Can VF/Xf Grades Have Faults?

I'm seeing this frequently, where people list a stamp as being VF or XF and then say things like "large thin" or "small tear". In such cases it appears the grade is being used to describe the appearance of the stamp, not its actual grade.

I thought that VF or XF precluded any faults like these? Am I correct, or have grading standards changed?

Grade is related to appearance. When you are talking about faults, you are talking about condition.

A grade, such as VF or XF, will relate to the centering (and with a used stamp, it may relate to the cancel), so you can have a stamp that is legitimately XF with a large thin.

Of course, the dealer has to speak to both grade and condition. But XF might be a stamp that is beautiful from the front and an affront to the senses from the back.

My 2d.

Every catalog/dealer/collector has their own "standard". Know your seller, and you usually will not run into major problems.

That being said, here is a quote from the Scott catalog that sums up what I personally feel:

I had not heard that grade and condition were two separate things. I refer to my 1998 Unitrade Specialized Catalogue of Canadian Stamps, where it says the following:

VF - paper: must be free of all defects
F - paper: there will be no tears, thins, creases etc. in the paper
VG - paper: defects such as creases or staining are present

Here, clearly the condition of the paper must be accounted for when issuing the grade.

I believe it is appropriate to describe a stamp as "VF appearing" and then list the tear, thin etc., but not to call the stamp "VF"

A technicality perhaps, but a bit misleading and seems to be part of an erosion of grades. 20 years ago, XF was hardly ever used, now everyone is using it on things with off centers and flaws.

You know how it is: When you sell a stamp, it is a marvelous XF specimen. When you are buying it, the same stamp will hardly be F...

It is true that I have seen many example of stamps that were described as XF and we could clearly see that it was off center, even if it was only a little (It does not take much to get from XF to VF...).

I've noticed the exact same thing... when I used to collect in the late 80s, VF meant no faults and good centering. Fast forward to now and I've started collecting again and I am noticing that VF or F is being used to describe the centering only. And even then, I've seen stamps with only two nice margins and the other two touching the perfs with VF or F-VF in the description. I also have an issue with sellers not showing the back of the stamp so I usually pass on those unless they're fairly recent issues. I picked up a lot the other day where it said all stamps were VF and about half had backs that looked like they were attacked by a hinge shotgun and then promptly scraped off with a garden hoe.

Dan

I did not notice that I was replying to a question under the Canada subforum.

My comments about grade being separate from condition mirror the information that would be found in the front of Scott catalogues. I had not spent a lot of time looking at the front sections of a Unitrade catalogue, and I just flipped through my 2010 edition. Pretty interesting stuff that will warrant more attention on a snowy night this winter.

As to the grade and condition question, I agree that Unitrade seems to conflate the two, including having a section entitled "Grading Condition" that would support the notion that a F stamp might have more flaws than an VF stamp.

When you are buying in person, none of this matters much, as you can assess the grade and condition yourself; however, when bidding in a mail auction that doesn't picture the item, I would not accept that a stamp listed as F-VF has flaws unless they are included in the listing. I would expect that the centering is less than wonderful, and that there are no flaws (unless they are mentioned, of course).

Unitrade goes on to illustrate the grades by pictures and descriptions, and those all seem to relate to centering and cancels. So while the first few paragraphs conflate grade and condition, the balance of the section seems to treat grade similarly to how Scott treats grade.

My 2010 edition also has a couple pages on "Gems" that discuss the push for XF listings, explains why it is difficult for them, and gives some examples of recent sales of exceptional items.

My 2d. Sorry for the confusion of my commenting from Scott-land and not Unitrade-land.

C.

pepere-jack - well said re: the subjective evaluation of the buyer vs seller. I'm ok with that and expect it, but NOT when there are objective standards being "fudged." When something is clearly off center or has a thin, that's no longer subjective.

Faken - I hear you, I stay away from stamps without highly detailed pics. I do take some consolation in the fact that when buying stamps on places like ebay both ebay and your credit card company will back your purchase if a seller does not meet his obligations of sale (ie. sends you something not as described). So I might buy a lot for a good price but I'd have no problems demanding a refund if the seller did not grade properly. Not everyone is being dishonest though; some people just don't know how to grade properly. One seller of miscellaneous wares who had a lot for sale said the lot was very fine, but I could clearly see it was not. When I asked him if his evaluation of "very fine" was his assessment of the philatelic grade or just his personal impression of the lot, he admitted he did not know how to grade.

Cjd - no problem, thanks for clarifying. I admit I have not paid much attention to Scott grading for international material. Incidentally, I suspect the reason Unitrade focuses on and includes more illustrations on centering and cancels is because visual examples are much more helpful in navigating the myriad of combinations possible. However, a tear is a tear and generally varies only in size; not much more to discuss or illustrate.

I can appreciate the difficulty of listing XF. Even listing VF for early versions of Canada comes with all sorts of caveats depending on the issue. There are many early stamps for which traditional XF criterion simply do not exist. Even VF is pushing it for some. I would personally prefer to see XF not catalogued, but used for those superb exceptions of virtual perfection that are difficult to find.

My opinion is that this age old issue is part objective part subjective.

For Canada etc, I use Unitrade as the bible on this (and as CJD notes above--a lot of people overlook the page in Unitrade at the front). To me this is as objective as it gets and its quite granular.

For example, Unitrade even provides guidance on the VF-F aspects AS IT RELATES TO THE YEAR OF ISSUE of the stamp...ie, a VF for a 1970s stamp is different than one from 1870.

I recently used Unitrade in a friendly disagreement at a stamp show where the dealer was trying to sell me a Newfoundland pence issue with only 1 margin saying it was VF. I showed him the Unitrade page, and he sort of mumbled and changed his tune.

good question

As a collector and an ebay seller, I agree that VF XF are vastly overused.
It only seems logical that a VF stamp has no faults. If not, then a distinction should be made between centering and condition.

Personally I do not collect stamps with any type of fault. I would take a F over a VF if the F had no faults and the VF did (with of course the appropriate price used).

Sadly, many dealers over-grade. It is human nature, but a reputable dealer will not do this. Faults should ALWAYS be mentioned. I have bought stamps on ebay at a good price only to find a thin or a tear. At that point I have to decide if it is worth the trouble to return (will depend on price - my time is important as well).

I just think that if you want to be a reputable seller and get top dollar for your sales, I will always give financial priority to sellers that states all aspects. I am fine with using F/VF/XF for centering, as long as they also specifically mention faults or no faults, OG, NG or RG and finally the hinge status with the various acronyms such as LH, VLH, H, HR or any hybrids like heavy hinging, partial hinge remnant etc. And then high res photo of front and back. I feel like anything less can lead to confusion, false expectations or deception. And if/when I do start selling stamps online, I will protect myself by disclosing all aspects of the stamp. I'm also not a fan of sellers that want us to assume... so like if they don't state the gum status, assume OG. Again, that can lead to disappointments.

OK, lunch break over, back to work earning stamp funds :)

Dan

Thanks all, good discussion, helps me to know I'm not off my rocker. Well, I may be, but not on this issue...

Here is how I see things: The catalogs, either Scott or Unitrade try to give "retail" value. To get a standard point of view, they decided to give the value of an item in VF and F centering for item with NO FAULT. I just reread the "Conditon grading" chapter in my 2012 Unitrade and there is no mention that a F stamps might have a fault or two... It is mainly about centering; So I then assume that the value is for a faultless stamp. It is logical to be that way else how the heck are you supposed to evaluate if your stamp is VF or F or VG? You would have to use your "feeling" and I don't trust mine to that extent (specially for high price stamps!). JR1960, your 1998 Unitrade might be outdated... :)

I do use the catalog value as a base value to evaluate what would be a fair price for a specific stamp. So I use the catalog value as a base depending of the centering. Then, if the stamp has fault (not that I buy many stamps lately, but high price stamps are cheaper with minor faults...) I simply evaluate the "fault depreciation" accordingly to the fault severity. This is not simple as different persons will evaluate a fault as different severity, but I think my system works.

I do think that all can be measured... Some will tell me (have told me) that mathematical measurement is a lost of time and that true collectors will use their feelings to know what is right to pay... (... I have also been told that the grading system is a scam to have the collectors pay more ... But that is an other story entirely!) Well, my feeling have made me pay too much for some stamps. My inexperience might have played a certain role, but then you have to start somewhere. For those like me that are not yet "true collectors", then I say that hard evidence cannot be overruled by feelings. I have been accused to be too "mathematical", but it is the way I see it.

So there you have it, this is my view. XF stamps do really exists, but I think that XF stamps with faults also are available for a better price. It is just the collector's willingness to endure the faults that will make him/her decide to buy or not, if the price is right of course.

Edit: Typos. There will certainly be some more anyway...

VF and XF always meant no faults prior to the Internet and ebay. Now you get people that are not collectors selling a lot of stamps. They sugar coat their listings and don't understand or pretend to not understand stamp grades. They view grades as personal opinions. These sellers either through their ignorance or deception have affected things to the point where this is even a question. Go to Scott's, APS, SG, etc. for the answer. I know I am kind of up on a soapbox here, but the question struck a nerve with me. These days we have VF and XF stamps that are now "graded" stamps, that are listed at highly inflated prices that I think is very damaging to our hobby

pjsstamps, I think you're right about the over inflation of the grade, but I don't see them being listed at highly inflated prices. Quite the opposite, I see most used Canadian stamps selling on ebay for 5-30% of catalogue, and I think the price has been driven down. I can't speak for mint or other countries though.

The whole graded stamp deal that bugs me is when you can buy a sheet of 1950's commemoratives for about 70% of face value, divide it up into VF and XF stamps and have them graded and then ask about 100 times (or more) the XF value. Someone must buy these. I suspect they are preying on inexperienced collectors that will only get turned away from collecting when they find out the true worth of what they purchased. Stick with the grading system that has served us for over 150 years to preserve the integrity of the hobby.