Canadian Stamp Catalog Value Estimation - Part #1

Hi.

I am trying to "develop" a method for estimating the "catalog value" of my stamp collection. I know that some think that it is futile to put a value to a stamp and to "grade" a stamp and all, but I think this important for me. It is a reference for me that will tell me how much I can put on a stamp or how much I should sell it.

Now, that being said, I noted this thread as "part #1" because there is two big questions I have to answer: The evaluation of the catalog value from the centering AND the effect of faults (minor and not so minor) on the value of a stamp. Let's concentrate on the first question here.

I have sometimes troubles putting the "base catalog value" to a stamp when it is not VF like the price column in the catalog. I do use the Unitrade catalog so many stamps do have VF and F value. What I want to know, is how to evaluate an XF stamp or a VG stamp when there are no price column?

First, let's recapitulate the existing grades I think are the most used: VG, F, VF, XF and SUPERB. I have seen somewhere PERFECT, but never seen it on a stamp. I do not know if anybody do use other grades. I do, of course, use the "in between" grades F-VF and VF-XF (I don't usually use VG-F because it does not denote a big enough difference in quality and the XF-SUPERB would probably not be noticeable easily).

Then, we can come back to the question with an example. Let say that we have a Sc #74 MINT NH. The catalog values are 20$ for VF, 5$ for F and 0.60$ for VG. There is a 200% NH bonus, but we will not bother with tat for now. Let say that our stamp is XF, how would you value this stamp? If we calculate the "ratio" between VF and F, then 20/5 = 4 (so VF is 4 times the value of F). So would it be valid to say that an XF Sc 74 would be 4 times the price for VF (ie 80$)? and for SUPERB, still 4 times the XF value??

Then there is the NH factor. The Unitrade catalog tells us that the NH is for VF. For the F grade, we have to cut the NH factor in half... So, would you multiply it by 2 for an XF stamp (giving 400% factor)??? and for a SUPERB (giving 800%)???

I would really like to have your opinion and to know HOW you do it. These are things that are not described in catalog, probably because those stamps are not seen often. But I still want to know for not being lost if I get to see one.

Your help will be appreciated. Sorry for the lengthy post.

Thanks.

I do not have a 2012 Unitrade here,just 2005, so I do not kniow (nut will check in the library) how the grading is listed now.

To me it seemed, generally speaking and not picking any specific examples as there are always exceptions, that VF to F was a reduction of a half and also F to VG. I see in the Cents Issue the jump up from F to VF is x2.5 but usually it seems to be in the x2 range in my 2005 catalogue anyway.

Are these other grades you mention, XF, superb, perfect, listed in Unitrade now? and if so why? VF was just great with maybe a VF+ to indicate a gem of particular beauty. The other grades were in the US catalogue for older US stamps I think, and to my thinking, came into existence just to give stamp dealers a reason to increase prices.


Condition and appearance (eye appeal) will always add or detract from a stamps value. To value stamps one by one is to suppose that the stamps will be sold one by one, which is possible but slow.

If you mix very nice stamps in with poor specimens then the whole mix is devalued unless you separate and show the best stamps at their best.

I understand the need to value a collection but I think it would bo you well enough to use a simpler grading system.

Many collectors ignore the grading on ebay and elsewhere and do their own judging of what a stamp is worth by their own experience and eye, and then determine how much they are willing to pay. I suppose though that there are also collectors who do not know a lot about grading and do look at the grades listed as showing them what a stamp is worth.

I have also used the idea that you assume a stamp is Fine or Fine+ until it proves itself to be otherwise (Very Fine, etc).

If you have very nice appearing stamps then they should be marked as such for future generations who might not know about stamp grading, and for buyers or even yourself, as some stamps are hard to grade because all stamps of a certain series or era were not centered well or what have you.

Puzzler: These grades are not priced in Unitrade 2012. The XF grade is discussed in the section describing the grading of stamps in the introduction. It is said: "VEY FINE stamps will be just slightly off center on one or two sides..." and "EXTREMELY FINE stamps are close to being perfectly centered."; So there is at least one more grade higher than XF that is not described in Unitrade. Also, you can see them (at lease XF) in the GEM section in the beginning of the catalog (If there were such section in the 2005 edition... I began with 2009 edition and there was). They are also used sometimes in the descriptions for lots in auction houses. Also, I saw them in the PSE documentation for stamp grading (http://www.psestamp.com/intro.chtml; on page 12 of their document; They use XF, SUPERB and GEM). I know that they specialized on US stamps, but the principle is the same. I know for a fact that experts will do measurements to determine the stamp centering. But I don't know the exact ratio they will use to determine that a stamp is VF or F or XF.

It does matter to me because I don't have enough experience to determine if that particular stamp is worth the money a seller is asking or not. I am always referring to the catalog value to see if it is reasonable or not. We can see in the auction house that sometimes stamps are selling over the catalog value. Those stamps are normally "better than VF" and described as XF. I do not collect stamps to make money because if it were that, I would have stopped a long time ago (not profitable enough). I am only trying to put a value as real as I can on my stuff.

You talk about grades on ebay... Well, every body know that when a seller is selling a stamp, then it is XF but when the same seller bought the stamp, it was F-VF. It is certain that you cannot (most of the time) use the grade that is given by the seller. It is just for me to be able to make my own evaluation based on the pictures and then to put a value on the stuff I am looking to buy if, in fact, I agree that the stamp is XF as the seller claims.

I must not be the only one asking myself this question.

pepere_jack, you speak sense, what you says makes good sense. Thank you for explaining how the newer Unitrade catalogues are.

I am missing the Gem section in 2005 so was going by the old way of grading.

With the XF or Superb (or Perfect) I would go by what the Unitrade catalogue siggests. Since they do not price these grades (you mentioned) then it would be hard to know how a dealer does it.

If Unitrade only mentions Extremely Fine (is that XF? (extra fine I thought)) and Perfect while they are talking about XF, then ??

You would think that everyone would want to be on the same page, so to speak. Unitrade uses Scott numbers and terms so they must follow Scott grading practices to a certain extent anyway.

Perhaps you could just say that a stamp is XF or whatever and also say that it is worth VF x2 or whatever you had supposed by comparison to dealer sites.

It is always what the market will bear too.

Sorry I went on about the old system for grading and what not. I had been thinking about this for a while and you just happened to provide a place for me to talk and talk.

I always liked the idea of keep it Simple and all these extra grades seem to complicate things beyond reason at times. You have to take a school course in grading or something.

Puzzler, The GEM section show some GEM that have been sold at auction. They are very beautiful stamps that I don't think I would ever have enough budget to acquire!

The I mentioned the PERFECT grade, but I don't think that it is often used. I saw it in documentation (not Unitrade) but never in a stamp description. The "Extremely fine" always been described as XF (maybe EF would have been more exact but it seems less "appealing"). I think that the grading should be in order VG, F, VF, XF then SUPERB.

I am not sure if it is the "new grading" or "the old grading"... Maybe the grading is more detailed since Robbin Harris took over the editing the Unitrade catalog (I think that occurred for the 2006 edition).

I have access to a 2009 Scott catalog and the grading section is described as FINE, FINE-VERY FINE, VERY FINE, and EXTREMELY FINE. It is essentially the same description as in the Unitrade Catalog... So maybe Unitrade took the description from there... There is, as introduction to the grading section, the following text:




That text in Scott catalog seems to confirm my statement stating that there are XF and SUPERB grades.

I know that the market will decide of the final price. I just want to try to estimate a value. I have been accuse of being a "mathematical freak" before (not in those word, but more like "attaching too much importance to the mathematical way". Well, I heard that we could explain the universe with the right math formula...

I personally don't find this too complicated (having more grade than the traditional VG, F and VF) but rather exciting to look for the better stamp.

I was probably going to use 1.5 as the conversion factor to keep a "buffer" or as a "margin of error". Some XF stamps might be sold at 2, 3 or sometimes 4 times the catalog value, but I don't want to assume that my "humble" possessing could go fetch so high prices. I do buy lots at web auction but I do buy cheap. Even then, I do sometimes find an item that could be the "treasure" we are all looking for.

So thanks for your opinion Puzzler. If any other also want to give their opinion, you are welcome!

pepere_jack,

I think you're on the right track with grading your stamps, but I have some things to add.

Canada stamps from about 1927 on are actually quite common in the grade of XF. My own experience is that VF sells for 25%-50% of catalogue value (the higher % is for key issues like #158 Bluenose, etc), and XF rarely sells for more than 75% of cat value.

Prior to 1927, stamps with a grade of VF+ are far less common and prices tend to reflect that fact (with a couple of exceptions) VF copies of the KGV "Admiral" series often sell at catalogue value, whereas VF copies of the 1898 "x-mas" stamps are tough to sell at 50% catalogue. Low face-value "small queens" and "Maple leaves" are a tough sell at 25% cat value unless they grade XF or better.

I realize that my experiences are anecdotal, but I have spent thousands of $$ on my Canada collection over the past 2 years and this is the trend I have seen.

If you take anything from my comments is that you can not apply 1 formula to selling all of your stamps. You really need to follow the market to get a good idea what things are selling for.

My suggestion ...

Go to ebay and look up auctions of Canada stamps similar to those you intend to sell. Click "watch item" on numerous auctions including: .99 starting bid auctions and "buy-it-now" store items. Follow these for a couple of weeks and see what sells and what doesn't sell. Pay close attention to the ending prices on .99 auctions. This should prepare you what to expect from your sales ...

Brian

Rileysan,

Thanks for your comments.

I know that different era will have to be calculated differently... And I do know that stamps rarely sell up to catalog value. But I still base my calculations on the catalog value because it is a "fixed" point on the market. Once I have the catalog value, then I can evaluate the percentage of the catalog value a stamp should sell.

By setting the base value at catalog value, if I speak with an other collector, we then speak the same language. If I say 100$ Catalog Value, then he will be able to evaluate the percentage he is willing to pay as much as I can do it. But the fact is that I don't really want to sell right now (I am not there yet). I am still cataloging my collection and assessing the total value.