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!

Lot 4599 in Kelleher sale 701  
 

 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1019 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   12:11 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this topic Add James Drummond to your friends list Get a Link to this Message
Does this stamp look like a trimmed perforated copy to anyone else but me?

Nothing about it encourages genuineness: the ink color, the date of the cancel, the margins, etc.

Jim

p.s. Sorry, just found out that this is a duplicate post. Please ignore all comments.





http://db.kelleherauctions.com/php/...701&lot=4599
Send note to Staff
Edited by James Drummond - 06/18/2017 1:47 pm

Pillar Of The Community
2740 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   12:40 pm  Show Profile Check jogil's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add jogil to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
The top isn't even cut straight and the bottom shows some slight remnants of perforation holes.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
537 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   1:39 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revenuermd to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
They seem to be busy destroying any credibility that the firm once had for revenues.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Ron Lesher
Pillar Of The Community
1395 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   1:39 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add John Becker to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
That stamp was discussed (debunked) in a thread a few weeks ago. See about 4 posts down the thread..
http://goscf.com/t/54643&SearchTerms=kelleher
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
861 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   4:10 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add hy-brasil to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Still, we never heard what Kelleher had to say. And the other thread has 2 posts that refute it; no debunking there, in my opinion.

Color: bad original scan or a scanner doing interpretive dance here. With the heavy blur and dot at the right side, I'd expect a wash of the ink color overall. The apparent brilliant white paper is just too brilliant. The orange here is too pale and washy, not a first issue revenue color.

Kindly tell me why February 1871 is a bad date (at least, that's what it looks like to me). Were the first issues invalidated January 1st? Too late for part perfs? I'd expect legal offices to be able to use up existing stamps before buying new ones; a dollar is a dollar. Now memory kicks in: yes, 1871 is awfully late for a part perf. Troublesome to me is the cancel. It looks like it's aniline ink and that type of pencil apparently was not patented until 1877.

Quote:
The top isn't even cut straight

Not a problem by itself. Part perfs were cut apart with scissors.

Quote:
and the bottom shows some slight remnants of perforation holes

All I can see are two dents under "LA", too close together to be perf 12. What am I missing? Further the easiest starting point for a fake would be an imperf. The perfed stamp candidate would have to be a jumbo (this one is slightly wide, too), and one probably from a sheet margin.

If the perfs are genuine, the horizontal margin width should be measurable against scans of blocks. Of course, that still does not eliminate a trimmed top or bottom margin taller-than-usual perfed stamp. Can the blur and dot on this stamp give us a position?

Nonetheless, it could be a part perf but not a proven/provable part perf. The margins don't look big enough to be a R66b without question. Then the only satisfactory example would be a vertical pair. Some of you then won't like the singles passed by the PF here (last on page 2, 3rd on page 2):
http://pfsearch.org/pfsearch/pf_grd...lledfrom=lkp
In any case, if sold (rather iffy), it's going for a cert anyway.

And nobody here has mentioned the pulled perf.

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by hy-brasil - 06/18/2017 7:04 pm
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
3695 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   8:47 pm  Show Profile Check revenuecollector's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add revenuecollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Apparently their auction manager completely ignored my explanation as to how the stamp cannot be genuine, as they haven't pulled the lot. I was under the impression that some other people had reported the lot to them as well. Money and ethics make strange bedfellows it would appear.

You don't even need to look at the margins. That bright color is distinctly a late state printing shade and the cancel date is 1871. Legit part perfs would be a pale reddish brown shade with a cancel date in 1863 or early 1864 at the latest.

I'd bet my pension against the stamp being genuine.


Quote:
Nonetheless, it could be a part perf but not a proven/provable part perf.


Actually, no it couldn't.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by revenuecollector - 06/18/2017 8:53 pm
Pillar Of The Community
United States
4703 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   9:01 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revcollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
There is no possibility that this stamp is a genuine part perf. Shade, impression, cancel date, margins, and I guarantee paper are wrong. This was a perforated stamp and someone took a scissors and trimmed it top and bottom. There is zero chance of any other possibility.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
537 Posts
Posted 06/19/2017   06:53 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revenuermd to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
What a delightful discussion. But it is time not to hide this discussion here on this blog. Let's get the discussion into The American Revenuer for the revenue collector audience. I am teaching a course on philatelic forgeries the day before the opening of MILCOPEX. Let's get a feature article into Linn's. The ignorance, greed, and ethics of this situation must be exposed big time.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Ron Lesher
Pillar Of The Community
United States
4703 Posts
Posted 06/19/2017   07:48 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revcollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
The examples you mention on the last page of the PF group were examined over 50 years ago when dealers were doing the certs; they would have no chance today. Even the pairs would be heavily scrutinized and might prove problematical.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
324 Posts
Posted 06/19/2017   08:50 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add SPQR to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
The Kelleher Lot has been withdrawn.
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!Promoting the integrity of internet philatelic dealers. Please join us so buyers can buy with confidence.
New Forum TopicsRecently Active Forum Topics
  Great Americans Stamps Without gums?
  Japan Classics opinions
  U.S. 3c Washington (No Grill) Perf 12 S.C. #207 - No frame line under 3 - Added value?
  Stamp Identification Wanted
  U.S. ~1870 3c Washington (No grill) Perf 12 - Identification please
  U.S. S.C. #599a Perf 10 - Please verify identification
  Grandmother's stamp accumulation
  Nice uncut example of R189 with interesting handstamp cancel
  Separating sheets of stamps
  Could someone please tell me the difference between these stamps?
  counting peaks and valleys of die cut stamps (example flag over porch)
  U.S. 1920s 2c Washington Perf 11 - 19 x 21.9 mm - What is Scott Number please
  U.S. 1893 10c S.C. #237 - Double Transfer C.V. $13.50?
  U.S. 1861 1c S.C. #63 - What is this cancel?
  Using Descriptive Titles to Help the Reader, and Search Engines
  "Funny they do this" .......... "my 2018 version"
  Never found ths before..Scott 275
  Franklin 1c stamp and washington 7c stamp
  U.S. 3c. Washington - S.C. #10 or #11?
  U.S. 1847 Benjamin Franklin 5c S.C. #1 - Color?
  Australian Coil Stamps
  UK variety missing 5d
  Mis-Identified ebay listings
  Scott 539 on eBay - weird bidding
  Recent Revenue Acquisitions

  U.S. ~1870 3c Washington (No grill) Perf 12 - Identification please
  US Stamp Give-Away (June 2018, #2)
  Modern Industrial Art and Design
  Japan Classics opinions
  Lakes, Marshes, Mangroves, and Wetlands on stamps
  Stamp Identification Wanted
  Great Americans Stamps Without gums?
  New, Free, US Stamp Album Pages
  My new favourite cover! Sc # 20 I think
  Separating sheets of stamps
  Could someone please tell me the difference between these stamps?
  Grandmother's stamp accumulation
  U.S. 3c Washington (No Grill) Perf 12 S.C. #207 - No frame line under 3 - Added value?
  Printing error on QEII coronation stamp
  U.S. 1920s 2c Washington Perf 11 - 19 x 21.9 mm - What is Scott Number please
  Mathematics on stamps
  Decimal Varieties and Errors
  New South Wales Perfin OS-NSW
  Marine Mammals on Stamps... Dolphins, Whales, Seals, etc
  UK variety missing 5d
  U.S. 1893 10c S.C. #237 - Double Transfer C.V. $13.50?
  U.S. S.C. #599a Perf 10 - Please verify identification
  Reptiles on stamps?
  UK old stamps, cannot determine catalog number
  Poets' Corner

Go to Top of Page
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 - 2018 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 © 2005 - 2018 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.54 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05