Stamp Community Family of Web Sites
Stamp Community Forum
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some stamps?
Our stamp forum is completely free! Register Now!

"Near very fine" wording?  
 

 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Valued Member
United States
208 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   1:28 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this topic Add James Drummond to your friends list  Get a Link to this Message
H. R. Harmer (https://hrharmer.com/en/home#) has an upcoming auction #3013 with some interesting lot descriptions, at least in the revenue section.

This stamp is described as "near very fine."





Maybe it's just me, but it seems like saying a stamp is almost very well centered, when it fact it clearly isn't, is a weird way of describing something.

It's like saying something is almost new: it either is new, or it isn't.

Perhaps this goes with the "couple blunted perfs" comment, when clearly one fourth of all the perforations are "blunted." So, 25% is a "couple"?

Jim
Send note to Staff

Valued Member
United States
408 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   1:36 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add jarnick to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
"near very fine" clearly means fine. Almost as bad as "would be very fine but for missing corner".
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
912 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   3:13 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add bookbndrbob to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Not to mention a pretty sloppy reperforating job on the left side.

How about "nearly very fine, except for clipped right side, short perf on top, reperforated left side, and centering."
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
208 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   3:17 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add James Drummond to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
One last thing: the cancel is printed, not handstamped.

So... pretty much everything in the item description is incorrect.

Jim
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3664 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   5:11 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revcollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
It's probably not reperforated, just some very dull pins. It's a well known printed cancel, but they are not particularly knowledgeable about revenues. The opening bid is probably too close to the retail value for it to get any bids.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3664 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   5:15 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revcollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Actually the next lot appears to be worse; I doubt that it is genuine. Nor is 1673 likely to be genuine. And I have my doubts about 1683.

https://stampauctionnetwork.com/ha/ha301334.cfm#97
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
208 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   5:29 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add James Drummond to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I think you meant lot 1684?

Almost a classic fake imperf.: three reasonable margins and then the fourth is no margin at all.

Jim


Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3664 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   5:43 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revcollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
The $1.60 would have to be looked at, but it actually has much to recommend itself. The impression and shade appear to be correct. And these values were printed quite close together, it would be very unusual to have both the top and bottom margins so wide on a perforated stamp. I am inclined to think it genuine, albeit a not very attractive example.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3664 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   5:46 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revcollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Some perforated pairs from the Curtis census. Notice how small the margins are.

http://www.thecurtiscollection.com/...stampType=66
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
237 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   6:50 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add 1typesetter to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
And no mention of the pinholes in Lot 1698.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3664 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   7:21 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revcollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Looks like staple holes and a small tear. Must be part of the premium.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
2784 Posts
Posted 05/18/2017   9:04 pm  Show Profile Check revenuecollector's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add revenuecollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
The $1.60 would have to be looked at, but it actually has much to recommend itself. The impression and shade appear to be correct. And these values were printed quite close together, it would be very unusual to have both the top and bottom margins so wide on a perforated stamp. I am inclined to think it genuine, albeit a not very attractive example.


I agree with Bart. As much as one can tell from Interwebz pictures, if I had to bet on one side or the other, I would lean genuine.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page


  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
United States Postal Service, Now on eBay!United States Postal Service, Now on eBay!
New Forum Topics Recently Active Forum Topics
  Complete set of Australian Framas
  Total eclipse scott number
  Early Ceylon with "CAVE" overprint
  Over & underinked embossed covers and 1 cut square
  Question Regarding Color of GB Scott 98
  Scott 1700a or 1700e
  Do you recognize this cancellation?
  Ebay netflix tax now impossed on all Australian ebay sellers
  Old Stamp Collection Book
  Has anyone seen this R155 overprint inking anomaly before?
  RB15c with bogus rouletting?
  National Surety and us senate air mail
  $2 Columbian MNH Full Pane of 100 - Auction Watch
  Double print or over inked or printed on the gummed side ?
  3 cent #11A should be easy Plate 1L identification but...
  Australia Post Get It Very Wrong.
  One of these eBay sellers is a bit clueless
  International Postage Stamp For Sale
  Hairline in my Unitrade 138
  Fall River Philatelic Society STAMP SHOW, Saturday August 19, 2017 10AM-5PM
  2017 pentagon finance USPS cancels on back of envelope, free
  114 with later cancel
  Booklet Pairs on Sweden Complicates Things
  Federated Malay States $250 Revenue Stamp
  New Birds of Canada Issue

  A horse is a horse, of course, of course... (part 2)
  Total eclipse scott number
  Complete set of Australian Framas
  Help ID Australian 4d Orange, Scott 31
  Early Ceylon with "CAVE" overprint
  Literary Stamp Collecting
  Reorganizing Scott International
  Unitrade Canada 2017 Current Catalogue Status
  Over & underinked embossed covers and 1 cut square
  One of these eBay sellers is a bit clueless
  italy stamp imperf 1862-63 is this type I or type II,please help me identify?
  Whats in your Library?
  Question Regarding Color of GB Scott 98
  Scott 1700a or 1700e
  Self adhesive mounts
  RB15c with bogus rouletting?
  Ebay netflix tax now impossed on all Australian ebay sellers
  Do you recognize this cancellation?
  Has anyone seen this R155 overprint inking anomaly before?
  Identify bluish paper "on the fly"
  Lighthouses on Stamps
  Recutting on the R68c
  need help to find value and if are good or rares stamps
  GB KGV Downey Head - Overview and Discussion
  China: PJZ-17 (What is that number ?)

Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Stamp Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2017 Stamp Community Family - All rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Stamp Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use    Advertise Here
Stamp Community Forum © 2007 - 2014 Stamp Community Forums Go To Top Of Page
It took 0.56 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05