Scott 2115f Cv?

My 2013 Scott Cat. shows -$ value for an imperf. pair. Does the new CV show a price now? If so what?

Still no CV in the 2014 Scott.

Can you please tell me which stamp is 2113? Thank you, Peter

Scott #2113 is the 22c "D" stamp with eagle (small size from booklet) that was issued back in 1985. The 2113b variety is imperforate between the stamps (horizontally). An error that has not had enough secondary market activity (apparently) to allow the Scott Catalog to place a value on it.

[edit] I just checked all the way back to my 2001 Scott Catalog. The error 2113b was listed the same way then as it is now (no specific value just a "$--" listing).

Thanks for checking the 2014 cat. I have googled and found nothing. I purchased a set off ebay last night.

CoinWatcher: The stamp you just posted is NOT a #2113, but rather a #2114 imperforate pair.

There is no suffix letter listed in the Scott Catalog (2013 ed.) referring to the #2114 imperforate pair, but it is listed with a value of $125.00 (in italics) suggesting that the example is relatively scarce, thus the reason for the high catalog value.

[edit] Sorry, I stand corrected. It's the Scott #2115f imperforate pair coil. (I didn't read down far enough in my catalog as I was only looking at the design.)

Unless the pic on my screen is different from what you all are seeing -- I see a Scott US#2115f, the 22c flag over White House imperforate coil pair error. It is a relatively common error (one of the most common of the imperforate errors), that typically retails for $3-$5. The estimated known population is several thousand pairs. The 2013 Scott catalog value for mint is $10.

The $125 quote above is for a full gutter pair of the sheet version of the stamp. It is perforate, not imperforate -- that is why it does not have a minor catalog number assigned (once separated, it's indistinguishable from a normal single).

Also, 2115 exists in two different printing varieties, some printed on the B press and some on the C or D press. The difference can be checked by looking at the tagging. The block tagging on the B-press issues is 19mm wide, on the C/D-press it is 16.5mm wide. Twenty-two different plates were assigned, nine for the B-press and twelve for the C/D-press. Plate 8 was printed on the C/D-press and exists with both wide and narrow block tagging. The wide tagging is scarce and a strip of 5 (PS5) retails for $125.00.
Plate number 9 was planned for the B-press, but was never used.
The plate number club, PNC3 does not list a price for an imperforate strip of any length!

Peter

Thanks all for the great info. & picking up on my mistake.

Just curious: On the posted scan, what are the black marks above "USA"? A partial cancellation, perhaps? Dirt or debris? Or is it in the printing of the stamp? That will make a difference in how desirable the pair would be on the secondary market.

Imperf pairs of Scott #2115f seem to be going for around $5 to $6 (based on ebay sold listings).

wt1 supposed to be MNH so will have to see when I get them.

Coinwatcher, one question please. Is it possible for you to edit this thread where it reads Scott 2115f instead of the wrong number? Just with an eye on future reference! Thank you a bunch!

Peter

When your 2115f imperf pair arrives, it might be worthwhile to check the tagging (if you have a UV lamp). While Scott has listed both imperf and tagging-omitted errors for 2115, they do not have an imperf tagging-omitted pair listed. Since both errors are relatively common, I would not be surprised if double-errors exist. And with a common error like this one, it's easy for a seller to overlook the tagging-omitted possibility. Unlikely, of course, but stranger things do happen.

"what are the black marks above "USA"? A partial cancellation, perhaps? Dirt or debris? Or is it in the printing of the stamp?"

Likely sloppy printing.

I received the stamps today and here is a better look at the marks above USA. Looks to be a printing error. I will need to get a black light to see if there is any tagging error.

Whatever it is, it does not seem to be in the color of the stamp. It looks brown. The BEP employee that was keeping an eye on the press was eating a chocolate bar? Anyway, this is most likely not an error, but a freak!

Peter