To Lift Or Not To Lift... (Anonymous Poll)

I also would not lift the stamp. To me, a cover with a stamp hinged to it is not as attractive as a cover with a stamp with its original affixture.

ILS... here's the thread with all of the images...

https://goscf.com/t/38504

billw2... with all due respect,
(and I truly mean that), your
position is 180 degrees from that
of essayk's...

I'm thinking now, I'll do neither...
I originally purchased this cover
for myself... not to sell... the
amount of controversy which has
been generated - was not my intent
when I posted it... for that, please
accept my apologies...

Thank you all for your participation...
I'm going to tuck the cover away for
a few years and forget about it for
awhile and re-focus on stamps...

Randall

I think Randall's decision to keep this item intact and not submit it for sale at this time may be the best course available under his present circumstances. Speaking purely as a collector, I understand the need to keep the item in its original and most natural condition, and as a collector I encourage him to do that as long as possible. He is satisfied that the year date is clear enough to make the case for identifying the stamp as a 461, which is not an unreasonable approach to identifying the stamp by elimination. So long as removal of the stamp is presently the only way to observe the watermark variety directly, his decision to keep it intact probably will mean he cannot sell it as a 461 cover unless and until a non-destructive method for viewing the watermark is ever developed.

Should the day come when he is ready to consign it somewhere as a 461 cover, he will need to let the house determine how it wishes to establish the identity of the stamp. I tend to agree with Bill Weiss that Siegel may not be interested in this as an isolated consignment item, but if it were included as part of a larger consignment then they could advise. Even then Randall would still have the right to withdraw the item.

If this were my cover and my personal investment in it were minimal, I would keep it intact indefinitely, passing it on to my heirs or assigns if necessary. But I would keep looking for a combination of fluid and illumination that would permit me to observe the watermark directly while it is still on cover. I would also do the homework necessary to establish that the cancel could not be any more recent than the issue date of the stamp as a 461, or establish why that cannot be proven.

As I see it, the collector demand for original condition is being frustrated by some technological limitations which may or may not be overcome any time in the foreseeable future. If Randall has time to wait, and is comfortable with that, then he should. That is what I would do too. If its just a case of curiosity killed the cover, then what's the rush?