Disappointing Crease In An Expensive Stamp

My 10d embossed stamp arrived with a crease. The seller did not state it in the description and the original scan (not the one I posted) did not clearly show it even though I could make out that faint line. However, the front of the stamp has no clear sign of creasing. I wonder how much this crease would detract from the value of the stamp. Will it still be worth 10% catalogue? This stamp cost me £300, not sure whether to even return it or am I paying fair value?

This is the seller's back scan...

I wonder if there's a satisfactory way to establish if the crease was there before the stamp was printed?

What's your feeling pennyblackie?

The stamp is able to flex to the crease when I applied some pressure. The lack of a crease mark in front could be because of the thickness of the stamp.

That is disappointing. You paid 10% of catalogue and it's facially very appealing.

My question would be 'how difficult would it be to find a nicer example for £300 or less?'

Instead of rejecting the stamp, I agreed to keep the stamp with a partial refund. The seller has agreed to refund me £150, bringing my purchase price to £150 which I think is fair. I did not think of getting a refund as a part of me wants to keep this stamp. 4 margined specimens for these stamps are very hard to come by.

pennyblackie,
This is a major fault (if I were issuing a cert for this, it would be noted as such "Vertical Crease").
When there is a major fault in the stamp, value of the stamp is yes, around 10%-15% depending on scarcity of the item.
If this has a CV of £300 and you paid that for it, then you should be asking to return it, or some significant reduction.
This is NOT a crease before the print, or you'd be able to separate it, or see even a faint gap under magnification in the design. That's not evident at all.

Classic, this is a £3000 stamp. Just for comparison, a piece with thinning was sold at siegal auction for £750 for the same die number (die 1).

https://siegelauctions.com/lots.php...30&page_no=2

pennieblackie,
Then do you feel you have received a good deal?
Were the photos available in the listing when you bought it? (But the fault wasn't described?)

I am ok having this stamp in my collection for £150. 10d specimens are really hard to come by even if I were to search for it on the internet all over again. The front appearance of the stamp is good with no sign of bending in the paper, making the crease seem almost like a gum crease.

Speaking of creases. Here is what looks like a fold that occurred during the printing process on what I believe is Scott #4, SG #5. The paper in the crease is fragile. This probably will decrease the value of the stamp, even though the stamp is sort of a freak. What do you think?

Danko, quite an unusual crease I must say.

From the scan it looks like a pre-printing paper crease.

Pennyblackie, that is a nice looking specimen. Even with the fault I think the price after adjustment is good, especially considering all the factors.

I agree with Bobby about the Barbados. Definately pre-printing paper crease in my opinion also. It looks like no creasing on the right front but the printing ink gap gets larger to the left front as the paper fold increased. Now pulled apart.

Yes, that what I thought, a sort of a printing/paper defect. This make this stamp a somewhat unique, but I think that over all it decreases the value of the stamp. Nevertheless, it is an interesting specimen, definitely worth keeping. Nice margins too.

I generally don't worry much about the value of stamps I buy - within fairly broad limits -- especially if they were bargains. I don't sell what I collect, and my heirs will be perfectly happy with whatever they get for my collection.

So, as long as I'm not paying a ridiculously high price for items, I don't have any concerns. I try to buy in the middle of the price range, if not near the bottom, meaning I don't buy gem stamps often but mostly purchase good-looking above average stamps without worrying a whole lot about perfect centering, etc. I pay almost no attention to the back of stamps unless there's damage that might eventually affect the front. A small thin is of no concern to me in the way a tear or pulled perfs would be.

In fact, a small problem on the back of the stamp is often a way to purchase an item I couldn't normally afford at a very low price. And if it will look good in my collection, I'm satisifed. I've never understood the obsession with the back of stamps anymore than with the back of paintings. Heavy hinged? Don't care -- as long as the front looks good and the price is good.

This stamp (the UK 10p) would look wonderful on an album page. That's my main criterion for my collection. If the seller will refund part of the price due to not noting the crease in the listing, I'd be very happy with that. A £3000 stamp for £150 is a drop dead bargain especially when it looks as good as this one. Even at £300 I wouldn't be too upset.