What's A Reasonable Price To Pay For "Space Fillers"

Though not specifically a Classic stamps topic, the question arose for me while considering the purchase of a classic stamp, 30¢ 1860 (Scott 38). Image below, as taken from the now closed ebay listing.

The starting price was $120.
2021 cat for a used example is $450.

Seller described the stamp as "sound" but the sheer number of repairs are quite obvious from the photo. I pointed this out to the seller and he agreed with my assessment. I offered $25 for it, he countered with $50. I took my time deciding, and now the auction is now over — 1 bid at $120.

In my opinion, an unsound stamp such as this is merely a space filler, with no redeeming value as a "collectible" other than as an example of a poor attempt at salvaging a Classic stamp. (My interest in it was to expand my collection of repaired/altered #38s. I don't have stamp albums, per se.)

Seeking opinions on what a stamp like this should sell for. Or to come at it from another angle, what percentage of catalog would you consider to be reasonable for an unsound copy of a not-very-rare stamp such as this?

Then again, can we even consider this item to still be a stamp? IMO it's more like a scrap of paper that used to be a stamp.

For me, the item would have value in telling the story of what to look for when considering the purchase of #38. Where would this story be told? Other than telling it to myself (which I do ) I could find an audience by telling it at one of my stamp club's Show and Tell sessions, and get even more eyes on the stamps and relevant details by presenting them in an exhibit. The only chance of realizing any kind of "return on investment" would be write an article about them for one of the stamp mags. However, most journals don't pay very much for articles, if anything at all. Alas...

So what's this stamp, or one like it worth as a percentage of catalog, or by any other measure? Your collective thoughts, please!

There have been various discussions about "space fillers" in this forum. You can use the Search function to easily find them. Some of those discussions talk about 5-10% of Catalog Value, but I find that difficult to swallow. Catalog value is for a Very Fine Example. So, if you have a space filler (put in your definition here), then it could never be considered a Very Fine Example.

My quick answer is, "Pay what you like, but first search and search and search for better examples."

I agree. My rule of thumb is that if the stamp is still presentable, i.e. VF appearance, then 10% of CV is good. If the faults are major and can be seen from the front and are distracting, then it approaches the 5% mark.

The pictured #38 looks decent from a distance, so I can see a lot of people happy with that in their album for $45. $120 is too much to spend on it.

If the stamp has very poor centering and a heavy cancel, it might retail for only 10-20% of CV if sound anyway. So a stamp with a bad thin or heavy crease is 10% of 10-20%, or 1% to 2% of CV for an ugly poorly centered stamp with faults. IMO.

In this case it's not rare and better examples are easily available. And this example appears to have been reperfed left and top. So, $0.

An item would have to be really rare (less than 20-30 known) to make an exception. Another one may not come along for a long time.

Otherwise, I would prefer looking at an empty space.

And those repairs are?

Do you agree with the reperf comment?

Of course what anyone of would pay is pointless for this stamp as someone was will to pay $120, 26.67%.

Edit: Now the real question is did the buyer see the repairs/reperf possibilities?

In my humble and financially stressed opinion, a few bucks at the most.
But between an expensive damaged stamp and an empty space, why not use a real space filler? Download and print a fine image of that stamp, it will be clear that it's a space filler and at the same time, it completes the images of that series.

Reperfed, parts of the design missing. Has the appearance of having been rebacked.

I have the feeling that the auction may have been ended prematurely. But regardless, what one person is or was willing to pay doesn't speak to my question.

I guess we'll never know if the buyer (if there was one) knew what he was walking into.

Me, I have no interest at most prices to buy a space filler as I have no concern if a space is not filled. Have I bought space fillers? Yes I have for the sole purpose to flip it to someone I knew looking for such a space filler.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the 1856 one-cent magenta stamp from British Guiana is at best a space filler but do hit the seven figure pricing regularly. Space filler US C3a stamps still command a high percentage of catalog.

In sort what a space filler may sell for is still based on good old supply and demand.

Essay, not telling you anything you do not know, but any stamp is "worth" what someone will pay for it in any single transaction. I'm guessing the buyer probably did not notice or know better to see the faults in this particular stamp though. Happens all the time for better or worse. Sort of agree with Germania; don't really do space fillers unless the particular stamp is so hard to find that I've abandoned all reasonable hope and that is even dependent on the particular album. (Decided that I'd rather look at a blank space rather than place a used stamp in my Ecuador books as an example.) Purely subjective though.

Think the crowd is pretty close in the single percentage of catalog though.

I am also in the "prefer an empty space and money in my pocket over a space filler", but I can also say 26% was too high for the pictured stamp (IMO).

If the purpose of a space filler is to represent a stamp that you believe you have no hope of ever owning I would simply take a Siegel image and place it in the space. My reasoning is that if you spend $40 on a junk stamp and later ARE able to afford a good example you have now paid $40 more for the good example.

Thanks to everyone for their input so far. To clarify, as I explained, my purpose in acquiring "bad #38s" is not to fill empty album spaces. But the perspectives you've offered on what not to pay — regardless of the intention — have been very helpful. Keep 'em coming!

Does this qualify as a "bad #38" ? :-)

The value of your collection of 38s will have educational value that is far more meaningful than the value of the stamps themselves. If I understand correctly, you are not just looking for cheap stamps with faults, but focusing on the deceptive and expertly repaired copies of the stamp. I think that would make a good article and/or non-competitive exhibit, and best wishes in your hunt.

@ZebraMan,

Oh, that qualifies as a "bad #38" alright.

Funny you should post that picture... Just the other day I wrote to an auction house to point out that a #38 made its way into their catalog's 1861 section.

Yes, I've intentionally acquired a few bad #38s for the reasons stated. But even though they were relatively cheap, I've been thinking that I paid too much for them. Had nothing to base that on, but now I do. :)

I will first point out a lot of collectors do buy and fill spaces in their albums with space fillers. I believe more will buy a space filler to place in their collections than what you would think based on the posts here. The collecting community is much larger than the representatives here. As most members of SCF is more that adved collectors. I have found selling space fillers for 10% of catalog is realistic and no problem. If someone wants a stamp to fill that space 10% is not to much regardless of the catalog price. I have sold space fillers for as much as 20% of catalog if the appearance was good on its face. A lot of collectors place regummed stamps in the category of space fillers and so do I. This is altering the stamp, same as a repaired example. They should be sold as such with you informing the buyer of it condition of being repaired or regumed.

Any thoughts on regumed stamps as space fillers? Do you place them in the repaired category?

Do I place regummed stamps in the category of repaired space fillers? No. I consider equivalent to no gum examples particularly if accompanied by an otherwise clean certificate which is the only circumstance in which I would knowingly purchase regummed examples.