I *really* Hate The Way PSE Words Their Certificates!

You're clearly missing my point. I give up.

"Perhaps: "It is a genuine used R36c, with the perforations TRIMMED off to fraudently resemble R36a""

This seems better to me.

That implies intent, which the expertizers cannot determine.

I prefer the "submitted as" and "our opinion is" as separate statements to be included on the certificate. There is value in having both.

The problem that I have with the PF Certificates is the formatting. The "Submitted As" catalog number is front and center. If they have a differing opinion, the catalog number of their opinion is buried inside the following paragraph. I would suggest the identified catalog number be presented with the same weight and formatting as the "submitted by" identification (including cat #, year, color, ...)

I have limited experience with the BPP certification as one who buys Irish stamps with a certificate. The expert is Roy Hamilton-Bowen who resides in Rodgau, Germany and is a BPP expertiser, but also dealer.

I also travel to Germany once or twice a year and like to look what is on offer from stamp shops if I pass one.

I also have bought Dutch stamps and British stamps with certificates.

I notice that the use of certificates is much more widespread in Germany, than in the UK or the Netherlands. As soon as the set is sold north of € 100 - € 200, a certificate comes into play. I think many dealers seek a certificate so he can provide certainty he is selling the genuine item. It also may be a collector wants to put an item up for auction and would not receive anywhere near a reasonable price. The expertisers, frequently, also are dealers and can certify their own stock.

In the UK, certificates are issued by expert committees. The few that are issued by a dealer hold little value (David Brandon might be an exception). A certificate, mostly, is applied for by a collector. Sometimes because the collector wants to confirm a rare 'shade' or variety. Most times, I suspect, it is because the collector wants to sell his item as that variety or put it up for auction as such. If there is a certificate, it is remarked, but dealers, rarely, apply for one.

Whereas the German perspective is confirming the item for sale is genuine, the British perspective is more that of confirming the variety. Consequently, I am not surprised that BPP certificates tell you what it is. British certificates tend to state whether it is as claimed.

In the Netherlands, there is a bit of a hybrid situation. There are a couple of older certificates issued by a person that are taken seriously. An important expertiser is Henk Vleeming, who used to deal in stamps, but who now works for Corinphila Auctions. Other than that, DNK (an auction house) issues certificates based on the opinion of at least two of their expertisers and the expertising committee of the NVPH (trade association) issues certificates that are taken seriously. Like in Germany, Dutch certificates state what it is and what the condition is.

revenuecollector, I agree with your initial statements.

To me, it seems people in positions of decision, want to avoid offence because of the dollar. Poor way to run a business.

The old saying holds true
you can't please all the people all the time...etc.

I actually see two issues here:
1. Micro: How the wording on each certificate is phrased, which feeds into:
2. Macro: How the information is presented in fields in a database for broad study like "How many are known" type of analysis, etc.
Both could be improved by every certifying group to create a better end product.

And as ZebraMan points out, upon further thought, I would delete the word "fraudulently" from my draft prhasing as intent is not clear.

I agree. You never know why perforations were cut/trimmed from a stamp. One can assume that it is for philatelic purposes, but that isn't necessarily the case. I have a sequence of bank checks from the 1870s, all Scott #R152a or R152b, all from the same bank, and all with the perforations trimmed off on all four sides. I've also seen isolated CIvil War-era documents with this practice as well (clearly late printings that cannot be imperfs). Overly fastidious clerk? Some sort of semi-automated cutting process? Who knows, but it certainly wasn't for "fraudulent" reasons...

RevCollector - in response to your comment about changing the cert tracking database being expensive:

The technical change would be minor. The real cost would come from the decision as to how to use one or more new fields; e.g., just use it going forward would incur no meaningful additional costs. Converting the existing certificate dsts to include / use the new field could be expensive.

Of course this question could be discussed with Mr. Droege as I believe it is his organization which wrote the PF's software

Non fraudulent cutting was usually to save space; documents were often crowded things with little room for stamps. But at this point, the assumption has to be that someone wants the item to be the more expensive variety because they either bought it as such or want to sell it as such. So wording it that way makes it clear that reselling it as what it is not would be fraudulent. This protects potential buyers (and sellers).

Go to stampboards.com and read through the thread about PSE ("The Numerical Stamp Grading Fad").
Having done so, you'd never want to have anything to do with that joke of an "expert" organisation.

There is a big difference between BPP and PF/PSE. BPP guarantees their finding; PF/PSE does not. The latter only provide an opinion. If you submit stamp X to BPP and it is actually Y the cert will state Y. PF/PSE can't do that because they are not guaranteeing it is Y only offering an opinion it is not X.
I don't know what APEX does as they do guarantee their finding.

What happened there is two people with an agenda to take down PSE. The things they accused PSE of (incorrect certs, unwillingness to remove incorrect certs) have happened with other certification organizations. The only difference is that these two people, who made the rounds posting the same allegations in every other stamp forum, had their own agendas.
Don

Read through the first and last pages of the Stampboards thread. All good fun. The fake cancel stamps weren't the only examples of PSE's problems in certificating.

Yes, lets support a board that habitually demeans new and inexperienced collectors by calling them 'bunnies'. (Oh the irony that we a current thread here discussing how it may be harsh in telling new and inexperienced collectors to look things up for themselves.) LOL
Don

I understand having information about what was submitted, but it is often too prominent on PF certs leading to confusion. I once submitted half a dozen orange brown and brown orange Scott #1 candidates. I just put in arbitrary Scott numbers - 1b and 1d - didn't really try to get it right. I wanted them to determine it. Certs came back printed in a way sure to confuse casual readers: