Aps-When Did They?

I'm still sorting and sifting through a happily received stamp album and collection of stamps here. I have found quite a few interesting stamps. They are pretty much balanced out as far as canceled, MNH, and MH. What I'm beginning to wonder is when did the APS make the rule of the difference between MNH and MH?

In my collection, as I am going through it, I am finding a lot of MH stamps. The ones with the hinges still on the back are easy enough to figure out. The stamps that had hinges on, but was removed you can see the spot where the gum has been messed with. Now if I take my magnifying glass I can closely look at a stamp that seems to be mint and in most cases the gum has not been interfered with. So, it is a mint stamp.

The gentleman that had this collection seems to have hinged most of the stamps that were mint and this for him started around 1930-1940. Now, this is why I ask the question as to when did the APS push the rule on the difference of MNH and MH. I look at all the stamps that were mint and now are of a lesser value just because of one little piece of sticky paper on the back of a stamp and I kind of cringe on what I have lost in value collectively. Has this been a rule since the beginning of stamp collecting or did that come later on?

Donna

I don't know if there is such a thing as an APS rule on the matter, but the mint, never hinged trend began as a fad in the mid 1960's. That's when original gum became the most expensive commodity in the world. Before that, almost everyone was happy to use stamp hinges. It had to be a conspiracy that originated with the people making stamp mounts.

modern_who,
The way I understand it is that anything that has to do with the official way of stamp collecting or in order that something to be recognized as stamp collecting the APS seems to be the deciding factor. I really hope I'm wrong on this and if that's the case then I have a collection that just went up in value because as I said I have a lot of MH stamps that are old. Again, it all seems to be what the value of them are according to Scott. There I would be lucky to get 1/3 their value. Isn't stamp collecting fun????

Donna Merkle

Donna, I don't know exactly when because I had stopped collecting for a time, but even Scott didn't take never hinged into consideration originally. It was years before they picked up on it, simply because the stamps were selling for more. Scott doesn't make the market, it's supposed to track it.

I have a question along these lines. Let's say you purchase a box lot and want to put the best ones in vario pages. Do you leave the old hinges on them or do you remove the old hinges?
I have some stamps where you can clearly see discoloration caused by the hinges.

I would remove them, if possible. Some may not come off without soaking. As for discoloration, you might try soaking one of these to see if what's causing it will wash away in the water. A clean stamp without gum is better than a gummed stamp that's stained. At least I think so.

Thanks for the reply modern_who. Some of the packages of hinges say "easily removed" on them. On a few junk stamps I peeled the hinge off. Some came right off but some took some of the stamp off too. Good thing they were junk stamps already.
Yes soaking does a much better job.
As far as the staining, most of the bad ones look like some sort of rust.

Based on Modern_who's comments, an interesting question would be: In which year did Scott start listing MNH values.

I just posted a similar thread somewhere here on the forum a couple of days ago. Basically scratching my head about the HUGE difference (usually) between MH and MNH in 19th century stamps.

From the comments of the other thread, it seems that it is possilbe to "regum" a stamp and apparently it is very difficult to determine if it is the "Original" gum or not.

So Donna Merkle, having MH stamps is at least honest. They are what they are!

Nutmeg, I mentioned soaking with the stains in mind. You can also just clip the loose portion away on problem hinges. I usually just zip that off along the crease with the blade of a small pocket knife... like opening an envelope.

as far as hinged vs. never hinged...the European market does not value hinged stamps very highly...based on what items are going for on the internet...one case in point...Europa stamps...a huge difference between mint never hinged and unused..so if a collector does not care about the difference its a big savings..but don't try to sell them in Europe !

I am not sure where the shift is in the Scott Specialized US catalog. On the early issues the stamps are valued both mint hinged and mint never hinged. At some point, the listings are only for MNH. Late 1930's maybe??

Scott catalogues clearly state when prices are for hinged or not, both in the specialized and in the country listings.
Gibbons do the same in their catalogues but in a more simplified form.
In the specialized, stamps up to 1900 are for stamps with half or more of their original gum. After 1900 the prices are for Full Original gum.
In the country sections, the cut off points are stated in the listings.

Gibbons prices for GB are for MNH KEVIII to QEII, and before this MH or part own gum.
For country sections, all stamps after 1946 are priced for MNH.

Londonbus1

Thanks everyone for your answers on this. I was considering maybe trying to re-gum a stamp, but with all the sorting, reorganizing that I am doing now, that would be something that I would maybe do if I had nothing better to do.

I think that what I am going to do is that for all my MNH stamps I will put them in mounts and then keep them in a stock book. The MH I just will re-hinge when I place them in an album.

Donna

RE-GUMMING?

That's almost like counterfeiting. It doesn't increase the value but only makes it less desirable among collectors who know it's re-gummed. And if they aren't told, its shows intent to defraud.

People are paying the premium prices for undisturbed, original gum!

modern_who
My collection will never be something that would end up going on a World Wide exhibit. My collection is being done out of nothing more than a hobby and hopefully, an heirloom. It was a tradition in my family to collect stamps and I've just decided to revive it and would hope that whoever is lucky enough to inherit my collection would keep it going.

Not only am I trying to set up a system that would be easy to follow in this collection, but I am keeping what I call a "Stamping Diary". Here I keep notes on stamps that I have purchased, condition, value, any unusual history on the stamp, etc. If I would try experimenting with the re-gumming of a stamp, that would be something that would be included in the notes as well. I would also include that this issue of re-gumming would "show an intent to defraud". Now this is something that I would never do.

Donna

Donna, I was just trying to make you aware that re-gumming is not the answer, and that trying to pass off re-gummed stamps as never-hinged (original gum) copies is dishonest. I did see you say it was only a thought and that you had better things to do. Stamps aren't usually re-gummed for fun, but to deceive.