Does Anyone Know The Price Of A Used Franklin 476A

PSE stopped certifying them. Still listed in Scott and still certified by PF, to the best of my knowledge.

That looks like a watermark to me. Since the only known copies of 476A come from unused mint sheets it would be an uphill battle to get a used copy certified anyway.

Thanks You Rhett ;
I don't like to name names but like a crazy fool I just wanted to see if or what they would say about this stamp so I had it certified.
And this is what they said;
And this is are opinion that; It is not scott 476A it is a scott 439.
So that's fine, but I think the great the problem lies with the thing I asked.
I requested about in a enlarged photograph I sent to show me where this watermark was in this picture well they told me it was in the left hand corner that's fine but they would not show me in the picture where it was, A little vague I thought not very professional.Ether they didn't know or they didn't want to tell me in the picture for some reason
Very disappointing The whole point in identifying this stamp was the watermark and not to tell me exact place in this stamp makes me wonder.
Thanks Dan

Makes you wonder what?

Well Rogdcam;
I will finish the statement;
It makes me wonder why they didn't mention the watermark on the certificate if there was one aren't they suppose to tell you a description and the watermark is the main one I would think.

Catalog number, issue year, denomination and color.

Getting a certificate and showing it means a lot for my personal well being. Appreciate it. "Serenity now"

Hi Dan,
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. Additionally, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

There are multiple threads where you try to make the case that you have found a rarity; they often go on for a number of pages. The folks here have tried to give you advice which would save you time/money. And now even after you drop money on buying an opinion from experts you are questioning it.

Are you thinking that if you keep doubting that someone might tell that you have found a rarity even though it is not true? Stamp collecting is a great hobby even if you do not find a rarity. Save your money on certs and buy more stamps!
Don

Just for clarity, when I commented that I thought the stamp was watermarked, I was referencing the most recently posted stamp pictured in this thread, not the the subject stamp of the OP. The stamp from the OP now has PF Cert #562645 as a 439. The PF cert database says this about this stamp:
DOUBLE OVAL CANCEL.
AND WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT
IT IS NOT SCOTT 476A, RATHER, IT IS A SCOTT 439, THE STAMP WITH SEVERAL CREASES AND SHORT PERFORATIONS.

Good luck finding a 476A. Decades ago I thought I had one and sent it to the PF. Of course, it came back as watermarked. I even asked where the watermark was. They sent a nice letter showing where it was. Still couldn't see it.

About two years ago our club went to the PF for a visit. We were allowed to each bring one stamp to be examined. I brought my "476A" and they ran it through the VSC 6000 (I think that was the model at the time). They could not find a watermark. But they did not encourage me to submit the stamp for a certificate either.

For those who are interested, Ken Lawrence wrote a very good, long article about the 476A in the Linn's, July 20, 2015 issue.

Thank you Rhett and Germainia;
Im also scared to say any thing about stamps any more but here goes.
This was nice Rhett you found it in the data base that's crazy!!
Good job a real detective I wouldn't have known!
Germainia it is great story about your experience about this stamp
maybe this stamp doesn't exist but its fun looking.

Here's something I want to share,If you think having a certificate that doesn't add a watermark description is normal try explaining why in another stamp that I had certified by the same company at the same time had in its description a watermark was mentioned.
I hope I don't a fend anyone I just think its interesting to find out the truth and make collecting stamps fun with information to back it up.
Thank Dan

What difference would it have made if the verbiage "single line watermark" was added? The PF identified it as a 439. The PF will many times state what the watermark is when a stamp was incorrectly identified for submission. They try and keep things relatively short and sweet. In the case of your stamp they used space to call out "several creases and short perforations". If they had used words to further describe a 439 what does that change? I am confused as to what the issue is. If the stamp that they were identifying was a vertical watermark variety or a USIR watermark that should have been a USPS watermark (271a) it will be written out.

Personally I do not think that it matters at all if it is called out. You paid for an ID and a review for condition/state and that is exactly what you received.

If you submit a US Scott 332 and after review it is found to be a US Scott 332 do you really need somebody to tell you that it is a 2 cent Washington Carmine Perf 12 D/L Watermark issued in 1908? How did you arrive at the conclusion when submitting the stamp in the first place that it was a US Scott 332?

I agree with rogdcam, adding the phrase "with single line watermark" would add no information here; the fact that the PF added that phrase on the opinion on another stamp the OP submitted seems totally immaterial to me.

I thought maybe this might help with the confusion .
Here are two certs both have a questionable stamp
both should have been marked with a watermark .

Schuyler-Rumsey just put one up for auction. 1972 cert - lot 1800.