Are These Perforations Possible?

Sinclair, I understand your concerns, but how do you know that they are intentionally hiding faults? Could it be simply explained that poorly trained employees are presenting these stamps to the best of their limited knowledge?

Could be the reason, but is no excuse.

Your company, your responsibility.

There is no other way to explain what is going on. I have bought one of these stamps so I know what they are doing.

HDNA - I would invite you to carefully review the stamps that are listed on Stamp Smarter by this seller, and you should easily observe an unusually large number of them with very similar repairs. Whoever does the work fairly crudely smears a filler of an unknown substance over faults, probably mostly thins. I have seen these same types of repairs on countless stamps in the last few years from the same seller. I have reported them to the seller over and over again. Fortunately, many have been documented on Stamp Smarter. I have also seen them in person from buyers who than submitted them to me for expertizing. In any case where I've seen one from a buyer, no faults were mentioned in the title or description (that would be because they do not use written descriptions generally). However, when I have reported them to the seller and asked him to please add the repair(s) to the description, they often do so by adding at the very bottom of the listing a short description such as "may have a repair as seen in the picture". Usually nothing more definitive than that type of evasive decription, And since the seller starts all his auctions at 99c, there is generally very quickly some bids on every item. This is significant because once the item has bids, neither the title nor description can be changed, so there is only two ways to add after-the-fact info - by adding it at the very bottom (as they elect to do) OR by simply using the "Ask Question" to post the question onto the listing in that location (I generally pose my report in the form of a question so that they (any seller) has the option of using that webform to tell readers of the problem. They have never used the "Ask Question" function. So the after-the-fact additional info is put at the very bottom of the listing, where the chances of it being seen by most bidders is rather nil.

But I seriosly doubt, given the great number of reports about the same type of repairs,that the seller is unaware of what they are (though I certainly can't accuse them of purposely ommitting the obvious same type repairs from their description, doesn't it seem logical that since they have been told about these same types of repairs over and over.............).

Here are a few more for anybody that remains unconvinced.

351337497591
311311783676
351335921432
311312110747

http://www.ebay.com/itm/nystamps-US...047675.l2557

Here s a good example. Reported by me to Stamp Smarter and them, yet no additional info was added to the listing. I could link lots of them. So is ignoring them intentional? Who knows.......

(typing error corrected)

Cjd, I agree that it isn't an excuse. However, there aren't many companies that can exist without a similar business model. An engineering or architect firm? Yes, they are held to a higher standard so that people don't die. They receive a premium in compensation due to the critical nature of their work. A stamp selling company with the business model of many of the ebay accounts presented here would not be profitable if it only employed experts.

It doesn't excuse misrepresentation. As many before me in this thread have argued, ideally misrepresentation would never happen.

essayk presented the code of ethics of many stamp organizations. I agree with these codes in terms of how members should conduct business. Any member of these organizations should have their membership stripped if they don't follow the codes to the letter.

Do these organizations closely police their members? It seems that they don't always do so.

Should anyone trust a seller based on their organizational membership? Ideally they would, but no organization will be able to perfectly police their members. Obviously, human error can also account for some transgressions.

"Your company, your responsibility." I like the concept of this, but it just doesn't exist in in an ideal manner in the current state of the U.S. It is also not enforceable unless you have vast amounts of money to pay lawyers to "encourage" companies to uphold their stated ethics and responsibilities.

I don't know how to fix the issue of stamp sellers on ebay that misrepresent their material whether intended or not. However I do know that given enough anecdotal evidence that resources such as StampSmarter does help buyers connect with sellers that sell material that is appropriately priced.

here is another one that is similar to the one that started this discussion

http://www.ebay.com/itm/nystamps-US...p=true&rt=nc

Not only is ebay not protecting people from this seller, they are promoting him - when you browse the listing their lots are listed with a big NYstamps logo (and the feedback % is not shown when you view the item).

In the ebay examples linked by Winston Sinclair and Bill Weiss, the filled thins are fairly obvious on the photo of the back. If the thins had not been filled, would they not be invisible except when held to the light or dipped? In these particular examples, do not the repairs actually make the flaws more obvious?

I'm not defending NYStamps. There are many other examples of failings to fault them for. But in these particular examples, aren't the faults fairly obvious?

Or is it that buyers just don't even realize that those crummy looking backs result from crude repairs and, instead, think that crummy looking backs are just par for the course with old stamps???

Someone please 'splain it to me.

Or am I missing something?

edited for typo

Bill, Sinclair, I now see what you are describing. It doesn't exclude the possibility of not knowingly misrepresenting their stamps for sale, but it does create a lot of doubt.

Bill, your statement that you have informed them many times concerning the alterations should have raised flags in that company that more attention should have been paid. It seems that such communication has resulted in no change to their practices. In that case, I completely agree with you that they are knowingly ignoring these issues.

So what should be done at this point? I looked at the listings that you presented as examples and I didn't see any display of affiliation with any philatelic organizations.

Do I believe that they should adhere to a higher standard of ethics? Yes. However they currently do not represent themselves as members of any organized group of philatelists. In their current state they can do whatever the heck that they want without reprisal.

Should stamp collectors look for marks of affiliation with groups that have standards of ethics? I believe that they should so that they have some measure of assurance that the seller is held to a code of ethics.

Is every stamp buyer, expert or novice going to consider the organizational membership of a certain seller? No. The novices are going to be sadly disappointed and the experts may find some great deals.

Once again, I want to express how I believe that StampSmarter has a place in the current stamp market.

Once again, I want to express how lying in the U.S. is not a prosecutable offense and that "buyer beware" is sadly the norm for a large amount of transactions in the U.S. including stamp sales.

I very much hope for the selling climate to change, but I don't expect it to happen without radical changes in policy that includes politics. The misrepresentation of items will always occur but could hopefully be limited.

If the recognized stamp organizations make definitive assessments of a stamp seller's honesty, then the hobby will be bettered and all stamp buyers will be benefited.

How can they do this? Good question. At the very least they should seriously consider complaints against members. So far this seems to not be guaranteed.

I believe that philately organizations should play a much more active role than they have so far. Times have changed. ebay, the source of many stamp transactions in the world of philately has encompassed the majority of transactions.

ebay due to their policies and desire for profits will never police philatelic transactions in a manner that is consistently fair.

The philatelic organizations need to better police their members.

These are my thoughts and I am very willing to change them provided information that more accurately depicts the situation.

I buy from all sorts of dealers that bother to do the right thing. I don't accept that it is just the way it has to be.

Once in a while his stuff pops up in my search results. It is probably fine, but I choose not to support the business model. Others may think that is foolish. So be it.

Good examples, Sinclair, let's look at them.

I see marks on the reverse that look like repairs, and I see tears and such in some of the items. Those things put me on alert. Most of them are of no interest to me in any grade, but one is of some moderate interest as a spacefiller. That said, I would not pay much for it, because of the gunk on the reverse.

But I can see the stamp well enough to identify it from the photo, so I know what I'm getting into, and I can see that they have accurately reported the current cat value for what it is. If I am in the market for a spacefiller, then I would not hesitate to bid on it. That would be true about every stamp you listed. So I don't see the fraud.


I am able to figure out what the item is,
that it has some kind of problem that alerts me not to over pay.
that They started bidding at 1 cent in each case,
That the price is being set by open competitive bidding (unless they are using shills?)
that every item is selling for a small fraction of catalog
but that it isn't nystamps that is jacking me out of my money.


The fact that they haven't given much of a verbal description is more than offset by giving me views of both sides. I remember the old days of buying with ONLY words from ads in Linns. This is better.

I shop for a lot of things on ebay, not just stamps, and one thing that is common to that venue is that the picture is EVERYTHING. That is a new paradigm.

I think part of the problem we are all wrangling over is that the present ethical statements I've shown you are a little behind the times insofar as not taking adequate note of the fundamental differences in buying and selling practices online. People who prefer the old styles are quick to cry "foul" to the change.

You want to see UNETHICAL? Back in the 1970s Modern Photography magazine had dozens of schlock sellers in their ads section. And you had to know what you were doing in trying to buy from them, and how to protect yourself from their tricks (like sending damaged goods COD and blaming YOU for the damage after you signed for it and opened it. Then the trouble was revealed, but who had a witness? No refund.) Now that IS unethical. One company tried to hook me for $650 but my credit card company defended me. But a YEAR later they tried to put the charge through again.

The unwillingness of a company to subscribe to a code that requires a writeup for every stamp, MAY be an indication that they are up to no good. But it is hardly self evident. Suspicion needs verification. Otherwise the ethics problem lies with the accuser.

Edit - I just saw the last comments from cjd - you have a good sense about this that I recommend to all. If you don't trust a dealer and/or don't know what you are getting into - then stay clear.

Isn't that just good common sense?

I'm not defending ebay in ignoring bad business practices, but this seller has to likely pay tens of thousands of dollars a month in ebay fees. At about 15,000 auctions a month, even if the average sale is- $20, that's $300K in gross sales that ebay collects fees on. I'm sure ebay is happy to turn a blind eye to keep money like that coming in.