| Author |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,746 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
319 Posts |
|
|
This is a daily trend on ebay, and usually from repeat offenders....Today's treasure of philately is this wide-margin, GEM #16. No, this is not an ordinary Type IV either; this is the rare "broken frame, non-recut" variety. Right up there with extra-line W/F, and the kinda-blue experimental paper..... https://www.ebay.com/itm/1855-UNITE...192410124171
|
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1317 Posts |
|
|
Here is an interesting wording I ran across "Scott#9 1c Franklin Used Regum". Now, it does not take an idiot to figure out how to fix the regum issue on a used stamp. SOAK IT!! |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
1189 Posts |
|
|
jaxom100, it might not even be regummed, either. I've seen many 19th century stamps which were used and still had most of the original gum. The reason was that people used to steam the stamps off the covers rather than soaking them like we do today. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
1189 Posts |
|
|
reedededge, I'm either not looking at the right listing, or I'm not seeing something here.
My first question is "Why is this a fake?" It's not closely cut, has wide margins on three sides and ample on the bottom. The reverse looks like a normal stamp of the period. What am I missing?
The second problem is I'm not seeing a description like the one you were describing. Has the seller changed his description?
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3490 Posts |
|
|
I agree, it doesn't appear to be a fake, just not a Ty IV, as it was described to be. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
United States
10633 Posts |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1808 Posts |
|
|
I contacted the seller, who acknowledged receiving several messages and intends to take it down. The seller bought a large lot from a "trusted seller" that turned out to have a few seemingly high-value stamps misidentified.
ETA: Still there with the same incorrect description, bidding up to $177. Hm. |
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by dudley - 12/31/2017 10:32 pm |
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
12569 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
12569 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
12569 Posts |
|
|
I believe his explanation that he purchased it and relied upon the sellers identifications. Therein lies the problem with many ebay sellers. They are not dealers in the true sense. They are retailers. Baseball cards one day and stamps the next. The term dealer is thrown about too freely. If you are going to present an item as a $2500 stamp you had better know what you are talking about. I must say though that as I write this I wonder why someone would start a $2500 stamp at 99 cents. Hmmmmm and who would think that the purchased a $2500 stamp for $150? And that is why ebay could care less what goes on. Ignorance all around. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
213 Posts |
|
|
This is one of my pet peeves--the whole Ty.I, Ty.II, etc. thing on every stamp of the 1851 and 1857 series. The fact is that dealers and collectors (present company excepted) don't know the difference between the various types.
For the sake of discussion, at your next stamp show pick a US dealer at random. Show them two stamps side-by-side; A 10c 1851 Ty.II, and the other a Ty.III. See if the dealer can identify the difference in Type right off-the-bat. Remember now, these are major catalog numbers!
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1317 Posts |
|
|
Two months ago, I could not tell the difference between the 1c Franklin types either. But I put in the time to learn plating to tell the difference. Now I would not have any problems telling the types apart if the stamp top and bottom are visible. I see the stamps in my sleep now. If you are going to buy or sell something, take the time to learn what you are dealing with. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,746 |
|