Definition Of Mnh

The attached photo (best I could do to illustrate the point; scan wasn't effective) shows the back of a US 213 that carries a PSE certificate graded VF 80, Mint OGnh and which was also represented by the seller as MNH. The photo shows no obvious hinge marks, but there are small disturbances in the gum as the photo barely shows. Would this stamp still qualify as MNH; if so, would its value still be discounted somewhat for the gum disturbances (how much)? Should the certificate have noted these disturbances (assuming they existed at the time of examination) or are they too minor to be of concern?

I'm no perfectionist; just interested in what MNH is interpreted as for more experienced folks and what folks view as the level of detail expertizers should adhere to with respect to noting faults or other aspects of a stamp that may affect its value.

Thanks.

Is that the way it was issued by the Post Office? If so it is mint og nh with gum skips
If not it is mint og disturbed gum.

If the question of hinging comes up despite that, then it is nh with "defective" gum.

Those are not formal categories, but merely descriptive of the actual condition of the gum.

If someone omits mention of any of these factors, the buyer might argue that the stamp received was "other than as described" and that could be the basis for a return and refund.

My opinions.

Wasn't there a recent Thread about different types of gum and how the effects of time and temperature affect the back of the stamp?

Jack Kelley

It looks rather distressed - and I'd be rather distressed if a supposedly UMM stamp looked like that. Surely the cert should have noted the fact, along the lines set out by essayk?

Just to add some clarity to the rather rough picture, the larger dark areas on the left and right sides and the top and bottom shading are just shadows - the disturbances in question are the smaller spots in the middle.

essayk, as always you teach me something, I admire the way you do not waste time on unnecessary details some people would bore us with.

Keep up the outstanding work!

Cheers

David (Stampmaster)

I would agree going by the photo the spots appear to be small gum skips, so NH with small gum skips.

I always like the term "disturbed" gum.

Doesn't gum "skip" refer to something that happened during the original gum application. If it is known to be so, than gum skip would be proper.

Looks like this stamp might have slightly adhered to a glassine or another stamp, causing a disturbance in the gum.

It is suspicious to me that the disturbances seem to be just where a hinge would have been.

Thanks for the kind thoughts, Dave, but I fear that prolixity has been one of the banes of my existence. I am about to put up a new thread by telling a story. Talk about wordy.

As for trying to diagnose the nature and source of those blotches on the gum side. You folks doing that must have keener vision or a better image than I, but I cannot see enough to even speculate on what they might be. If I saw an evenly lit closer image I might have a thought or two. But I do see that they are not confined just to the central area, so I don't think that hinging caused them. Getting stuck to something, such as the inside of a glassine envelope, has possibilities, but they could also be skips from a poor application of gum. I'm out to sea on what caused them.

Appreciate the feedback from you folks that took the time to help me out on this.