Beware Non Certified Classic Stamps On Ebay

We have all seen the warnings about buying non certified classic stamps from generic sellers or dealers on ebay. These would be sellers or dealers that you have never heard of before, including those that list either APS or ASDA credentials but again you have never heard of before. The names of the biggest most well known dealers most of us know by name whether we have purchased from them or not. This note is written as an exclamation point to those warnings by reporting my own experience with such sellers. The term cavaet empor was never more true. I started collecting stamps as a kid but really didn't get into it until the 1970's. By the end of the 1970's I put the hobby on hold for three reasons: inflation had caused the classics to go through the roof, I didn't have the income to buy what I wanted in that market, and I found another collectible to take the place of stamps. By 1989 or 1990, circumstances had changed. I had the income to be able to purchase some of the classics like the Pictorials that I had always wanted and got the bug at an auction held in Delaware. I bought a lot of stamps that included what I thought was an unused #38, an unused #36, an unused #2, an unused #117 and a few others. These were all raw without certs. I sent them into the PF. The 38 was unused with og but had a tiny crease and a surface rub. The 36 turned out to be used as did the #2 which had a manuscript cancellation removed. The 117 which was a large superbly centered specimen was genuine without faults but was judged faintly cancelled. With this and a few other disappointments, I swore off uncertified stamps altogether and only bought stamps that had been already certified from well known dealers. The bulk of my collection in classic US was acquired this way. Over the last few years, I have dabbled on ebay with stamps again without certs. Big mistake. The lesson I should have learned for all time back in the early 1990's has now been permanently learned with the help of Wm Weiss expertization whose fees are reasonable and therefore permit you to find out what you need to know about your non certified stamp purchases which you would otherwise not have done because of the fees that PSE and PF charge that are a percentage of catalog value, not a flat fee per item. Naturally the items that need the certs the most are the most expensive. The sellers offering the damaged stuff likely know this. They may also know that their stamps are damaged as well. We all know about certs being tossed when the opinion is not what is desired and playing one service off against another. I would wager that 75% of non certified classic US stamps being offered on ebay, if sent to any of the 3 major certifying services or Weiss will NOT
receive a clean certificate. I can say that without question because that is the percentage of my own purchases that involved classic stamps that looked good and showed no obvious defect to me under high mag and with watermark fluid. I'll admit that I'm not a stamp expertizer, but I don't knowingly buy stamps that are grossly defective. Didn't matter. The number and types of flaws found could be listed in alphabetical order. No more. I will no longer buy an uncertified classic US stamp unless the seller agrees beforehand that the stamp is refundable with the receipt of a faulty cert. I recommend the same for your purchases. Weiss makes it possible to do so economically and with dispatch. This does not apply to non classic US stamps for which I would not think about getting a cert anyway but for all I know amny of them may be damaged as well. I would be interested in hearing of other members' experiences and particularly members who bought foreign stamps on ebay raw and then sent them in for certification. You don't have quite the choices for expertization of foreign stamps in this country that you do for US stamps and the cost and inconvenience of dealing with foreign expertizers has made me shy away from sending any of my more expensive foreign classic stamps for expertization--probably to my detriment as the US example shows. Let me now what your experiences have been. The percentage of certified stamps is miniscule compared to all that is out there. I bet we are all sitting on a pile of defective merchandise without the slight clue. Bet on it.

Hello funcitypapa.....

I agree that there is a lot of questionable material being listed as sound.

Any chance of getting a look at the stamps you mention ???.....#36 , #38, #117, #2,

I'd love to be able to but actually am not that familiar as to how to accomplish it. Those stamps I do not have on hand to shoot a photo of; I do have a copy of the certs. For the 117, and a faintly cancelled 38 you would really have to imagine the cancel, it certainly isn't seen with the naked or for that matter a camera's eye. But I think the issue goes a little deeper than just saying that there are a lot of questionable or doctored items on ebay. I think it also has to do with some questionable calls on the certificate themselves. We have all seen glaring defects completely glossed over and not mentioned on a cert while at other times truly miniscule and for practical purposes truly insignificant issues are mentioned. The certifying process is supposed to be a blinded process? Do we really believe this? Do you really believe that a rare item submitted is not going to have its provenance or submitter known to the experts and this information is not going to sway them no matter how little towards a favorable or unfavorable opinion. That would just be human nature but it has financial implications. For example I have several certs in this category. An unused 67 with XF centering being called for a tiny (<1mm) tear in a perf hole. Did you ever consider how one gets a tiny tear in a perf hole and on a stamp of that magnitude isn't the real issue whether an unused 67 is truly unused as opposed to used cancellation removed and not whether there is a tiny perf hole tear that needs 10X magnification to see. If I was the ref on that play, I believe that I would put the whistle back in my pocket. Or how about a tiny perf crease or tiny corner crease. I have had these called on a VF/XF used 67b and two VF or better 78c's. I think that when you are talking about rare items like this where the real question on the table is "genuine?" that a little slack and common sense should be applied. I'm not talking about major defects such as large tears, large defacing creases, thins, reperfing and regumming--these are things that should in my opinion always be called. Have you ever wondered how an unused stamp gets to the point of "genuine unused, traces of gum?" There's not enough gum there to tell whether it is og or not. After all if you are going to wash the gum off a stamp aren't you going to wash it all off? Just some thoughts on the expertizing process.

Thanks for sharing, funcitypapa.

You raise interesting and thought-provoking points. I guess there's always going to be subjectivity in any grading process. And it's natural that sellers who do volume business with exerpertizing services develop working relationships. Ideally, those are based on integrity and quality of the material. I'm not questioning anyone's scruples, but I could see where an expert might give the benefit of doubt to a seller responsible for 40-50% of the expert's fees.

I guess the bottom line, as you say, caveat emptor.

KirkS

funcitypapa.....

"Did you ever consider how one gets a tiny tear in a perf hole and on a stamp of that magnitude" ????????????

How could the stamps Scott number play a part in how it was originally handled ??????

ALL IMPERFECTIONS SHOULD BE ACKNOWLEGED ! Faults OF ANY SIZE are still faults that effect value.....especially on higher value items.

The real problem here is not the certifying agencies......it is buying questionable material.

Everything I've bought on ebay that I've sent in for certification has come back with certs....all genuine, most without faults.


Have you been buying things from sellers that post poor photos ?

thank you for your note KirkS. This was not meant to bash or doubt the scruples of independent sellers on ebay. Frankly, I think most collectors of non certified stamps are harboring a lot of stuff in their collections that would not pass muster in formal certification. After all, you can't know everything and most of us are collectors not expertizers. But you have to figure that a well centered classic that is over 125 years old has passed through a lot of hands in that time period. for someone not to have thought to get it certified, if only for financial gain motives, doesn't seem logical. there is usually a reason these items come with no cert attached. On the other hand, I do believe over the last 40 years, that expertizing commitees have become increasingly picayune over really small defects. If you look at the old PF certs from the 1960's and 1970's you didn't have all of this minutiae noted on the certs. The expertizers of today would say that detection techniques are better and maybe they feel that they are better expertizers than the older ones. Maybe. But I don't think so. I think that liability concerns, like so many other avenues of our society drives their need to call everything, no matter how inconsequential.

nr-notare: rather than speak in generalities about what you have bought and sent in for certs some of which have come back with faults, why don't you, as I did mention specific stamps that you bought that came back with good certs and the stamps you bought that did not come back with good certs--------we all have stamp stories. I do too. A couple of the more interesting ones involve the certifying organizations. They are interesting and I believe they
illustrate a point. But I have hesitated telling them because I see that there are a lot of people apparently tracking this discussion but not contributing and you wonder why not. We probably all have had similar experiences. By the way, you are not talking to a novice in collecting.

funcitypapa.....


The issue is that you expect certifying agencies to overlook obvious faults.....creases, tears, scrapes, removed cancels.

Nature of the beast...I'm interested in what you have to say, but I don't have anything in particular to contribute. Though some may argue this point, I try not to post unless I feel like it makes a contribution of some sort, however tiny.

I have most of the U.S. stamps that I feel a need to own, because I'm off in a different collecting area. The big three expertizers aren't particularly useful to me.

That doesn't mean I am not interested in a story or a good point to be made. (You never know when this stuff will be useful...)

Cjd

nr-notrare.--------No that is not what I expect. But rather than me tell you anymore about myself, I still didn't hear an answer to my questions which is: what specific stamps did you sent in for certification that came back good and which came back bad. Your definition of classic and my definition of classic may not be the same. Since the US Classic category on this forum I think encompasses up to 1940, I want to be clear that I am talking about pre 1890 stamps only. I think the likelihood of purchasing non certified stamps from after 1890 and getting a clean certificate is much higher than before that date. And remember, while you are so anxious to criticize me, the seller is the one advertizing the stamps on line without faults. Many of these sellers make a point of stating that they have been involved with stamps for 40 or more years and a good deal of them also attach their APS logo. That says something to me about the state of affairs, even if it does not to you.

funcitypapa......

I have not sent in anything that has come back without a cert.

If you just take the word of a seller and send material in without examining them, then you are setting yourself up to fail.

Scrapes, creases, tears and cancels that have been removed are readily visible faults but you are complaining about certifying agencies that do not overlook them.

The material I've sent in are all pre-1865......and immaterial to this discussion.

nr-notare-------tried to send you an email but was blocked by lack of 50 postings. would like to continue our discussion, but privately, not in a public forum. I think you will find that you and I may have more in common that you realize ---<<email deleted>> If you send a note please identify it as continuation of philatelic discussion so I do not automatically delete it from my spam

funcitypapa.....

email sent....note that it's from here....SCF.

I don't have much experience with any of the certification agencies being discussed, having collected Australia exclusively for many years. Over here it's only very rare stamps that come with certificates, and there's no grading at all. That so far has remained the domain of the US. Even Aust. stamps worth several thousand will not usually have certificates. Some of the rare colonial stamps will.

Australian collectors are very concerned with perforations, probably more so than centring. One short perf or folded perf will knock down the price of a well centred roo significantly.

I would imagine that it's the collecting practices and general opinions that have changed over the years and put pressure on experts certifying stamps to tighten up on small issues such as bent perfs. Grading has also forced this issue. I know that PSE has been criticised in the past for issuing gem 100 grades to stamps with obvious perf faults, even if it's just one slightly short. What you're saying by issuing a gem 100 cert. is that no example of this stamp could be better. But if it has a short perf, then a stamp with the same exact centring but full perfs would be better. So even a small fault should knock the grade down. It follows that this must knock the grade down by the same amount at any grade level to be consistent. Even in the recent time of grading there are differences between earlier issued certificates and now. It's a refining of the process. I agree with Tom that every small fault should be noted.

I'm sure that as my US collection builds and I move to the more classic stamps that I'll be getting a lot more experience with certificates. Do you have a set figure at which you'll get a stamp certified?

Balf

I'm trying to get my arms around this issue...

If ebay sellers are in the wrong for not noting faults, and expertizers are in the wrong for noting faults, who makes the determination when a line has been crossed from "do not note" to "note"? "Tiny" strikes me as a tiny bit too subjective.

Anything other than a "list all faults" policy seems to favor the seller at the expense of the buyer. If a tiny perf tear is present on an otherwise fantastic, and fantastically rare, stamp, then let the buyer make the informed decision to ignore the fault. The only reason I can see to pretend it isn't there is to preserve a seller's resale value. No?

I'm not intending to be snarky...I'm genuinely curious to know where this line would be drawn.

My 2d.

Cjd

Hi folks.....

Grading is a statement about centering.....nothing else.

When a seller states "fault free" and there are obvious faults shown in his photo what does this imply ????? Either the seller is blind or purposely omitting the obvious.

If a seller posts worthless photos there is usually a reason he doesn't want you to get a good look.

We are all free to determine what level of less than perfect is acceptable......education is the key.

Statements included on certs meant to describe the size or impact of a fault.....are opinions.



Caveat Emptor.