A Regummed C15

Anyone,

If the seller indicates "suspected" then it most likely is. How much does a suspected regumed a C15 detract from the actual value of a VF MNH stamp? I don't have my catalogs with me so what is the going rate for a VF MNH C15?

Art



On the Sam Houston Auction last week a nice looking C13 & a nice looking regummed (or reperfed) C15 went for less than $300.

Although I can't evaluate what a regummed stamp might fetch in terms of value, I can tell you that the Scott Catalog values are $615 (MNH) and $550 (Used).

Just curious, but can a stamp that has been regummed fall into the "never hinged" catagory?
Regumming would essentially be a repair that would take place due to something like soaking off a hinge, in theory.
???

In a word, NO.
I regummed stamp is just that Regummed. Would you pay a MNH price for a Penny Black that some how had missed being cancelled, then soaked off an envelope 100 years later, regummed and offered as MNH. I would hope not! The problem is that you don't know if the stamp was actually and regummed. Or Regummed due to another reason. I would guess over 90% would be to mislead a buyer! Personally I would treat ANY regummed stamp as USED. Just my 2 cents.

Another interesting point to consider in evaluating such a stamp is that the Mint/Used values are "only" $65 apart. For a stamp of this high a value and scarcity, that's a relatively small difference (and considerably smaller than that of the lower value Zepps).

It is my guess that in this situation, a "postally used" stamp commands a better price because it would reflect period usage that was relatively rare in the Depression era but that, of course, is not what is presented here. Under this condition, I'm not too sure how one would value a "regummed" stamp. Even if you classified it as "used", I suspect that most buyers on the secondary market would expect a contemporaneous cancellation to prove it went through the mails during the period it was issued, but in this example that is not the case.

It may simply come down to what one would be willing to pay for the stamp, if they wanted an uncancelled and regummed stamp to add to their collection, which is not what the intended values in the catalog were meant to reflect.

I would go with the used catalog value - but given that the stamp you posted has other condition issues aside from the regum (toning, missing perfs, and what looks like some color run especially on the right margin... possibly due to soaking or some type of chemical treatment... possibly to remove a cancel mark?) I would price it somewhere between 50-70% of the used catalog value.

The stamp does have fairly good centering, and I think it would display well - but for such an expensive issue that isn't particularly hard to find, I think you really have to take all things into consideration.

I think the color of the stamp bleeding into the design bothers me more than the regum.
Anyone else feel that way, or have any thoughts on it?
Would a stamp from that era be common with bleeding colors without tampering?

No. Scott classifies regummed stamps as "the same as a stamp with none of its original gum for the purposes of grading". Further, Scott only lists values of "No gum" stamps through #218.

I could not find a guide for determining the value of "no gum" stamps, but it's clearly less than one with original gum. I would guess it's in between used and mint, hinged.

It is very simply an altered Stamp and therefore value should be affected greatly. Unfortunately there are no guidelines for re-gummed pieces but I'd be hesitant to pay over $50.00 for it.

I am still curious about the color bleeding from the stamp?
Is that normal for this era or particular stamp?

ratio411,

I've been thinking more and more about this stamp since everyone else has noted the same condition issue.

Now its time to put on my detective hat and imagine things for a little while.

The first area I spotted the runny ink is the right margin but on closer inspection the same issue can be observed, most noticeably in the "GRAF ZEPPLIN..." on the top, but also around the $ symbol and in other areas of the text - areas where the ink is most heavily printed on the paper.

Have you ever spilled some liquid on water soluble ink? The same effect is observed.

Of course in this case the design was not printed with a water soluble ink.

So what could have been used to dissolve the ink of the original design? And why would something so powerful be used on a simple used postage stamp?

I suspect the solution it was soaked in was intended to remove the ink of a cancel. As a result the surface of the original design also began to dissolve. Because the stamp was likely submerged in the solution and then drained we don't see very pronounced running of the ink, like if you were to spill some coffee on a notepad - however such a scenario would explain why we observe the smeared ink in the right margin, if you can imagine that after being soaked the stamp was then lifted out by the left side of the stamp thus causing the suspended ink to drain across the right margin of the piece.

And now I lay my hat to rest and let the rest of you decide.

I see ink bleeding in the "Z" and the top serif of the "I" in Zeppelin.

I think you are right Panda...
I think this stamp was removed from cover,
bleached of cancel, then regummed for a
MNH appearance.

All of this baffles me though as the stamp
is worth the most on cover, and next highest
value used. To be converted to MNH actually
reduces it's value and is risky.

Maybe it was not restored to 'decieve', but
rather restored by a collector that wanted
his album the way he/she wanted it, MNH, and
did it to satisfy his/her own collection preference.

OK, since no one else has chimed in, I will. The "color run" in the right margin is NOT a color run at all it is a "Guide Line" and marked where to cut the sheet. These stamps were printed as 1 sheet of 200 then seperated into 4 smaller sheets of 50. The lines were printed with one Running Horizontaly and one Verticaly intersecting in the middle of the 4 panes. This stamp would have been from one of the left 2 panes. 1st stamp to the left of center. Hope this helps.

Just to clarify, what I've been referring to as a "color run" is not the vertical guide line printed across the right perforations, but the area of blue between the design's outermost frame and the stamp's perforations on the right side.

Also, regarding the issue of $ value on cover vs mint - I think its hard to determine (detective hat on) whether the person manipulating the stamp came into possession of the stamp on cover or as used-off-paper - so perhaps their choice was more like mint vs used. Certainly there are many possibilities about the motive, but I think deceit is the most likely.

-P. Bear

In a technical sense, you are right. This is altered ... but not irreparably. Regummed stamps can be soaked and turned into no-gum stamps. That is why Scott specifically lists values for no-gum examples of classic US stamps, and makes no mention or implication that stamps without gum are damaged goods. That you think this is only worth $50 because of the re-gum is neither fair, nor reasonable.

Assuming this has no other condition problems (cancel removed or the like) this is a $300 stamp all day.