Philatelic Foundation Database And Submission Research

Agree (with a Australian perspective)

https://9now.nine.com.au/a-current-...d6ec7fbbb686

People do it to hotel/travel services for the most part because they know they can get away with it. It benefits those companies more to just let it go and focus on the next customer as quick as possible. It wouldn't work with the PF because you're signing a document agreeing to their terms, so it would be very difficult to win. The submitters would also worry about being blacklisted if they tried pulling something like that, and the vast majority of collectors would do everything they could to maintain a clean reputation with a company that claims to be the authority on the hobby they're invested in.

For a company like this, the current model being used is problematic and not trustworthy given the 100's of other models they could be using to prove integrity. There's no way to know how much of it is for actual research or how much of it is for securing a profit for themselves, and honestly just seems opaque by design.

Please don't take offense at this, as I'm only an outsider looking in. And please understand that because I don't have any longstanding relationship with them it wouldn't behove me to simply take their word at face value and assume their intentions are 100% pure and honest.

As far as donations are concerned, if I were to donate any money it would be better spent on StampSmarter or on these forums; both of which have taught me far more than anything the PF has offered.

I have no particular beef with them, but their database is bulky and cluttered with confusing search options and inconsistent wording in their descriptions... certainly an inconsistency in photo quality. It appears as if each scanner they use has different settings applied or is a different brand altogether, even though they boast about their "Hi-Tech technology".
Their descriptions don't actually teach you anything aside from what they deem as "true" or "not true", and they don't show you how to better discern for yourself as a collector, yet they expect you to come to the correct conclusion beforehand lest you be shamed on the certificate if you get it wrong.
There are no references to outside sources like what you can find in StampSmarter.

If we're going to make a donation, tell us what it's going towards, and how it will benefit the collector specifically. They need to earn our trust, not the other way around.

Something like this would be nice:



It's quite the opposite. Nobody knows how much the PF has received or what it's even helping with.

One of the auction houses I buy from now only accepts debit card payments (much harder to reclaim than credit card payments) below a certain figure. Above that, it's bank transfer.

This brings me back to my original question at the beginning of this thread, which I think is a big component in determining just how much of this is actually for 'research' or how much of it is about securing a profit.
The fact that you can't hardly find any 'upgrades' (for lack of a better word) from what the submitter claims it to be, is only Exhibit A.
And I'm not talking about 'grills', of which you can find 100+ websites online that show how to verify those for yourself. Indeed, it would look terrible if they got that wrong on paper.

I'm talking about types that either 1) nobody really talks or cares about so much (dot in U variety, etc.), or 2) are extremely difficult to find ANY information about whatsoever, even though they're worth it for the collector to do so (as we can see in auctions housing the various paper types).
The PF doesn't even try to clarify it for you, and yet expects you to be the professional before submitting it... to the professionals.
Case in point - the 1st picture in my original post which holds this description:




Descriptions like this with no further clarification is enough for collectors to lose interest in the hobby, if not lose trust in the ones controlling the consensus in general.

You can see their financials through 2020 here:

https://projects.propublica.org/non...ns/131523140

I don't have a problem with not using credit cards per say, more so in having to pay a price up front before the experts even tell you what it is.

This is my next issue:
They are not only told ahead of time by the submitter, but are paid ahead of time by the submitter as well.
The submission papers for their expertization service call for USD/EUR-backed cheques or money orders only.
(Money enclosed is $---- amount).
However, if you wish to make a donation to the foundation, you can use credit cards with no problem.
Again, there are plenty of ways the PF in particular can adjust their contract so that chargebacks would not be a problem for them.

Put a tack in this for a moment, and let's use an example that ties both points together:
Use the database to search for SPECIAL PRINTINGS of the Bank Note series. You will notice that every single one that was deemed authentic had already been deemed as such by the submitter in advance, which means that the money had already been paid in advance as well. This secures a profit for the foundation.

I'm not making any absolute claims here, but from a logical perspective it appears to be something like this:

Regarding a Scott #195-
"you gave us the money for it, so we'll see if it's a SPECIAL PRINTING (and not just a "really nice 159")

For a #63a-
"you gave us the money for a color type, so we will check the color for you (unless it's absolutely obvious from just looking at it).

For a #157b-
"you gave us the money in advance, so we'll check the paper type and see if it's on double paper (unless it's already folded up and again blatantly obvious)."

Some might say, "This is false. They will notify you if it's something different and they can always adjust the price!"

From a business standpoint this is a terrible idea. It is not sustainable given their current system.
Imagine someone submitting/paying for the price of a regular issue, and the PF deems it to be a more valuable variety. Say they adjust the price according to that variety and notify the submitter.
Now, let's say that the submitter doesn't have the money for the adjusted price, or simply doesn't want to pay it. The PF would have to send back the stamp at minimal cost to the submitter, to which the submitter would receive not only their stamp back, but an 'unofficial' certificate in the form of an email declaring it to be that rare type.
It would be unsustainable if
1) everyone started doing this (submitting at minimal cost with maximum results), and
2) the PF were 100% honest in their expertization.
From a business standpoint, they would have to require the money in advance for what the submitter thinks it is in order to make a profit from those high-end items, which is probably why you don't see many rare types being labeled as such without the submitter labeling and paying for it first.
Again, obvious examples like grills are a different story because it would be too easy for customers to call out the company for malfeasance, or incompetence, which are both equally bad.

An easier way of looking at it is this:
If everyone could assume that the PF were genuinely 100% honest in their expertization, why would the submitter need to put in anything more than the bare minimum knowing that the PF will simply adjust the price anyway?

I'm not saying that they're doing some pay-to-play scheme, but I think it's safe to say that if the money is not enclosed first, it's going to be a very standard and quick "once-over" rather than examining it with all the potential varieties in mind.

It looks like 80% of their income comes from "Program Services", which is most likely their grading service.
So their tax exemption status comes from providing pictures they are paid to take, and information limited only to what they deem as "true" or "false".

I'm sorry to be so skeptical, but this is my main concern:

*If they claim to be all about the research, they are hindering the research if using it as a veil to actually focus more on profits for the company.*

There are so many other business models they could be using which would increase trust and interest in the hobby, and ultimately increase income for themselves.
But that's oftentimes a difficult concept to grasp for companies that have a monopoly on information and/or "expertization", where the easiest way to guarantee revenue is through opacity in what they represent while utilizing a business model that allows plenty of slack on their end, while the consumer is bound by the constraints of having no choice but to "Trust the Experts".

(See Facebook, Twitter, World Health Organization, etc..)

I assume the auction house in question is in the UK or EU? Bank transfers are simply not an option here in the U.S. unless you are talking huge transfer amounts, as the fee load is onerous. The U.S. banking system has never adopted bank transfers in the way they have been adopted internationally. They're just not a commerce standard here.

For example, for me to send or accept any bank transfer, the fee starts at US$15 per transaction, and US$25 if it is an international transaction. Simply not doable for small amounts.

We just don't use bank transfers here in the U.S. other than for extremely large transactions or ones that are business-to-business. PayPal, Venmo, etc. are much more prevalent for person-to-person transactions, and virtually all small-to-medium sized businesses accept credit and debit cards but very few accept bank transfers. Virtually no retail businesses accept bank transfers for over-the-counter purchases.

Stephen,
If you don't like the PF's business model, etc., etc. take your business elsewhere.

They've become much more widely used here with the advent of internet/digital banking, and, for both the auction house and the buyer, they're quick and easy. No fees involved for domestic use, AFAIK. Some auction houses no longer take credit cards, and, if they do, they apply an additional fee - debit cards are much more common. Cheques stagger on, but, for the individual, they're a pain because of mass closures of high street banks.

Stephen-P, with all of your apparent distrust of their business practices, you should be happy that PF is definitely not a monopoly.

You do realize that any upgrades would almost certainly mean a higher catalog value, and therefore a higher cert price, don't you? It is certainly in the PF's best interests to find a stamp as the most expensive possible from a profit standpoint. The fact is, is that most stamps sent in are either correctly identified, or incorrectly identified as a more expensive variety. I am positive that if a stamp turns out to be a better variety then it was submitted as, they will certainly say so on the cert.

This is exactly what my original post was about, and it came about from me not being able to find many examples like this (besides the obvious varieties that would make them look bad if they didn't certify it properly).
I posted this thread after days of searching the Banknote series and before trying to find what you mention here.
I want people to post them to prove me wrong!

They have a monopoly in the sense that the vast majority of collectors reference them first when dealing with philatelic varieties, despite threads like this one exposing numerous elephants in the room that are simply pushed aside otherwise.
That makes no sense.
I see nothing wrong with talking about it in hopes that they see it, and grow from it.
And this would absolutely benefit them in the long run.
100%