The Philatelic Foundation Grading Upgrade

I give an example.
I only looked at the first page of Siegel sales of PSE 100, sorted by value, and found this 15c which has grade 100 and is called "perfect stamp".

I think we agree that those perforation tips are not perfect. Why aren't the perforation tips measured by parts of a mm, but only the centering?

It sold for 50.000 USD (normal Scott: 325 USD)
What does this tell us about the definition of grading (see above)?

It tells us that stamp market is strong. It tells us that the hobby is not dying. It tells us that people are free to spend their money as they see fit.

By the way, those perf tips look just fine for that issue.

Stamperix - A dealer lists a stamp on ebay or on his website or in print with a scan and another dealer does the same for the same Scott number. Dealer one describes it as VF-XF Choice Nice Color Fresh Gem. Dealer two states that it is a PF Grade 85 with no faults, 2015 Certificate. The price from both dealers is similar. You know of both dealers but have no close relationship. You are in an airport between flights and want to buy the stamp because you have wanted and sought it for quite a while. Which stamp do you feel more confident in purchasing?

Whichever one looks better to me? And when spending a few hundred on a stamp I request good high resolution scans of the back. Those that need a number to tell them if the stamp is a gem are blind collectors.

Looks better?

I would choose the stamp from the third dealer, a stamp that "looks better to me" and especially has a PF certificate saying it's a XF grade.

As long as the color and impression quality can't be measured by technology and the perforation tips are not measured in parts of a mm, there is no way to include those quality aspects into a grading that is based on grades of 85, 90 and so on and based on centering. This is like a "media breaks" and can't be done from a definition point of view.

I also like well centered stamps and I even would understand the price given above if the reason would be the centering. But the whole grading system is built on the wrong asymmetric underground.

But for grading, it's not about the specific issue. If it was, then wouldn't one Z grill be a 100 Gem, and the other be a squirrel dinner.

It's not a bell curve.

rogdcam- you keep saying its a few cut up, when clearly it's a LOT. Instead of this nonsense, why don't you spend time looking at AUCTION CATALOGS of the last 20 years. Not just the PF site. In almost every catalog of outstanding or graded stamps, and a lot of others as well, you will find plenty of stamps that have CLEARLY been cut down from multiples. 19th century stamps, and 20th century stamps both. Not all are equally scarce, but all were deliberate mutilations that harm the hobby. A small group of rich egotists do not prove the strength of the hobby, just an old adage.

Morning friends,

How does a blemish on the back side of one of these super 100 stamps affect their grade?

Yes, we have lost most of our postal history to the soaking tray over time. The relatively few older covers left contain no stamps or stamps that would bring a very low grade by today's standards.

The removal of stamps from cover was and still is an acceptable philatelic practice. We are living through the era of a "change in the force" where the center gem in a multiple block is more collectable than the block as a whole.

Those are the facts sad may it be depending on your personal views.

It looks like the next new investment opportunity is buying and hoarding US classic multiples.

The next step is to get investors (non-collectors) to believe this so we can unload our mint sheets from the 1960's at a steep premium.

Back to grading - look at this stamp which has been certified as a "100J". (from a recent ad in Linn's). Unbelievable.

The 1960's are not classics.

Is the stamp you show certified as a 100J or called that by a dealer?

Post electric eye technology (1938 I think) was a game changer as far as stamp centering goes. Before this technology well centered were not common, after that date well centered stamp were common.
Don

'
Taking the criticism as valid for the sake of argument:

Perhaps TPG (over-)emphasizes centering because, wait for it, collectors (the marketplace) values centering.

And that, in turn, comes from decades during which auction catalog photos could show you little else about a stamp; surely not freshness (of the color or the gum).

Run multiple linear regression analysis of MNHOG auction results over those decades, and <guess> you will find that centering is a vastly more important factor than all of the others </guess> simply because it was the most reliable basis for a bid.

Q/ Do we want graders to teach us a different set of values than those reflected in decades of real-world results?

Q/ Do we not want graders to tell us "this is how this stamp will do at auction"?

Cheers,

/s/ ikeyPikey

There is no problem in finding more examples to show the strange definition of "grading".

This stamp (some stamps after the one shown above in the same Siegel result list) also has "gem" grade 100, and here I also miss some perforation tips :).

What could have been the reason to get a grade 100...? How transparent is the process of grading, how is it calculated, how can it be compared between PF and PSE?

it sold for 21.000 USD. For how much would it have sold when the perforation would be perfect (without any tips missing), but the centering would have been 0.0001% not correct? So what grade would it have got, and how would the grade influenced the price?

Can stamps be graded from an image? Can graded stamp images be compared if the images are from different sources?
Don