A 139A Pricing Issue

What would you consider a reasonable bid for this 139A presently being offered?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/111517547300

The seller says it was certified as a 139A by Bill Weiss, and I have no doubt that it was. But after looking at its overall grade I sent him a note asking him to consider all the price/grade information in the US Specialized, including the yellow pages (2015). Here is most of what I said:



In his reply he made the following notes:




Bill, did you really give this guy a suggested value of $650 minimum for this stamp? If so, then presumably you used different reduction percentages than I did, especially if you checked it before the 2015 cat came out with a $500 increase in the "base" value for the VF standard. How did you "parse" this one.

Despite having officially been told that "an expert with 50 plus years of experience cannot be wrong," I cannot help but wonder how the rest of you would value this stamp if you were a bidder.

For a comparison, take a peek at this 141A (with PF cert) that I recently picked up in a Siegel auction for $800 plus house surcharge.



When Scott Trepel saw this lot come up his visceral reaction was a very audible "oouff." I bought it anyway because it is a late state I-grill. Be that as it may ...

I have already placed a $350 bid on the 10c, which is short of the reserve. What would you all do?

I would pay 500 $ if I collected them - but I don't.

Seller originally listed it for a BIN of $4875 and a starting bid of $1300.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/US-stamp-Sc...047675.l2557

Folks can ask whatever they want for a stamp and can even put high numbers in situation where they might not really want to sell an item.
I'm sure Bill will comment with his opinion but it doesn't appear from the listing that the seller actually bought a graded opinion from Bill, his listing contains only the basic cert.
don

In fact, he just asked me last night for my advice on how to set a reserve price and I *DID* advise him that if it was mine, I would not sell it for under 10% (or thereabouts) of the Scott "VF" price. I admit I did not consult the Graded Prices, mostly because I feel these higher value "I" grills are quite scarce and now that Scott has finally given them major number status, I think a lot more collectors will want them, so that also factored into my opinion given to him.

Bottom-line is that it only my opinion and anyone is free to disagree with it.

Allow me to comment on the matter of collector demand and the known supply. One of the reasons the I-grill items are perceived as scarce is precisely due to the fact that few collectors were led to discriminate them from the H-grill. The higher value grills, even as H-grills, have always been more scarce than the lower denominations, so now we are splitting into two groups what was already scarce as one. In principle one should expect that the values of both classes should go up in proportion to the relative scarcity of each. But for the present, the I-grill supply is increasing as the H-grill supply decreases (from the old unsorted everything-is-H pattern) yet the I-grills are getting more costly and the H-grills are not. That I attribute to the hype about relative scarcity - which is hype until we have a better basis for the claim about just HOW much rarer the I-grill should be expected to be.

The present condition is temporary, with a rush to get on the bandwagon. But right now it would be easy to overpay for an I-grill, for when the hysteria dies down and the facts are in, things are going to stabilize with far more examples out there for the I-grill than are presently recognized. It's just that right now only real specialists can distinguish one type from another most of the time, and they can handle only so many.

Am I making sense here? If so, then my point is that we should not dismiss the Scott recommendations for pricing by grade, even though the stamps are rare. I am content that the Scott tables are as reflective of the kinds of distributions and market performance of this material as are the VF prices. Grading is part of the hobby today, since the early 1990s, and it does not appear to be growing less important. And it will still be there when today's buyers are the sellers of tomorrow.

Buy the stamp, not any fancy holder it may come in.

What are you referring to Yoshi?

Not a big fan of reserve auctions on ebay. Set the price and let the buyers go from there. Thats said, it appears the seller has been forthcoming in his expectations. Many items sold at auction houses have reserves, they just don't flaunt it and the buyers are usually none the wiser.

My philosophy in ebay auctions, "sometimes you pay too much, sometimes you get a bargain. It all averages out in the long run. If you want it, go for it. Someone else may want it more ! "

Everything about ebay protects the buyer. It's a no risk situation.

Addressing Essayk's points about scarcity of the "I" grills, I can tell you that I see very FEW on the higher values. In fact, in the last 7 years, I think I've certified only ONE 15c, TWO 10c and ONE 90c. I've never seen an "I" on the 24c or 30c. On the other hand, I *do* think the low values are overpriced. I've certified lots of 1c,2c,3c,6c and 7c and all are more common than the catalog prices indicate. But not the higher values.

And by the way, aside from my own expert service, I also work for APEX and usually ALL Banknote stamps are sent to me to examine, so I also see a lot more Banknotes (grilled and ungrilled) there.

Wow! Bill you've seen a 90¢ I grill!?!? I'm jealous now.

I did not mean to imply that the upper denomination I-grills are not rare. All the upper denomination Bank Note issue grills are rare and always have been. My point was that the relative scarcity of one type against the other in that rarified atmosphere is not yet well explored. There is a lot of unchecked material out there. But given the fact that most of the upper value I-grills are early state grills, it is likely that there were far fewer calls to print and grill those denominations, which would naturally lend credence to the notion that they are going to be rarer than the H-grill. I can't imagine anyone familiar with the subject denying that. But I do believe that right now we are still at the point of discovery on the matter of relative scarcity, and should not try to build too much of a case for quantity until we can settle some basic questions, like how often, when, and how many of the I-grills were produced in the first place.

But this is rather beside the point of the problem of pricing via the tables in Scott. Let me set down two points or contention on that:

1. The question of grading the condition and printing quality of a stamp is, and ought to be, independent of its rarity. No separate standards due to rarity.

2. The yellow page tables assign pricing standards to various production grades, but do not take faults into consideration. Deductions for faults begin after the production grade has been determined and reduce the values grade by grade. The VF standard is not to be the only standard for reductions due to faults.

Are these points of common agreement?