Changing Nature Of Certificates - Scott 65

Here's an interesting tale. I purchased this a while back based upon the first APEX certificate shown. It stated this was "United States, Scott 65E essay, Brazer No. 65TC-D, rose pink shade on experimental straw paper, original gum, hinge remnant, few nibbed perfs."

Looking at the stamp, I just couldn't reconcile the description of the paper with the stamp, so I sent it in, stating I thought they were in error.

The second certificate is what I received back with the stamp...Along with the accompanying note to the certificate which states basically that until the varieties are all listed by Scott, the APEX prefers to call these 65TC (See last image).

I'm confused. The stamp you are showing is Imperf --but the stamps on cert are perforated?

Thank you for pointing out my error. I've corrected the post to show the correct stamp. I'll list the other stamp at a later time.

Okay. You sent an item in for a reconsideration, and they reconsidered it in light of new specialist information. Nothing terribly surprising there. What is the rest of the story?

Do you agree with their revised opinion? Or, is there something about the stamp that requires further consideration? We don't have your stamp in front of us to study the paper, so you will have to fill us in.

You're right. I should have given more information.

When I purchased the stamp, I had done so because I really wanted a certified item with straw paper. I'd read about it, but had never seen the genuine article up close and personal.

I received the stamp and looked at it carefully under a microscope, expecting to see the elongated fibers which were supposed to be characteristic of that paper. I couldn't find any. I went to the source, Brazer's original book and the reprint, both of which I own copies of. The descriptions are minimal, but trying to track out what the certificate listed against what Brazer listed just wasn't meshing. I contacted the APS and spoke with Mercer Bristow about it, telling him that something wasn't right, that this really didn't appear to be straw paper. He asked me to send it in and they would look at it again.

You see the resulting change in certificate descriptions. And with this one, I also received the additional certificate note I've shown in the scans.

Note that this was not an "ancient" certificate, but one issued only four years earlier. I still don't understand how this big a change can occur. I went from a stamp on "...experimental straw paper, original gum..." to a stamp on "...thick stamp paper with experimental gum..." That seems to be quite a difference, don't you think?

I also note that the first certificate calls the shade "rose pink", while the second just states "pink". I don't know if that truly makes a difference with this variety, but it's another discrepancy. I assume there are color "standards" that are used for comparisons when they certify certain stamps (such as the Scott 65 family of stamps), so I find the difference on the two certs odd--if I sent in a #65 vs #64b vs #64 for example, rose pink vs pink is a pretty big deal. I don't know if the shades are not as pertinent on the trial proofs, so please correct me if this is inconsequential here.

Even more annoying is the difference in color from 2008 cert picture --- which looks more "rose pink"

Versus 2012 picture in cert where color is lighter resembling a more true pink. Maybe it faded over the 4 years. Haha

Whole thing is annoying me. I'm feeling your pain stampman!