Another Great Classic Multiple Bites The Dust

Because PSE is a business and they are in it to make money. As long as their SMQ can publish the inflated market values for these types of mutilated pieces they will continue to grade them.

There will always be collectors for items like this. It's an ego thing.

That's what I honestly don't get - why would someone want to own such an artificial piece of ugly, for a whole lot of money? When they could get a whole lot of nice, real stamps for the same.

I know, there's no accounting for individual taste, or ego, or etc...

Partly because they have a whole lot of money and partly because they really collect certificates. They want to be able to say that they have "the finest known example" because some certificate says so. Regardless of how many collectors think it ugly. Since the vast majority of those who think that way could not afford the item anyway, they don't count as far as the buyers of this type of material are concerned.

revcollector, you're spot on with ego.

You have at one end of the spectrum Bill Gross, and at the other, the kiloware buyer. Reconciling the hobby across this spectrum yields only discontent and misunderstanding.

I am not sure if jealousy is at work or it's the product of the sensationalism associated with socializing it. I just know that when left to capitalism, the outcome becomes clear.

The "finest known example" is the epitome of the "haves". It's not about getting a c3a or several. It's obtaining the c3a PB. That person wins. Look at me, and my shining example of greatness. Aren't I a good collector? I have one, but you don't, and can't get one, because I have the only 1.

Ultimately I believe, that the collecting at the level of Gross, is more a bigger tax scheme tied to subsequent charitable contributions he worked out than that of philately. I'm sure he loved the press of it all too. He determined that if he bought 50M in stamps, later auctioned it all, and donated the proceeds, then he capitalized more than a straight donation would otherwise. It all goes back to asset valuation.

Bill Gross is a bad example because he never made a point of buying high end graded stamps. He always went for overall quality in both postal history and stamps. Just look at the sales so far:

https://siegelauctions.com/past_sales.php

I also think you are being a bit too cynical about his motivations. I think he enjoyed collecting, and would not be selling the US collection now if not for his divorce.

I do not know which organizations have issued certs on these sort of vandalized stamps, but I plan to not utilize their services, PSE for one. How strongly do we feel about this?

I wonder what other expertisers have issued certs on these?

No doubt about it, the inception of grading as a business model has on balance done more harm than good in this hobby.

Am very glad this topic has come up on SC, its a big issue.

This happened before grading, but it got worse as a result of grading.

Related to this, kind of - I just got through examining a cover which had 3 large - very large - margined 1c 1851 stamps added to it, fraudulently. A giant pair, and a single. These would have made nice graded singles, except I'm sure that they each had faults that needed hiding, so they were placed on this cover to greatly enhance the cover, and create something else that could potentially bring a lot of money with giant freak stamps. Just an interesting side-note to this discussion.

Every expertizing group does stamps such as these. The PF will not grade multiples, but none of them are going to concede business to their competitors.

I am not sure how the Bill Gross comment got in this thread... guy collected nongraded material, put together the most elaborate Scott 1-2 study in existence which likely required years of studying, and never broke up museum quality blocks or soaked stamps off covers to produce artificial graded 100 jumbo stamps.. His collection is amazing. Knocking him because he is rich and can afford super expensive rare material is not a fair assessment of his skill and dedication as a philatelist

I mistakingly mischaracterized him specifically. I should have articulated my thought process outside of that bad example.

I put up a voting poll on this at https://goscf.com/t/65054

I may offend some, but we all have our opinions. When I first saw a 1950's 3c US commemorative with "perfect" centering listed in an auction as having a catalog value of $90, I about fell off my chair. Like beanie babies and tulips before, this to will pass, But in the meantime senseless destruction is occurring.

The original block of 9 always had the potential for the "super" pair, but the "super" pair no longer has the potential either for a block of nine or nine singles, and should therefore the original block should have been worth more. Hopefully this will be borne out when these stamps come to market again and we can only hope that it realizes far less than was paid.

I do not believe that this will pass. It is far past the fad stage in terms of time.