****verified Error****

I'm so excited I can't contain myself

I just received my verification from The Philatelic Foundation regarding a gumming error and color variance I submitted a few weeks back.

Just to update everyone, I started a topic some time back, "Understanding gumming Error's" I have an Unused block of 16 stamps from The Philippine Islands of The United States, Scott# 292.
I was trying to figure out if my stamps had an actual gumming error or some other explanation as to why they looked glossy on 4 full stamps and half of 4 stamps. I received quit a bit of feed back and thought the only way to know for sure was to have it examined by a professional committee. Well, my results came back and I'm eager to share with everyone!

I now present the results!














I only wish I knew how many more existed, other then the obvious 40 stamps that came from the sheet of 400 mine did.
I'm proud that I was able to share my discovery with the great people here first.

Wow! that is exciting news! And just look how long they have gone unnoticed!

ncbuckeye,
no kidding, I have had these in my collection for over 21 years and I just recently noticed.

Nice!

Very nice! does this mean that you discovered a new variety/error? Maybe you should let Scott know!

canadianphilatelist,

I'm not sure if it's an entirely new variation I though it was interesting it was verified as 262VAR with the side notation Scott#292. Any ideas?

Typo. You should notify PF.

Russ,

Your right, They did type it up wrong Error after error seem to follow these guys
I'm also surprised they don't have the cert in their data base yet either.

canadianphilatelist,
I am not 100% positive this is a whole new variation, but I took your advise and notified Linns just in case. Why not, I don't see it listed in their catalog. Great Idea canadianphilatelist.

Did you submit it as a 262VAR?

I think the catalog number on the certificate reflects the ID that you submitted it under and the opinion portion of the certificate contains the PF identification of the stamp (i.e., a 292 VAR).

EDIT: This cert was submitted by the stamp's previous owner as a 64a and it came back as a 64 -- note that the catalog number is listed as 64a but the narrative correctly identifies it as a 64.

tomiseksj,

I just checked the paperwork I submitted as well as the confirmation letter they sent to me when they received it. It all stats, Philippine Scott#292. I did submit it as a color variation, Lilac, And the cert shows only 292 not 292a.

Just a quick side note; now that this error has been verified and based on the example I have. There is at least 16 more examples fully gummed on both sides, and 16 examples gummed half way, some where out there waiting to be discovered.

The preprinted portion of the certificate clearly indicates "and described by the applicant as follows:"

If you submitted it as a 292 then, as Russ said, it is a typo.

We'll be interested in hearing what type of response you get from Linns.

Trying to research gumming errors have been difficult in determining if they are considered a "Major Error". I have read Errors Vs. EFO, And the top major errors discussed are,


The most information I have found on gumming errors is.(In theory gumming errors are possible, in practice used stamps have no gum, so any error would become undetectable).

I am very curious as to how Linns or others will categorize this, a major error or EFO.

I found this comment interesting from Linns,

I hope they list it as a new variety! That would be so exciting if they were to list it as a new variety =) Make sure you come back and tell us when/if it gets listed!

canadianphilatelist,

lol, I couldn't leave everyone hanging without closure. I'm anxiously waiting to hear back myself just to share with everyone.

Wow, how disapointing!

I just received an email from Linns and they state,