$1 Jubilee - Opinion?

Sorry, but not so. Here is comparison of the right side view of the back, colored in blue, against the top:



How would this be possible? Stamps are perforated after printing and, sensibly, after the gum has been applied. Shrinkage would also mean the perf holes in the direction of shrinkage would be oval.

Those perfs are correct, as is hy-brasil in his post. Dried sheets were line perforated after gumming.

The phrase "A little learning is a dangerous thing" comes to mind. The ability to judge for oneself improves with time, study and experience. Ideally, we are all always learning.

Great discussion. Thanks for sharing your views.

I'm still a little confused however. Don's scan shows some mismatch between top and side but hy-brazil shows a good match. Perhaps just differences in imaging software?

Looking at stamp itself, the current wide margins don't suggest reperforation unless it was a huge jumbo prior to any reperfing.

Thanks again everyone.

canyoneer

You have gotten a lot of expert advise on the stamp you want to buy.
I have a well known stamp collector friend who will buy only the best Scott 61...Some stamp collectors have money to buy perfect stamps and some want perfect stamps but don't have the money.

Bottom line my friend, if it makes you happy,and to you it is a good looking stamp... Then buy it.

Robert

I probably fall in a third catagory. I can't afford the high grade/high end stamps but can possibly stretch it to get a VF, sound version of a something I really like. I just have accept the fact that I'll probably never get my money back if I ever have to sell.

Software should not make a difference in this day and age. Also, an absolute perfect match probably should not be expected but a very slight variation in spots. "Very slight" is based on experience. Don compares the whole side with (for example) the right side, which is the best view. My comparison of the right side (in blue) with the top was to prove there was no difference in gauge or perf hole size from top/bottom to sides.

In fact, I purposely left out the 3 top perf holes of the right side (in blue) as I feel they are reperfed. Further, the left side is angled relative to the right side; they should be parallel. So I think the lower 1/4 or 1/3 of the left side is also reperfed. It is hard to tell without Don's comparison or measurement with a Canada-specific gauge which measures the gauge on an inch scale and should also show the ideal perf hole size. And a gauge can be a used low-value Jubilee that is highly unlikely to be reperfed.

I agree with wert. With the problems, the stamp is still great-looking in my opinion. And the price in my opinion is correct for the overall condition. You might find one with problems and similar margins and centering at auction, but normally not for much less. You potentially could get your money back on a stamp like this down the road, but that would depend on the Canada stamp market at the time. And what if this were sold/had to be sold in a year like 2009? But I also think you should never expect profit or break-even in the long term; stamp purchases should not be considered investing.

If you're reluctant just to step in and spend the money, that's understandable. Otherwise, keep in mind that state sales tax on internet sales kicks in next year.

Given what the back of the stamp looks like I would wait and find a better copy for that kind of money.

I'll preface my post by saying...

A scan is a great analytical tool but it's never the same as examining the stamp in person. Without eyes on the actual item, one is making an educated guess, and trusting the seller (in this case a higher-end dealer with a good reputation).

I don't see reperfing here, Maybe that mottled / bit disturbed gum at left has warped the paper a bit. Also those perf tips, fuzzy with paper fibres, suggest it was lightly stuck down at some point.

It's still above average, with large margins. A bit more research should tell you if it is good value.

This has been a great exchange and I appreciate everyone's help here. The education value has been well worth starting the thread. It really reinforces two things to me.

1) The first is that certs are really "expect opinions" ... there are stamps that could come back with very different conclusions depending on which service is used and, I suspect, who does the actual evaluation. Some things are obvious, some aren't. I recall a topic on reprefing a while back that had 3-4 pages of back and forth between several people on whether a certain stamp was altered. The comparisons between PF and PSE on the same stamp are frightening sometimes. It made me realize that "it ain't that easy". Any stamp that I buy that is >$100 I like it to already have a cert or the seller will allow me time to get my own and permit returns.

2) The other (obvious) thing is that nothing replaces looking at the stamp in person. I like this stamp but after reading the subtleties pointed out by you all, don't feel comfortable paying that much without personally looking at it. I could see, being at a major stamp show, talking with the dealer, and looking at the stamp up close might persuade me to take the plunge (if there were an existing PF certification that would seal the deal). I only buy one or two higher end stamps per year so naturally I'm one of those tentative buyers (AKA thrifty). I don't recall being so anxious when I was buying approvals from Garcelon Stamp Company in 1970 with my paper route money .

PS Interesting about the sales tax issue. I assume ebay will be tacking this onto final invoices next. Bummer