Stamp Community Family of Web Sites
Stamp Community Forum
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some stamps?
Our stamp forum is completely free! Register Now!

Lot 4599 in Kelleher sale 701  
 

 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Valued Member
United States
498 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   12:11 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this topic Add James Drummond to your friends list  Get a Link to this Message
Does this stamp look like a trimmed perforated copy to anyone else but me?

Nothing about it encourages genuineness: the ink color, the date of the cancel, the margins, etc.

Jim

p.s. Sorry, just found out that this is a duplicate post. Please ignore all comments.





http://db.kelleherauctions.com/php/...701&lot=4599
Send note to Staff
Edited by James Drummond - 06/18/2017 1:47 pm

Pillar Of The Community
2313 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   12:40 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add jogil to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
The top isn't even cut straight and the bottom shows some slight remnants of perforation holes.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
359 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   1:39 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revenuermd to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
They seem to be busy destroying any credibility that the firm once had for revenues.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Ron Lesher
Pillar Of The Community
1063 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   1:39 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add John Becker to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
That stamp was discussed (debunked) in a thread a few weeks ago. See about 4 posts down the thread..
http://goscf.com/t/54643&SearchTerms=kelleher
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
425 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   4:10 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add hy-brasil to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Still, we never heard what Kelleher had to say. And the other thread has 2 posts that refute it; no debunking there, in my opinion.

Color: bad original scan or a scanner doing interpretive dance here. With the heavy blur and dot at the right side, I'd expect a wash of the ink color overall. The apparent brilliant white paper is just too brilliant. The orange here is too pale and washy, not a first issue revenue color.

Kindly tell me why February 1871 is a bad date (at least, that's what it looks like to me). Were the first issues invalidated January 1st? Too late for part perfs? I'd expect legal offices to be able to use up existing stamps before buying new ones; a dollar is a dollar. Now memory kicks in: yes, 1871 is awfully late for a part perf. Troublesome to me is the cancel. It looks like it's aniline ink and that type of pencil apparently was not patented until 1877.

Quote:
The top isn't even cut straight

Not a problem by itself. Part perfs were cut apart with scissors.

Quote:
and the bottom shows some slight remnants of perforation holes

All I can see are two dents under "LA", too close together to be perf 12. What am I missing? Further the easiest starting point for a fake would be an imperf. The perfed stamp candidate would have to be a jumbo (this one is slightly wide, too), and one probably from a sheet margin.

If the perfs are genuine, the horizontal margin width should be measurable against scans of blocks. Of course, that still does not eliminate a trimmed top or bottom margin taller-than-usual perfed stamp. Can the blur and dot on this stamp give us a position?

Nonetheless, it could be a part perf but not a proven/provable part perf. The margins don't look big enough to be a R66b without question. Then the only satisfactory example would be a vertical pair. Some of you then won't like the singles passed by the PF here (last on page 2, 3rd on page 2):
http://pfsearch.org/pfsearch/pf_grd...lledfrom=lkp
In any case, if sold (rather iffy), it's going for a cert anyway.

And nobody here has mentioned the pulled perf.

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by hy-brasil - 06/18/2017 7:04 pm
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
2999 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   8:47 pm  Show Profile Check revenuecollector's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add revenuecollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Apparently their auction manager completely ignored my explanation as to how the stamp cannot be genuine, as they haven't pulled the lot. I was under the impression that some other people had reported the lot to them as well. Money and ethics make strange bedfellows it would appear.

You don't even need to look at the margins. That bright color is distinctly a late state printing shade and the cancel date is 1871. Legit part perfs would be a pale reddish brown shade with a cancel date in 1863 or early 1864 at the latest.

I'd bet my pension against the stamp being genuine.


Quote:
Nonetheless, it could be a part perf but not a proven/provable part perf.


Actually, no it couldn't.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by revenuecollector - 06/18/2017 8:53 pm
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3964 Posts
Posted 06/18/2017   9:01 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revcollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
There is no possibility that this stamp is a genuine part perf. Shade, impression, cancel date, margins, and I guarantee paper are wrong. This was a perforated stamp and someone took a scissors and trimmed it top and bottom. There is zero chance of any other possibility.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
359 Posts
Posted 06/19/2017   06:53 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revenuermd to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
What a delightful discussion. But it is time not to hide this discussion here on this blog. Let's get the discussion into The American Revenuer for the revenue collector audience. I am teaching a course on philatelic forgeries the day before the opening of MILCOPEX. Let's get a feature article into Linn's. The ignorance, greed, and ethics of this situation must be exposed big time.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Ron Lesher
Pillar Of The Community
United States
3964 Posts
Posted 06/19/2017   07:48 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add revcollector to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
The examples you mention on the last page of the PF group were examined over 50 years ago when dealers were doing the certs; they would have no chance today. Even the pairs would be heavily scrutinized and might prove problematical.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
249 Posts
Posted 06/19/2017   08:50 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add SPQR to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
The Kelleher Lot has been withdrawn.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
United States Postal Service, Now on eBay!United States Postal Service, Now on eBay!
New Forum Topics Recently Active Forum Topics
  Scott US 114 lifted from old album
  Something's not quite right about this narcotic stamp image
  Anyone Doing the Same?
  Scott Page Protectors for Lighthouse Pages
  Sc. 632 and 633 design vs. Nebr. and Kans. versions and Sc. 571 sizes
  Assistance required Identifying this Franklin 1 Cent
  Color Date Change Over
  Measuring Germany Mi 154 for fault?
  How would I start / continue to identify this 10 cent Jefferson?
  High quality scanner?
  Future Scott Catalogues
  What's going on with eBay? Width of stamps
  Italian Post Turkish Empire 1922 question
  U.S Fancy Cancels Help Needed
  China commemoratives for radio telescope
  Five Cent Beaver Leaping Fish Variety
  Austrian Cinderellas
  Beautiful cinderella from the British Esperanto Association
  UX38 uncut sheet of four
  Unknown Finnish stamp
  Someone told me my description is wrong
  The oldest known precancel
  Show Your Newly Acquired Covers Here
  Outbound Bill of Exchange from U.S. to Mexico
  If you think "More is better" check out this auction

  Wiki'd Buildings on Stamps
  Sc. 632 and 633 design vs. Nebr. and Kans. versions and Sc. 571 sizes
  Show us SNOW on stamps!
  Dave's (Oldtriguy1960) Canada Air Post Official wants
  UX38 uncut sheet of four
  How would I start / continue to identify this 10 cent Jefferson?
  Scott US 114 lifted from old album
  China commemoratives for radio telescope
  Scott Page Protectors for Lighthouse Pages
  Future Scott Catalogues
  Show us HOT AIR BALLOONS!
  Something's not quite right about this narcotic stamp image
  Baseball Topical Stamps
  Massive Cinderella Lots up for auction
  Anyone Doing the Same?
  Assistance required Identifying this Franklin 1 Cent
  1934 National Parks Series and 1935 Farley Reprints
  Morocco "Gloss Proofs"
  My newly acquired Clipper covers!
  275 "Did You Know?" Facts about Postage Stamps
  Color Date Change Over
  What's going on with eBay? Width of stamps
  Scott 709 - - oddity
  10 Red Cloud (Scott 2175)
  Trade Mail For covers

Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Stamp Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2017 Stamp Community Family - All rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Stamp Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use    Advertise Here
Stamp Community Forum © 2007 - 2014 Stamp Community Forums Go To Top Of Page
It took 0.57 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05