Is This A Unused O113 Official Treasury?

Going through a lot of US Officials I purchased years ago, I find what had been identified as "O-82, Used, Tear".

Upon examination, I am sure this issue:
1) has a tear
2) has no gum
3) might be unused
4) may have been doctored to remove cancel
5) is printed on the "Soft Porous Paper" used in 1879. As a former graphic designer and art director I know printing papers, and this stamp does not represent the "Thin Hard Paper" used for the original 1873 printing.

What are your thoughts about:
1) identifying stamp as O82 or O113? Should I have it expertized?
2) can you ID from my scans if this is used or unused?
3) and how does the large tear affect the stamp's value? Especially if I am correct that issue is the rare O113.

Thanks in advance for any guidance!

imo the tear reduces the value to 10% or less of cat, regardless of actual id. use of a uv light will help to determine the used/ unused status. dipping would also possibly help. a scan of the back might also help. if you can take it to a show or local club meeting, you may get help, I would not spend any money for a cert, due to its condition unless a positive id of it being rare is made by a knowledgeable collector or revenue dealer.

Agree with the above. Beautiful centering, and the tear could possibly be sealed to make it more presentable and sell for more than 10%.
Hard to tell from the scan. The perfs, to me, look a little too sharp and jagged for soft paper, but could be. A good clear scan of the back may help to identify.
Hold the stamp up close in front of a bright light. Does the paper appear mottled at all, or is it perfectly smooth?
I would be inclined to trust the dealer's ID of a used O82 ($15) rather than unused ($475) or even a $750 used O113. Highly unlikely to be an unused O113 ($10,000) unless the dealer was really asleep at the wheel. Although it could happen, if the dealer used the same logic as I, "it couldn't possibly be a $10,000 stamp, it is more likely the $15 stamp" and left it at that.
Start with posting a scan of the back side here, and taking a photo in front of a bright light if you can. And/or taking it to a local club, show or dealer if convenient. A $25 cert is certainly not worth the risk until you know more about the stamp.

You may want to check at least the right side for reperfing. The perf holes seem to run out from bottom to top. Better scans would be helpful.

This is definitely used. The scan clearly shows a purple or magenta line/mark across the middle. A blacklight/UV light might show more of this.

i agree.......used stamp with issues.

As normal here folks focus on the value and go down that rabbit hole.

My suggestion is to send it in for a certificate tear and all. When done, you will have a stamp back you can use as a reference for your future collecting. If you are correct in the paper type, that will be verified. Of course the stamp will never be acceptable to those on the SCF who do not own it as they all want a 100J but will suffer with a mere 98.

Most collectors would be happy to have a difficult space filled with a torn stamp rather than not have the space filled at all. Even the most valuable stamp in the world has clipped corners.

Sending this in for a cert is all well and good, as long as one understands that the odds are not at all good. As has already been pointed out above, these are not soft paper perfs. And this stamp is known on "intermediate" paper, which shows some mesh but is not the soft paper variety.

Are you referring to the odds of getting a certificate which is accurate?

If the comments here are so accurate, why bother with formal certificates, just post the stamp image, wait, then print out all of the responses. One will then have a nice long "public certification certificate" at only the cost for printer paper.

Just look at the comments above:

The paper is bad, the perforation are bad, the tear is bad, there is now way you have a rare stamp and even as a used stamp the cancellation is badly done. I am surprised no one yet suggested tossing it in the paper recycling bin.

You know better.



I did not say they were "bad", only that they do not appear to be correct for the soft paper printings. Anyone who has looked at thousands of officials (which I have) will be able to look at the perfs with an experienced eye, and will also know that the hard and soft paper perfs have a different appearance.
As it happens, perhaps 85% of officials are easy enough to tell apart, but that other 15% can be very difficult. Essentially, officials are just another type of the banknotes, but without the Continentals to muddy the waters even more.

Obviously I meant to say National, not Continental here. Fingers sometimes go too fast.

parcelposrguy
the perfs were commented on as an aid toward an id.
no one said anything about the paper except to backlight it as an aid to help in identifying it.
Your comment re the accuracy of certificates is an affront to all who render their time energy and reputations doing so, whether paid or not and is uncalled for.
the condition issue is what it is, not everyone can or collects pristine copies, which do not exist in some areas.
most people will jump to the conclusion that they have the rarest listed varieties for lack of the knowledge or skill required to confirm or deny it and the eternal hope of a miracle.

The shade of the stamp works against being a Scott O113. It is more typical of a Scott O82. Additionally, these stamps come on what is known as intermediate paper and the tie goes to the cheaper variety. To be considered a Scott O 113 it must show as a typical Scott 184, having a mottled appearance when backlit.. The cancel is typical of a Scott O 82. There is a 99.99% probability that your stamp is a Scott O 82