Washington Coil Stamps (#353, 455 And 492 (?))

Can I get a price on US #353 new and used in Scott's US 2012 Catalog? I noticed my 2008 Catalog prices a 'used' for $100.00, substantially higher than the 2005 catalog, (and also higher than Swedish Tiger.)

Maybe Santa will bring me an upgrade for XMAS, (even tho I notice limited annual changes in Scotts.)

According to my 2011 Scott Specialized Catalog, a #353 lists for $215 (mnh), $95 (mint, o.g.) and $220 (used) in VF condition. However, the used price is italicized, suggesting that there are limited known transactions involving that piece.

Thanks; I better verify they're 353's.

I checked six Washington 2c coils in regards to my earlier post. Five were 10 perfs and one was a 12 perf. Following is the front and the back of the 12 perf. The back is fuzzy because I was trying to get an image of the watermark. I had toresort to a camera. Scott's says double line. I don't think this is a double line, but it doesn't conform to the wm's in Scott's. If you know what it is, please enlighten me. To me, it looks like the outline of a model-t radiator.
?????
Not sure about the other five, other than I'm sure one is a #492.
I get lost in all the examples. I wish they wouldn't resort to repeating the same series for their examples.

Hello Art. I have the Scott 2012 Classic Specialized that shows $95 unused, $220 used. (Unchanged from 2011) Your blurry photo certainly looks like the double-line watermark, which is unfortunate because the single-line version, US 388, would be worth $2250.00.

Note: You should be cautious. There is a possibility that you have an Imperf 344 that was fraudulently perforated (as noted in Scott Specialized). There are some perfs at the bottom right that look a little dicey. It is also interesting to note that the Watermark, when viewed from the back, is reversed, with the large part of the "U" on the left side, not the right side as shown in your photo. (Unless it was watermarked upside down, of course.)

The perf 12 coils are the most fraudulently altered U.S. stamps. The bottom on the stamp is Bureau knife and the left side is probably Bureau perforated. The right side perfs are questionableparticularly the second, third and fourth perfs from bottom. The top looks questionable above the "T" in "POSTAGE". This is the reason that they should be expertized.

I don't believe this addresses the last posts, but just to clarify, the stamp backside image is right-side up.
As to the imperf 344, it has a 191 watermark, so I would think that's not an issue. I agree the lower right hand perfs are peculiar. The irregularity you pointed out comes from a bend in the stamp. Not good.
This stamp and the other five came from a large mixed inventory, and had not been separately set aside. I guess it's always possible some previous owner (the previous owner was a dealer, so I'd be surprised he wouldn't have caught it) could have gotten it mixed up with their inventory. On the other hand he'd have caught the bend. Regardless, your point is valid, as it is on any large dollar volume stamp (or coin, or painting,) to have it expertized.

I was frustrated with whether the right and lefft edges would align, so I cut the stamp in half, and put the two images together. See Below. The stamp got a bit enlarged in the stretcher, however.



Just kidding, did a cut and paste of an enlarged image, but they do seem to align reasonably well, wot?

I suppose it depends on what your definition of reasonable is, but except for the middle two perfs none of the others align at all.

What can be done about the bend, and is it cost effective to repair it?

It's a rare year when I have the most recent Scott catalog, but I did splurge this year on several volumes, including volume 1.

So, this is US section from 2013 Scott (not from the US Specialized), and the prices have changed slightly:

#353 / SCV 2013:

mint: $90.00
mint never hinged: $220.00
used: $220.00 (italics)

Good luck with that identification!

-- Dave

What is the cost for the expertizing? And again, how about the fold in the bend? BTW, one of the other stamps (#492) has a Chicago 410 Postmark, and another (#455) with an encircled Capital "C". any significance there? I'll post an image tomorrow.

My Guess: the pictured stamp is a sheet stamp with posible natural straight edge at bottom and scissor cut at top. The expertizing services will be able to tell conclusively. I would send it to Bill Weiss - cost will be under 10$ but be prepared for disappointment, wiseguys have been faking them for a hundred years.

Measure the stamp, straight edge to straight edge. It should measure between 24.5mm and 25.0mm at all points across the straight edges. If it measures at least 24.5mm, that not a guarantee it is genuine, but if its less that 24.5mm that pretty much makes it a probable fake. the only way to be sure is to send it off to Weiss or one of the other services to check it.

Here is Bill Weiss' website:

http://www.stampexpertizing.com/

You can send a scan (should be high resolution -- be sure to read the specifics) to get an identification: $5. You can also send the stamp to him for one of several different types of opinions and certificates.

He is a good guy, and is well-recognized. He is also an expertizer for most, if not all, of the other expertizing services.

-- Dave

Philatarium and Al Gator:
Thank you for your input.
Any comments about the bend? I guess Bill Weiss can speak to the subject.