How Much Do Damages Hurt Value On Higher Value Used Classic?

I have been looking at ebay for months now, and am curious what people think is the negative % value effect of damages, specifically the following on higher value Classics (over $150 used SCV, say):

pinhole
crease and/or ironed-out crease
cut-straight perfs
reperf on one side
"tiny perf crease otherwise sound"
one short perf
tiny thin or small thin

Assuming a 4-margin used stamp with light cancel, i.e. a stamp that would probably fulfill the Scott requirement for the quoted used CV, how much should each of these matter? Are there any that are totally no-no?

Much depends upon the stamp and the relative scarcity of the item. I don't think anyone can apply a hard percentage of value reduction for a damaged stamp, as every specimen will be different.

As in most other aspects of stamp collecting, the value is not just in "catalog value" but in what a buyer is willing to pay and what a seller is willing to accept for the item. Then there are factors such as a collector wanting an item to fill a void in a collection and perhaps cannot afford a perfect specimen and a damaged/defective stamp may better fit into one's budget.

Of course, for those looking at a stamp for investment purposes, they would probably shy away from any damage or imperfections except for the most rare items.

As for straight edges, those are not damaged stamps, but are natural occurrences in stamps from that generation, even though they may be less desirable for a collection and would typically realize a lower value.

I would stay away from pinhole damage entirely. Personally, I would stay away from reperf stamps only because they have been altered and are not in the natural state they were issued in.

Many collectors do not view minor "thins" to be too much of a problem, as they look at the front of the stamp and don't much care if a hinge remnant or paper thin is present if it is not noticeable from the front of the stamp when mounted in an album. In fact, there are some collectors that would pay a premium for a well centered stamp with a small thin, than a poorly centered stamp without a thin.

I know I'm not really answering your question as to percentage of diminished value for such damage, but as I said in the first paragraph, it depends on the stamp involved, how significant the damage is, and whether it may be a common or rare variety. Some rarities, even with significant damage, can realize a substantial price while others could be worth next to nothing in damaged condition. Each stamp has to be judged on its own merits or flaws.

Thanks, wt1. I see it might be useful to clarify a bit.

By cut-straight perfs, I mean perfs that have been literally cut in a straight line, not Straight Edges

The stamps I am talking about in particular (because I would love them to be in my collection) are, for example:

#1 / #1a, #242 - #245, #292 - #293, C14 - C15

Nothing "pigeon blood" or super rare. Just really some of the higher values among the simpler, general issues.

I personally instinctively "feel" anti-pinholes / reperfs, as you said.

I realize putting a figure on anything like this is pretty fuzzy.

I guess I am just wondering - if I were to be willing to invest a couple hundred (or even more in some cases), would it be totally wasted or outrageous if PFC or Weiss (etc) came back and said any of these things?

Rule of thumb -- should you stick to things that already have a cert, just so you know what you are getting? Or are there hidden pitfalls there?

All I can do is tell you the chance that I might buy a stamp I really want, that has been hard to find with the following faults:

1% pinhole (never say never, they say)
1% crease and/or ironed-out crease
0% cut-straight perfs (okay, never)
15% reperf on one side
15% "tiny perf crease otherwise sound"
10% one short perf
0% tiny thin or small thin (never ever)

So are you suggesting that if a used Scott #1 (with a catalog value of $550.00) was offered with a pinhole or crease you'd go no higher than $5.50 for it? I doubt you'd find anyone willing to sell it that low, even with damage.

I think he means that if it had a pinhole, there is only a 1% chance he might buy it. i.e. he'd have to be totally desperate and more or less think he'll never find another.

This is interesting and much appreciated, smauggie -- I would have thought reperf would be much worse than cut-straight. Am I interpreting you right in that you actually dislike reperf less?

I paid 150.00 for a nice 3 margin #1 and I was happy to do it..

But, SV, your 3 margins were visible, I am sure, and the price you paid was not stratospheric - nowhere near the SCV.

But what if you bought something on ebay (or elsewhere via mail) and then you sent it out for a cert and the panel/person found a crease or a thin or a reperf that wasn't disclosed or obvious from the photos? This is my nightmare scenario -- I wouldn't want pricey stamps with that kind of damage unless they were truly rare. I'd rather pace myself even if it meant paying even closer to SCV ...

So then let's say I bought something that was a "gem" or a "beauty" or similar. Then it would take days or weeks to receive it and get the cert -- and then I'd have to go back to the seller and ... what?

I'd love to hear from both sides here -- there are sellers / dealers amongst us, right?

At what point does damage become too much damage on a pricey stamp with no disclosure? What constitutes a defect that "counts" as too much?

Presumably, the seller is not going to be happy to hear two weeks or a month later that he is expected to take it back ... but if we are talking three digits (or more, I suppose), why should a buyer agree to keep it?

Sorry if I misread Smauggie's post. I was thinking in terms of the initial post where it was asked what "% value" effect such damage would have on a scarce/rare stamp.

As far as JanS's last post about buying a stamp on ebay and then later finding out that an expertizing service would claim it is less than what was advertised and/or no disclosure, I think one would simply have to buy cautiously with the "buyer beware" attitude.

Personally, I would not buy a stamp on ebay that I would not be comfortable with if it turned out less than advertised and I didn't detect it immediately upon receipt (i.e. during the return privilege period). On the flip side, if a stamp were advertised at a low price but the buyer later found it was a more valuable variety, there would be no expectation that the buyer return it or pay the seller an additional premium because of his or her error.

Of course, you could always limit your purchases to only those stamps that are expertised beforehand, but that would put a considerable premium on the sale price that few would want to pay if it were a damaged or less than perfect specimen.

There are both legitimate and shady sellers on any auction site. Likewise, there are those selling items that are simply uninformed because they were trying to dispose of stamps that were given or inherited and do not have the philatelic knowledge to know what they are claiming in terms of a sale price. I think we've all seen the extremes where a seller can ask thousands of dollars for a seemingly common stamp and keeps re-listing it waiting for some uniformed buyer to take him up on the offer. On the other hand, there are true bargains waiting to be had for certain items.

I think it really depends on (1) what you collect, and (2) the stamp in question.

For example, there are certain Match & Medicine revenues where the only known examples are all faulty. M&Ms are usually found faulty and it is stated such in Scott. Are you really going to hold out for a sound one?

What about stamps that, while not necessarily having high catalog values, have populations so low that if you're lucky you might see one (1) example come onto the market every 10 years or so? Are you going to hold out for a sound one?

U.S. #1 & 2, $5 Columbians, Zepps... they're not scarce, just expensive due to demand. Every auction will have one or all of the aforementioned. There *IS* a healthy supply of all of them. There is no reason to settle for a subpar specimen (assuming money isn't the issue) for these and similar stamps, because there are boatloads of them out there. It's not like you'll be missing the opportunity of a lifetime.

In other areas though, there are stamps that appear on the market so rarely, that you really have to stop and consider buying a faulty example, or risk not seeing another example again for years if not decades.

I'll be making a post shortly about my recent acquisitions from INDYPEX, and one of the stamps I bought is a torn, beat up P.O.S.... and it has a population of single digits, with examples only showing up once every 10 years or so. The price was right, so I bought.

I also track revenue values in Scott over the long term to watch trends, and there are some areas where items show up at auction so infrequently that the prices have not been updated in 10-20 years, as there haven't been official results to report.

When dealing with low-population items, it really becomes a crapshoot. Catalog values and conditions can't necessarily be dealt with using the same rules and guidelines that one uses with readily-available stamps.

There isn't necessarily a formula or calculation that can be applied.

Then add to that the complication of being either a variety or cancel collector. In these cases the stamp itself becomes a secondary consideration. Yes, in a perfect world you want the stamp to be perfect in addition to the cancel or variety, but sometimes it comes down to a choice between a mediocre example of a cancel on a fault-free stamp versus a choice strike or placement on a faulty stamp. Which one is preferable? Again, sometimes it depends on how scarce the cancel in question is. Many of the proprietary cancels are found on stamps that were primarily used on products, so most examples are faulty.

It ultimately becomes a personal decision that only you can decide...

[revenuecollector said:
U.S. #1 & 2, $5 Columbians, Zepps... they're not scarce, just expensive due to demand. Every auction will have one or all of the aforementioned. There *IS* a healthy supply of all of them. There is no reason to settle for a subpar specimen (assuming money isn't the issue) for these and similar stamps, because there are boatloads of them out there. It's not like you'll be missing the opportunity of a lifetime.]

JanS: This is the scenario I am talking about -- I'm not nearly sophisticated enough to get into low-population items.

So I guess the question is: what would be an unacceptable discovery / reasonable return in this scenario? I've read people on this forum saying they have had to send back many or most of their ebay purchases because they are faulty -- if that is true for "ordinary" stamps, is it not even more acceptable in the case of something relatively more valuable?

@Jan - That's exactly what I mean. A cut-off perf stamp and a reperf stamp should be worth about the same, but I would prefer at least the aesthetics of there still being perfs.

Hi Jan,
I bought, in the last 2 weeks, from two well-known dealers, on ebay, 2 really difficult US Classics-- both grills for the 3c A25 stamp. I bought a "C" Grill, #83, and a "D" Grill, #85. Both are with Bill Weiss right now-- they both have faults, and I really only wanted to make sure that the grills were both genuine.

I was a little disappointed when I received the #85 in the mail. From the image on ebay, I knew it was poor centering, and I knew it had a natural margin straight edge. I didn't know there were some perf faults on the top of the stamp and a small-- maybe crease, but internal, and like, 3-4 mm. below the top perfs. It has a Scott CV of $1250, it's known for many copies being faulty, and I paid $159 (not knowing it was faulty).

The 83 has a rounded top right corner, missing a perf on the top right and right top. So I knew it was faulty, and a heavy cancel. Scott CV is $1200, the stamp is known for many faulty copies, and I paid $89.

I don't know that I'll keep the 85. I don't mind a perf crease on the classics, but I also want to keep the price in the 10% range if I know it's faulty. I've actually re-negotiated the price with a couple of dealers in the past on ebay, when the stamp was not described as faulty, and I offered to keep the stamp if a portion of the price I paid was refunded back to me.

BUT, then again, it's a "D" Grill. I would assume that the greatest majority of US collectors don't have one of these in their collection. And a "D" grill is still a "D" grill....so I may keep it.

Bottom line is that with the classics, if you want perfect centering and perfect perfs and backs, and completely sound, you will pay a LARGE premium-- and probably more than CV.

When I bought my #64, the pink one, it had a small corner perf crease that wasn't mentioned. I paid $200 for it. I asked Bill Weiss what he thought, and if he thought I should return it. I kept the email with his answer-- maybe this will be helpful:

"On the #64, I am unsure if I understand your question? Are you asking me if I think you should keep the stamp rather then return it? If the only fault I noted was a tiny corner crease and if your cost is $230, and you don't plan on selling it anytime soon, my advice would be to keep it. Your cost is under 25% of catalog value and for a scarcer stamp even with a tiny fault, that's not bad."

So, using this type of thought, I'll probably keep the #85, because it's truly a scarcer stamp.

I rambled a bit here, but hope that my thinking on this makes sense!
Thanks, Ray

I'll pay over cat value for a sound example but if it's hard one for me to acquire and it's something that doesn't come up too often then I will settle for some damage but even then it must be minimal for me to pay out anything. An example, just today, in fact I paid all of 7 dollars for a decent #78. Although I'll get a nicer one someday soon I'll still have this one for trade or possibly to help out my kids in their collections. (It was re-perforated on the bottom) It was from a seller that I had done business with before, the damage was still aesthetically (at least to me) pleasing and the price was right. win-win.

Thanks ray.mac and ILS. The "rambling" is exactly what I was looking for to help me think through where I would go with this if I decided to get my feet wet and things went badly.

So if I am understanding correctly, if you paid a minimal amount (well under 50% of CV) on a plentiful but desirable stamp (like a 1, 2, 243, 244, 292, etc.) and it turned out to be reperf or creased, then keeping it would be tempting.

But if the cost was, say, 50% - 75% of CV, then it would need to stand up to what it claimed to be?

Edit: Actually, I guess I should also ask how bad the crease / damage is on the ones you mention? Is it visible or the sort of thing only detected in fluid etc.?

Jan, the actual % of CV will depend on centering and condition. A lot of the classics, you can find on ebay, sound, for a lot less than 50%. You just have to be patient and pick your spots.

For example, the 24c 1861 lilac-- #70, 70a, 70b, 78, 78a, 78b-- 70b will cost more, but they all have Scott CV of around $300. You can buy most of those, sound, for less than $50, but they might not be perfectly centered. BUT, centering on all of the 1861 issues was really bad. So, it's kind of like, at least for me, that what would be considered F-VF on a 20th century issue, is like almost VF-XF for the classics.

So, I don't mind the perfs cutting in on one side, because I won't pay 50% for these stamps. So, if I paid $30 for the #78b, but found that it had a small perf crease, it still was only 10% of CV, and I would probably keep it....but at the same time, the dealer should have no problem with my wanting to return it.

Is this making sense?

Am I making sense here?