Anything Seen On The Reverse Is Of Little Consequence

I recently purchased a stamp for the cancel and when it arrived it had a substantial thin. When I questioned the owner I got the following response (in part):

"...when a stamp that is inexpensive and sold for the merit of the cancel, a condition that is only seen on the reverse is usually not described and of little consequence."

I would be curious how others might react to this response.

Everything about a stamps condition is important to me in deciding whether I will purchase or not and in determining price.

The seller is either ignorant, or he/she is dishonest.

A fault is still a fault, on everything, even if it has a shiny coat of paint on it.

The thin should have been mentioned.

Jim

Complete rubbish. If it's of no consequence, why not disclose the fault in the spirit of full disclosure? If it really doesn't matter, then there will be no problem selling it.

Complete BS. The full condition of the stamp should be described (or shown). It does not matter how inexpensive the stamp is.

The response by the seller is total "b.s." I go with dishonest.

I had Michael Aldrich tell me the same thing when I returned items from his auctions due to undisclosed faults: "Cancel collectors don't care about faults."

The **** they don't!

I will indeed buy faulty items if they have cancels, plate varieties, or other aspects I am interested in... HOWEVER, I factor the severity of the faults into what I am willing to pay.

Anyone trumpeting that line of **** has no ethics.

Would it do any good to report this to tha ASDA?

Peter

I've been told the same thing about plate varieties with condition issues. In fact, my pointing out of a major defect on a stamp was publicly ridiculed and broadcasted over SAN. It is total BS. When all else is equal, a sound stamp will sell for more than a defective stamp every time. It's no more complicated than that.

It's a commonly held view, and I've even seen it from some auctioneers, though in fairness they disclose at the head of the section that they don't call faults on the cancels.

Commonly held or not, I agree it should be disclosed or the policy stated.

Ditto to what everyone has said above. The seller deserves negative feedback that includes a warning to prospective buyers.

Ethically this is lame in my opinion.

Legally, any terms and conditions must be communicated before the transaction is done; adding/changing terms and conditions after the transaction is complete is against the law (at least in the state and country I live in).
Don

agree with paperhistory (although commonly held may be overstating it)

Actually it is a fairly common opinion. Like most philatelic areas, the scarcer the variety or cancel is, the less the back matters, but it always means something and should always be disclosed.

Faults do matter and must always be disclosed. To ignore this fact is asking for trouble and who needs that.