Philatic Foundation Question (Stupid Question)

Ok.

I've checked all the various folders of SCF and didn't find one called "Go ahead - ask a stupid question".

I'm looking at an interesting airmail that has a PF certificate. I really can't believe the price, but the dealer seems reputable.

The PF certificate is from 1996 (or the 1990's). It says it is genuine and it has an Original Gum.

Does PF also make a distinction (in the 1990's) between NH, LH, MH, HH, etc??????

Basically, my question is whether I might be buying a Mint stamp with an original gum but there is a hinge hanging on the back of it??


As I said - Where's the "Ask a stupid question" section??

EDIT: I know - ask the seller for photos or details. But I thought this might be useful information for other newbies to the certification market.

OR it's just a STUPID question!!

Not even close to being a stupid question. Don't try so hard next time!

Actually, a very good question.

The current expertizing terms used by PF are here http://www.philatelicfoundation.org...ng_terms.htm.

You are correct that expertizers do change how they use terminology over the years (they also change their decisions, too!). It is best to contact PF directly with the certificate number/year and request a clarification of the expertizer terms in use at that time. You didn't mention the stamp, but while you are at it, you should also confirm that the certificate has not been revoked. Not many have been revoked, but it does happen -- so you might as well ask if you are contacting them.

khj,

Good points. I'm not getting much luck showing up PF certificates from 199x on the Internet. In my case, PF said it was "Original Gum" and that was all (besides being genuine).

This is a new area for me. So I posted the question.

From what little exposure I have had to the Philatelic Foundation, I have been impressed with their expertising work. I will add that I am not a fan of any attempt to set a particular numeric grade for a stamp. It doesnt work that well for stamps or coins.

In all the years I have been tip-toeing across Stamp newsgroups,
I don't ever recall seeing a stupid question, not one.
I have seen biased and elitist and hurtful statements,
but never a stupid question.

the PF has gone through several phases over the last 60 years in terms of how it describes. Early certificates that have original gum listed in the description would usually just give an opinion "genuine" if there were no faults. If there were faults they may or may not be described depending on how bad a fault it was. In the old days, minor flaws like an irregular but present perf length might be passed over whereas today it would probably be mentioned. If the stamp was sound but regummed, it would be expertized as "genuine,regummed." If no gum nad the stamp was issued with gum, the no gum would be mentioned. Then there was a change in the wording such that og hinged stamps that were sound were expertized as "genuine previously hinged. At a later date, and I am thinking around 1990 those stamps that had og but previously hinged is not mentioned was a code for NH. If you had a block of 4 and some were hinged and some were NH the cert would read "genuine previously hinged in the lower pair only" or some such wording. Finally you had the PF wording NH and grading. The exact date or cert numbers where these changes were made however are not known to me. Perhaps the PF will tell you

I agree with smauggie--you either like a stamp (or coin) or you do not. It makes little difference if a numerical grade has been assigned.

Gosh - thanks for the replies - especially funcitypapa and khj.

I'll post pictures when I get it. Yes, I liked the stamp and I can't afford the XF+ JUMBO margin stamps :) :)

So I gets what I can gets!

rod222 - have you looked at my threads? I'm pretty sure there's at least one stupid question in there.

You would be hard pressed to beat mine, Swab

I once saw "due" on an Italian stamp (meaning 2 cents)
and broadcast on the forum because I couldn't find
the "postage due"