Nederland Queen Wilhelmina Original And Reprint

Here are my two postal forgeries .

Peter4522, Wow! That much almost 20 years ago! I'm amazed!

Floortrader, thanks for sharing. Are they forgeries due to smaller perforations?

Ken

Perforations plus the poor quality of the design . I found both in a old album I purchased .

I can not find my most recent catolgue of the Netherland, but do have a 2011 in front of me, and that should be reasonably correct.

The 10 cent grey wide lines in medallion 1922 has a catalogue value of: 90 euro mint, 30 euro hinged and 0,30 euro used.

The imperforated stamp of 10 cent from 1923 has a catalogue value of 16 euro mint, 10 euro hinged and 10 euro used.

The attraction for a forger was the difference in value between a 16 euro 1923 stamp and a 90 euro 1922 stamp.

Kind regards,

Johan

Notice the wide lines behind the queens head in the gray postal forgery. That is why I called it a postal forgery .

Floortrader, I cannot comment on the 7,5 cent brown stamp, I do not have in front of me.

The 10 cent gray stamps are 2 different issues. the one on the left is from the 1899 issue, with more and closer to each other lines in the medallion. The one on the right is the 1922 issue with wider lines in the medallion. So 2 different issues. Having wider lines in the medailion does not make it a forgery.

Kind regards, Johan

Johan, I would also like to thank you for your detailed explanations. I've learned a lot thanks to you

JOHAN ----I found it in the Scott catalog as 110 ,I believe your correct but I got thrown off because the design looks much poorer than the original . Let me go thru my stock and see what I can find and get back on it .

gee ----been a few years since I worked on Netherlands . I did find a few copies of the 1924 redrawn reissue with the wider lines . I still believe as stated earlier that my copy is a postal forgery .Not as Johan stated it is a 1924 redrawn copy . Here is my Postal Forgery next to a 1924 redrawn copy .

Hello Floortrader.

Personal thought on your 10 cent stamp.

Looks like a stamp from the imperforated 1923 issue, this stamp got perforated to look like a 1922 mint example. Somehow this one got used. Probably no one wanted to buy it,so the forger simply used it.

Also possible:
On the 31st of December 1935 this was also one of a number of older stamps that were no longer valid, A lot of these older stamps were used on covers in 1935. Also good way to get rid of this stamp.

Kind regards,

Johan.

If I recall correctly, the postal forgery of the 10 cent stamp was lithographed, while the original was printed using typography. If you look very closely at the stamp you should be able to see the difference.


I always find it interesting that the imperf version sold only about 360,000 copies while the normal 10 cent with wide spacing sold over 210,000,000 copies (almost 600 times as many). But the imperf version is cheaper mint than the perfed version. A clear example where numbers printed don't determine the value.

In reply to J2186 post.

There is a big difference in numbers produced. But the key is the number of stamps actually used.

The 1922 regular issue was sold and used a lot, like a normal issue would do. So mint examples are more difficult to find.

The 1923 imperforated issue was smaller in numbers, but because it was something different a lot of collectors held on to them. So more mint and hinged example are available in comparison to used ones. then the 1922 issue.

That is why the catalogue values that look a bit strange at first are indeed pretty realistic.

Kind regards,

Johan.

Johan,

I agree entirely.

I was just trying to make the point that stamp value depends on many things.

Jan

Thanks for all the additional information both of you supplied, someday hope to work on Netherlands and update my album page .