Are There Any Differences Between Scott 120 And 130 Besides The Grill?

For the sake of clarity I would hope that a stamp with perforations added to a straight edge would be described by specifying exactly that and avoiding general terms. In a hobby where minute physical differences can mean large value changes precision is the best policy IMO.

When the PF says "perforations added" I assume that ALL were added. If it were my world though I would add "to all four sides". Words are cheap.

If it is a proof, then all four sides is obvious. If it is a 120, then the specific side or sides would be stated.

Forget "obvious". Words cost nothing to write. The entire assuming the audience knows this or knows that drives me insane. Assume nothing. Just use some words and call it a day.

Zebra you make a good point that pressing out a grill on this stamp would be a money loser. In my head I was thinking the reverse. I guess that increases the odds for 130 as you point out.

The 1875 re-issues are more valuable used, but the original 1869's are generally more valuable unused, despite the low quantities issued of the reprints.

FYI, I got this back from the PF today. It came back as 130 regummed.

Which shows how difficult it can be to know exactly what an item is just from a scan.

Rlsny- First of all, kudos to you on the certification, and for the incredible find! The impression on your 130 is immaculate.

Hopefully, I would also like to give insight to your topic question by sharing from my own experience regarding the differences we might see in re-issues. For me personally, the paper has been the most qualifying factor that sets them apart from their 1869 counterparts. It might not be the same for other sets of eyes, but I always look at the paper first.

Here is a 127 reperfed at left and pulled perf at bottom right I found a while back that has since been certified.


I was sifting through a collection of pictorials and chose this one the moment I saw it. I did not consider the blue cancel, which is uncommon on re-issues, and I did not examine the design or even the back of it for hints of a grill. The paper itself was a dead giveaway.

I think it's helpful to include this in your thread, otherwise people with no experience in handling them may think that the design must have exceptional clarity in order for it to be certifiable. But that has not been my experience, and certainly is not the case for the ones I've seen.

Actually, I did not think the design could look as nice as the one you found. It has changed what I thought I knew about re-issues and I appreciate you posting about it!

Thank you rlsny for reporting back and closing the circle.

Here's a proof on india for comparison. The proof is still sharper.

Oh yes, putting them side by side helps a lot. It still looks VERY nice.