Stamp On Piece, Soak It Off?

Every once in awhile I come across a classic stamp that is still tied to a piece of the envelope or cover. There is usually little of the CDS or postmark remaining. However, everyone assumes that its more valuable when remaining on the piece. Me, unless the entire CDS is visible with the stamp tied, I soak the stamp off and to hex with the piece and put it into my album or in a stock sheet.

So, what do you do? Should I leave it on piece? Is it indeed more valuable on piece and if so why? And please, don't suggest that's because the catalog says so, there has to be a better reason than that.

Does the piece tell a story? If the remaining marking on the piece the stamp is attached to tells a story about the stamp (even if partial CDS, or other marking) then I say, leave it on piece. If it does not help to tell the story of the stamp attached, soak it and chuck it.

It all depends on what you define as a "classic" stamp. If it's a pre-1920 piece, I'd always keep it on cover just because of the postal history that gets lost if you separate it. If it's a later issue, then I check the cancellation or postal markings to see if there is any valid reason to keep it on cover. If so, I keep it on cover; if not, I soak it. That is my way anyway ... but every response will likely lead to a different comment.

Bottom line: If profit later on is your objective, then keep it on cover if for no other reason than "because the catalog says so". If profit is not the issue, then do whatever makes you happy. After all, it's your collection!

I think you have to evaluate it piece by piece (pun intended but the facts remain the same). There are a few instances where it does not make sense just to hang onto a piece on cover. For me usually yes, but one stamp at a time. The difficulty I have is the newer stamps. I automatically feel like taking them off cover because they are recent, but I have to remember that the person in 1861 probably felt the same, yet he kept it on cover. Think ahead, think after you're .... gone.

Art,

There are three rules I've set for myself on this subject ...

1) If the piece of paper contains a complete cancellation, and I lose a portion of that cancellation by removing the stamp from the piece ... I leave it on.

2) Multiples (pairs, strips, blocks) that are on a piece stay on a piece ... period. No reason to risk separating the multiple.

3) If the stamp in question damaged or frail, I leave it on the piece.

As for complete covers, I never remove a stamp.

Brian

Case in point. About 25+ years ago I HAD a block of 4 C18 baby Zep's on cover. Each stamp was well centered, not creased, stained or had any visible fault, a near perfect cancellation in the center of the block, I think the cover had a Chicago CDS. The cover was just the front of a registered cover. It was torn nearly in half, ratty with other tears, dirty and just real UGULY! I paid less than $40.00 for the cover at auction, not much for the stamps but a lot for the cover. I bought it for the stamps.

Yes, I soaked the block off. I split the block into pairs and put one in my album and gave one to a friend. The other pair I took to a stamp show in Charlotte, NC and traded it for a used XF US 117, the 12 cent 1869 issue and a used VF US 119, the 15 cent 1869 issue. The dealer said he needed the baby Zeps for one of his customers so we made the trade.

Both of these stamps and the baby Zep, still remain in my album.
My friend still has his baby Zep and is his only Zep.

I still think I did the right thing.

Trading up for 1869 pictorials is always a good decision :)

Simple rule of thumb, On cover a Stamp can have a mythical value of $5, take it off cover, value $1.00 Look in Scott's Specialized and every stamp listed on cover is worth more than a stamp not on cover. Single useage on cover is the most desirable more often than not as it keeps the cover commercial instead of raising the Philatelic question.

stallzer,

You are correct, the specialised does in fact place a higher value for a stamp on cover, in every instance. I believe that when they made that judgement it was for a cover in decent shape, one that a collector would be pleased with and not one that was torn up, ratty, dirty and in every sense of the word ugly, just plane crap. Looks are subjective. In the final analysis, its what the collector thinks of the cover and what the collector thinks of the stamps that is the determining factor. The cover was crap. The stamps were perfect. Easy decision, for me.

Art,

You're correct regarding valuation of covers. The front matter to the 2011 Scott Specialized says: "Folded letters, folded covers, envelopes, stationary entires and newspapers are valued as whole and complete, not as fronts of letter sheets or envelopes or as fragments of newspapers or circulars Values given are for covers bearing stamps that are "tied on" by the cancellation." And I agree that if the condition of the cover or piece detracts from the appearance of the stamp then it gets floated off.

Steve

I follow 2 simple rules (which don't apply to definitely philatelic or FDC's; these are assessed individually):

On cover, never soak.

On piece, if postmark is lost, never soak.

:)