Philatelic Foundation Database And Submission Research

Anyone see a difference in their potential liability if they are only promising to say "yes" or "no" to a particular inquiry, rather than undertaking to promise to identify the most-valuable possibility?

(No affiliation.)

I fail to see how the PF has much liability either way given that they only express opinions.

... and unlike APEX, the PF does not back its opinions with any form of money-back guarantee. I say that not as a criticism of the PF; what APEX offers in this regard is very unusual for the expertizing field.

In this case, couldn't the cert number be the primary key rather than the catalogue number? I believe cert numbers are unique.

I actually don't see a problem with the PF's database per se; the problem is the formatting of the data from said database and how it is presented to the public.

Even simplifying the presentation to something along the lines of:

Yes.
Although a really good certification DB, in my opinion, would also support a certification revisions. This would then prevent the cert number from being a primary key field.

I also agree that there is a significant delineation between developing a brand-new PF DB and simply working with what they have to develop better queries and reports.

It is not rocket science to develop a much better filtering capability into the existing PF DB (assumption being that it is a MSSQL DB).
Here is a screen shot of what I have done, as a single development volunteer on the PSE DB on Stamp Smarter, in implementing a good filtering capability. (click on image to see full size)

Users can build as complex filter as they desire. There are literally thousands of custom questions that can be asked of the certification data, limited only by the user's imagination.
The screen capture above shows a filter I built in 30 seconds which returns all 613 certs that are;
- genuine
- used stamps
- and have a cert date before 1/30/2021

It does not take a huge budget, it does not take hiring an expert.

https://stampsmarter.org/public/PSECertFUSA.php
Don

If you're thinking of a kickstarter, let us know...I'll buy in.

This might prove useful......

In restrospect, I should have used R13e for that example. The number of milky blue R13c being offered as R13e by national (non-revenue) dealers and even auction houses drives me up the wall.

Rogdcam said:



I absolutely agree with this. But most certainly the obverse should be true as well, or at least much more prevalent that what we see now. Searching varieties like the "Dot in U" is proof of that.

Does anybody know if I can use a credit card to pay for the charges after an evaluation has taken place? I've emailed the PF numerous times on both their site and personal address over the span of three weeks regarding this matter but have yet to get a reply.
I'm in a place where it's almost impossible to get a hold of USD, so I haven't been able to submit anything yet.

I ask every time I need to send something in, hoping.... But when I inquired earlier this month, the PF assured me they do not accept credit cards.

The PF, much like Amos Media, is poised, ready to leap into the 1990s!

Rather than being backwards, it's likely more about excluding the risk of a chargeback. Many organizations that provide services with a non-zero dispute or complaint rate will only accept non-reversible payment methods.

Try checking their MySpace page for updates?

PSE, APEX and PSAG all accept CC payment.