried to present heroic measures to even increase the number of members, for example by investing in digitalization and videos. The decline in membership has seemingly been slowed down, and this is claimed to be due to better marketing of the services. I would personally say that this is largely due to the association halving the membership fee for new members for two years. Membership will continue to decline when this discount is removed. In my opinion, the association is, if not unnecessary, then indifferent to the majority of philatelists.

The American Philatelic Society in the United States has carried out a similar campaign to increase membership, and there too it has only been able to slow down the downward trend. The philatelic hobby is probably declining in all Western countries, although perhaps more slowly than in Finland, because digitalization is not as advanced as it is here. As a kind of consolation, reference is made to the rise of philately in developing countries, such as China and India. But this has no bearing on the situation in Finland or Western countries.

The content of the hobby doesn't become more attractive, no matter how you wrap it in a shell. Getting involved in digital communication is not a salvation, because the older members of the associations are unlikely to be interested in the possibilities of utilizing it. Philatelists do not seem to understand the basic principle of social media such as Facebook, namely that it is not just a bulletin board where communication is one-way: from the top down to the hobbyists. Due to the inherent muffledness, the principle of correctness, communication can never be made two-way, meaning that the hobbyists themselves actively share and comment on posts and add their own content. Which would be necessary for social media content to be attractive. In addition, other digital and social media, especially commercial communicators, have the resources and expertise to attract followers that an amateur hobby association founded on membership fees can never have, no matter what kind of “social media expert” they could recruit. Cultural-historical digital content is produced by, for example, the communications of museums and universities, not to mention Yle Areena app and Wikipedia.

As a collector, I am interested in the current state and future of postage stamps and why not philately as well. In part, it reflects a broader societal, cultural change, after the aforementioned period of unified culture. Which is also of interest, such as the future of paper books. This change is of interest, although it seems to bother others.

As for the values ​​of collectibles, the price of most materials is constantly falling. The value of miscellaneous relics from the past is typically 5-10 €, found boxes and realisation lots are sold for less than a hundred. Which is why I believe that even the most expensive items will become more affordable if you can wait. The increase in the price of certain rarities in recent years may be due to the corona isolation of "at-risk" philatelists and the reaction to the collapse in the value of ordinary items.

Lauri Poropudas, the dismissed editor-in-chief of Filatelisti magazine, stated about philatelists that: "Some clearly pursue their own interests, but a large part nevertheless has a common cause and the majority just collect without caring about collector organizations". The individual members in philatelic associations are generally smart, fair and nice people. But you don't hear about them in the communication, such as in member magazines. In this case, they hand over the floor to a certain elite, who do not do the matter selflessly, but rather push their own agenda. They have a need to control the content of the hobby according to their own taste, and they succeed in this through exhibition and competition philately. They also have a financial interest in the matter. That is why I have got the impression that philatelic communications (exhibitions, magazines, guides, catalogues) are artificial and hypocritical.

As for the equality and liberal basic principle of collecting, philately seems to be the only type of collecting where there seems to be a need to organize hobbyists. As if an hobbyist enjoys the hobby best when they recognize their place in the hierarchy and even set a goal to strive for higher? There are different castes or "classes" in philatelic exhibitions and competitions, one for the top and one for the bottom. Gold and silver medals and trophies are used as incentives. The successful ones are presented with photographs in the trade magazine, like sports heroes. Surely this is great in itself (one can gasp, how is philately doing well?), but is it possible for the practice to produce inequality among hobbyists? If I have a goal, it is to collect a full collection, so why would I need the subjective and speculative judgment of some competition judge in implementing it? Whose views are not t are neither laws of nature nor facts, and it is not worth trying to make them into such.

Furthermore, sophisticated research, exhibitions and competitions claim to "develop" or "promote" the hobby. I think there is a selfish ulterior motive in this: if/when the assessment is based on matters of taste and opinion, it is possible for those who assess the collecting of others to guide the hobby in such a way that the appreciation of their own collection is maintained. This also has a bearing on the economic resale value of items and collections: is the collecting recommended that increases the appreciation and monetary value of their own collection?

Older people also have a tendency to reminisce about the past, the lives they have lived. History and the past are indeed dug up in philatelic publications, mainly due to old collectibles. But the past of organizations also seems to be essential to report. Why would my collecting be relevant to, say, the employees of the Mikkeli stamp stamp collectors 50 years ago? I think that those histories are mostly read by the authors themselves. Perhaps it is a matter of longing for the life they have left behind. More than some meritorious, in some way essential recording of information. Historians are all like copies of each other. But there seems to be a readiness and resources for this in the associations.

This also involves emphasizing the cultural-historical significance of philately: as one collecting expert noted, older people are often interested in old things.

Of course, to paraphrase former general Adolf Ernrooth: "If you don't know your history, you can't build your future". Does this apply to postage stamps and philately? I don't think so, because the world doesn't work the same way it did in the last millennium, in the era of paper letters, in Kekkonen and Koivisto's Finland next to Soviet Union. According to the definition of declinism: "the more we look to the past, the more we neglect the present". As is stated in the world of investment, "the past is no guarantee of the future".

The concern for the future of older philatelists may actually be part of an identity crisis: concern about the loss of one's own meaning, one's own life's work. Opposition to this is said to be promoting or preserving tradition. Death is a part of life, however harsh it may be.

I have noticed that criticism is not liked. It may be taken as a personal insult. That is perhaps understandable, but is it the case that the truth is not pleasing? If my conclusions are mere mistakes or the claims too one-sided, then what has been missing? It is not about collecting itself, but about the ideology developed around it: the rules and tradition. Doesn't the repeated concern about the future, which is only in internal discussions of associations and in member magazines, show how helpless we are in the face of the situation?

For me, collecting is a hobby, not a religion, whose certain sacred ideals or traditions must not be examined critically. It has been said, however, that one could focus on positive things. Well, there are plenty of texts about them elsewhere. Besides, it's not North Korea. If we try to argue that beginners shouldn't be intimidated, how well will they be able to attract them? Just a smile doesn't seem to attract them. I would argue that it's about not criticizing one's own sacred beliefs. Besides, hobbyists have enough media literacy to trust their own experience in what added value there is in the activities of philatelic associations - if anything.

Children and young people are aimed to recruit perhaps because it is easier to instill the own collecting ideology in them than in middle-aged people. In the fall of 2024, the Youth Philatelists' Remote Club started, which meets digitally via Teams. The goal is to be digitally online, where young people are. That remote club doesn't seem very trendy yet, judging by its low profile in the public eye (Youth club without youth?). We'll see if the number of young participants increases, although I don't believe it will have any revolutionary effect. Not even that the club would establish itself. Judging by the organizers and the rules, the ulterior motive seems to be an effort for research, i.e. recruiting young exhibition&competition philatelists. One could have guessed it - after all, such a routine has not been established for the mere joy of stamp collecting. But for the survival of exhibition and competition philately. I would guess that the activity will last for a couple of years before the association congeals into just a name or brand, which the seniors of the association keep on a ventilator.

If some new young people can be attracted, what is essential to me is how many of them will be involved after 3-5 years? As you get older and approach adulthood, your interests change. When your study, work and family plans become relevant and perhaps you move to a new location for work, your stamps can remain in the closet for decades. It is worth noting that there are also middle-aged people aged 30 - 50 who are interested in stamps, but they do not attend clubs either. Probably for the reasons I listed above. Focusing on school-aged children is, in my opinion, as effective as carrying water to a well: you don't notice that when letters and cards are no longer sent, you don't see stamps either. Soaking stamps from an envelope was once the spark for most young people to start collecting them.

Liberal collecting does not need rules. Or everyone can create them for themselves. In terms of ideology, I am mainly a classical liberal and individualist who wants to respect individual freedoms, against the institution. Associations protect the so-called quality = the interests of a certain narrow elite. It can also be important that someone raises criticism, with justification.