| Author |
Replies: 22 / Views: 4,634 |
|
Pillar Of The Community
1545 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2545 Posts |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
1849 Posts |
|
|
IBFS...think what he is stating.... The ERROR came from the sheets with that plate #. Even thou they are not in a plate position.... yes, deceiving. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
845 Posts |
|
|
Second block is "sound" although clearly the perfs are torn between rightmost columns. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
816 Posts |
|
|
So, if the 5c error is not present then those are all 499s right. Even if it was there, it would be a 505 surrounded by 499s, of course that would look cool. |
Send note to Staff
|
Member of the Central Oregon Stamp Club. Redmond, OR 97756 Mailer's Postmark Permit #1 APS 239403 |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1947 Posts |
|
|
Plate 7942 is the plate which had the errors of the 5 cent in amongst the 2 cent stamps. the position of the error stamps is such that it will not appear in a standard plate block. I suppose some collectors would attach a value to the plate above and beyond the usual value for a plate block.
Maybe some one can make a definitive statement, but I do not think that all printings from plate 7942 had the reentry errors. I think I remember that the defective 2 cent positions came to light after printings had been made, |
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by rohumpy - 06/10/2014 06:42 am |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
1849 Posts |
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
7097 Posts |
|
|
Yeah, agreed that seller is being very deceptive in his description. It's just like saying "Hey buy this rusty old AMC Pacer for 10K because it was parked next to a Lamborghini diablo once!"
Edited: I had to fix the italicized issue from sloppy cellphone typing earlier |
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by I_Love_Stamps - 06/10/2014 7:20 pm |
|
|
Moderator

United States
12330 Posts |
|
|
In my opinion this is a misleading description, people search by catalog number may see this and not look closely enough to see that it does not contain a 505. I will add it to the Stamp Smarter database, contact the seller and see if he is willing to improve the listing description. Don |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
United States
10632 Posts |
|
|
Although he could word it better, people have been noting this plate number for a very long time. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Moderator

United States
12330 Posts |
|
|
I have contacted the seller asked kindly if he would be willing to change the listing to include that a 505 is not what is actually for sale. This clarification should remove the chance of any misunderstanding. Don
Edit - The seller responded in a quick and professional manner stating that they will clarify the listing to avoid any confusion. Feel free to drop them a line thanking them or even better, supporting sellers who are willing to listen to feedback and care about problem free transactions. |
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by 51studebaker - 06/10/2014 10:04 am |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
816 Posts |
|
|
Great job! Quick resolution! |
Send note to Staff
|
Member of the Central Oregon Stamp Club. Redmond, OR 97756 Mailer's Postmark Permit #1 APS 239403 |
|
|
New Member
United States
1 Posts |
|
|
I am the seller of these items. First, my thanks to 51Studebaker for bringing this thread to my attention. I have updated the listings based on his request, and the comments I read here. As to those of you that have accused me of larceny and deception, in the typical forum gang up on the "evil ebay seller" attitude, please consider the following... If you researched the plate block for Scott 505 you would be aware that Scott defines that item to be just what I have offered and titled in the description, along with the appropriate catalog value. A collector of plate blocks would understand this. The plate number 7942 is scarcer (and valued higher) because the Post Office removed from circulation all of the sheets they could find once the error was discovered. The same plate number is associated with Scott 467 and 485 (but would appear to the novice to be a 463 (perf 10) or 482 (imperf)). I have been buying and selling classic US stamps for over 40 years, many of them on ebay. I currently have over 10,000 items listed and while mistakes can happen in that process, I will go out of my way to correct them as soon as I'm made aware. Please feel free to contact me directly if you have an interest or concern about any of my listings. I stand behind everyone of them. |
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by usstampshop - 06/10/2014 12:32 pm |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
1849 Posts |
|
|
usstampshop.... I do understand that mistakes happen. I am living proof. I always defend the SELLER because I am that more than a buyer @ ebay... BUT....The title is NOT correct. The stamp is a #499....not #505. I do understand what you stated...I stated that above.... Just the title could have been worded differently. No harm. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2943 Posts |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
1545 Posts |
|
|
Quote: my sellers I follow list. stampcrow...is this a good or bad sellers list? Also...IMO, just because the plate blocks came from the same plate as 505, why does that make it more desirable? To me it is just another plate block of 499's. At a high point, I'd put it at $25.00. I thank you '51Studebaker, as a buyer, for what you tried to do to get him to change his listing. Let's hope buyers read the entire description. 3 posts in one. -IBFS |
Send note to Staff
|
All science is either Physics or Stamp Collecting. -- Ernest Rutherford |
|
Replies: 22 / Views: 4,634 |
|