This Week's Revenues. Let's Talk About Condition/Grade.

I received these three stamps in the mail this week, one from ebay and the other two from an auction house. Each is unique in its own way. Two of the three are fairly common, at least according to the Scott catalog, but as is all too frequently the case, either the catalog is wrong (in my opinion) or there's more to the story than just the catalog value.

First is a lovely unused example of RB1c, the imperforate version of RB1a, with PF cert. This stamp only catalogs $80, but just try finding a nice one without faults. They are frequently found creased or thinned. They are also far less common than other early revenue stamps cataloging $200-400. In my opinion, this stamp is considerably undervalued in Scott.




Next is a stamp you see every day.... R77c. However it is in uncommon condition. Four large margins and bright color. A hint to others collecting early U.S. revenues: if you ever come across examples of R77c, R78c, R79c, or R80c, that are (1) sound, and (2) have margins fully clear of the design on all 4 sides, throw the catalog out the window and just buy it!

Seriously, these 4 stamps were positioned so tightly on the sheet and the perforation quality control was so awful that they are found almost universally either poorly centered or with the perfs hitting the design on at least one side.

For the type, this one would be considered to have jumbo margins. In numismatic circles, we would call this a "condition rarity", i.e., the stamp itself is not rare, but its condition makes it so.




Lastly, a stamp that, while flawed, makes for a very nice aesthetic presentation, and was thus (IMO) a bargain.

R96a is a tough stamp, cataloging $3,500. There are lots of trimmed examples out there on the market. This one has very nice balanced margins, and a nice contrasting magenta manuscript cancel. The raggedness of the edges is indicative of having been torn against a steel straight-edge, frequently found on the $5 and $10 types. It has a small tear at bottom right which does not detract from the overall presentation, but dropped the price to below 10% of Scott (it also helped that the seller only listed it as "revenue stamp" with no mention of the catalog number anywhere...)

I could probably double to triple my money right away if I chose to flip it, but I consider it a good long-term hold.

Did you put a perf gauge on the top and bottom of the R77c? They do not look quite right to me. The top perfs angle down from left to right, which might happen but it has to happen the same on both sides. Meanwhile the bottom perfs move up from the left for 5 perfs then suddenly drop down and then start to rise again. Something seems funky.

Everything perfs out 12 on all sides. The ones at bottom do appear to bounce around a bit though.

Here's an image with a red line drawn across the deepest points of the perfs from left to right at both top and bottom.

I agree that the catalog value on revenues does not always follow the scarcity of the stamp. I have also found that the market seems to recognize this and the scarcer undervalued stamps always do very well and the ones that I find as common but high catalog can be found at bargain prices.

.....and your RB1c is a real beauty. How did you know mine had a crease?