Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
I assume this is still correct?
Pleast keep your response to the question above and not meta discussion. For meta discussion please start another thread!
Login to Like
this post
I don't think the term "meta discussion" is what you think it is - however.....
In response to your question;
If a stamp was sent thru the postal system, it is a used stamp regardless if it has been cancelled or not.
If a stamp was affixed to an envelope/package that did not go thru the mailstream, is may be unused if you remove it but it is not mint.
If a stamp has passed thru the mailstream without a visible cancel, it MAY STILL have been cancelled with UV dye which might not be visible to the naked eye.
Now, is there a specific reason why you are asking?
Login to Like
this post
""Now, is there a specific reason why you are asking?""
Yes, I assume this is correct, as used stamp in any case!
Login to Like
this post
From "The Language of Stamp Collecting by David Rennie"
Unused:- Dealers' or auctioneers' term for a stamp having no cancellation upon it or gum on the back. Such stamps may have been through the post and failed to have received a cancellation, or sometimes may be mint stamps which have been cleaned up. Sometimes used for a mint stamp in poor condition or with very little gum remaining.
Although in my youth, about the time of the Roman invasion of UK, we always considered a stamp that had not gone through the mail as unused, but in those days most stamps had postal markings as the post office, despite the huge amount of mail managed to frank most without resorting to sharpies.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
09:49:20pm
I must be really stupid but I always assumed if a stamp had never been used (unused) it must be mint, i.e., the two terms mean the same thing!! I guess I still have a lot to learn about stamp collecting!! So if a stamp has no cancellation because it was never used but someone has stupidly removed it's gum we don't call it MNG (mint no gum) anymore!! I really don't understand! What about value of MNG compared to "unused"?
Login to Like
this post
I’ve never heard about UV dye used for cancellations, and there really is no way that ordinary mortals can know if a stamp was used for postage and not cancelled, or if the gum was soaked off intentionally or accidentally.
I avoid “MNG” and “Unused” stamps like I avoid surprise inheritances of a million dollars from distant cousins I didn’t even know I had, even if all I have to do is send a couple of thousand dollars to a bank in Eritrea to cover the cost of paperwork. I still regret buying an expensive but hard-to find-copy of Italy Scott #341, picturing a combat medic comforting a wounded soldier.
I can’t look at that stamp without remembering that it has no gum! That’s stupid, I know, but….
Bob
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
07:29:34am
I know this doesn't contribute much to the conversation but with some very early stamps early collectors got rid of gum because it dried out, cracked and partially destroyed or harmed the stamp. As I've said a few times, it's the front of the stamp that interests me, not the back. Of course I don't want thins. Bits of hinges and pencil marks are fine. All of this talk about the difference between MNG and used is not that important to me as a collector.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
"I always assumed if a stamp had never been used (unused) it must be mint"
Joe, not stupid at all. we all are always learning and you just learned another thing.
Mint refers to its state in relation to how it was issued by the postal authority. Any stamp issued with gum will automatically be NOT mint if the gum is gone; and most people who collect mint, collect it as Mint Never Hinged (or disturbed; MNH). This was not always so; collectors two or three generations ago hinged many things, which is one reason (age another) why so few earlier stamps are in this condition.
In nomenclature, many of us use 'mint' as equal to 'MNH' but other might use only 'MNH' to ensure there is no misunderstanding (MU); as some have already alluded to, there is also 'MH' or 'MDG' to indicate mint hinged or mint disturbed gum. There's also 'MNG as issued' to indicate the stamp never had gum.
David
Login to Like
this post
10:02:35am
The day we stop learning is the day we die!! I am getting in the habit now of not using hinges except for very cheap material. I really like the look of the black, either top or center loading, mounting. And I would never hinge a stamp that has never been hinged before, regardless of the value of the stamp. But on most material the back of the stamp doesn't bother me but I try not to make it worse. I know some stamps that were not really meant to be used as postage were not gummed. My BC#1 was never gummed and, as far as I've been able to learn, was never meant to be used as postage - sort of like a test copy. Also some US material was not gummed - the Farley stuff for example. But you seem to be saying the Penny Black wasn't gummed. I have one used copy without gum, of course, but I always thought they were originally gummed. No mention is made in my Scott's about them being released un-gummed.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Slight correction , the penny black was the worlds first adhesive stamp, yes it was gummed (gum Arabic). The confusion arises because it was issued imperf.
Login to Like
this post
Victor,
thanks for the correction; i've revised my post to reflect real stamps. Appreciate it.
Login to Like
this post
and, like Joe says, we keep learning
Login to Like
this post
12:17:28am
" .... . As I've said a few times, it's the front of the stamp that interests
me, ..."
Bravissimo ! ! !
Although it seems like you walked that back a bit in the later post.
I agree with that pretty much as well.
I prefer neat generally unobtrusive postally canceled when possible.
But with nearly 800,000 postage stamps collectable, plus far too
many interesting variations or errors possible, some of which are
simply not, and never will be, available postally cancelled, some
compromise had to be made as to "Mint" and the gum applied.
So I will seek which of the two states is available and affordable,
using hinges for just about all of them.
I get just about as much pleasure from either condition, and at
my age, I've not got that much time left to obsess over the
"never hinged" fad.
I think of myself in the J. G. Wentworth commercial with the
Viking horn cap on my head sing along, and substitute
"Collerction" for "Money.
Sing along with me
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
07:50:38pm
I've always thought unused stamps were in fact used stamps, uncancelled stamps sweated off a letter or package.
I assume this is still correct?
Pleast keep your response to the question above and not meta discussion. For meta discussion please start another thread!
Login to Like
this post
re: Unused Stamps
I don't think the term "meta discussion" is what you think it is - however.....
In response to your question;
If a stamp was sent thru the postal system, it is a used stamp regardless if it has been cancelled or not.
If a stamp was affixed to an envelope/package that did not go thru the mailstream, is may be unused if you remove it but it is not mint.
If a stamp has passed thru the mailstream without a visible cancel, it MAY STILL have been cancelled with UV dye which might not be visible to the naked eye.
Now, is there a specific reason why you are asking?
Login to Like
this post
08:44:58pm
re: Unused Stamps
""Now, is there a specific reason why you are asking?""
Yes, I assume this is correct, as used stamp in any case!
Login to Like
this post
re: Unused Stamps
From "The Language of Stamp Collecting by David Rennie"
Unused:- Dealers' or auctioneers' term for a stamp having no cancellation upon it or gum on the back. Such stamps may have been through the post and failed to have received a cancellation, or sometimes may be mint stamps which have been cleaned up. Sometimes used for a mint stamp in poor condition or with very little gum remaining.
Although in my youth, about the time of the Roman invasion of UK, we always considered a stamp that had not gone through the mail as unused, but in those days most stamps had postal markings as the post office, despite the huge amount of mail managed to frank most without resorting to sharpies.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
10 Oct 2022
09:49:20pm
re: Unused Stamps
I must be really stupid but I always assumed if a stamp had never been used (unused) it must be mint, i.e., the two terms mean the same thing!! I guess I still have a lot to learn about stamp collecting!! So if a stamp has no cancellation because it was never used but someone has stupidly removed it's gum we don't call it MNG (mint no gum) anymore!! I really don't understand! What about value of MNG compared to "unused"?
Login to Like
this post
re: Unused Stamps
I’ve never heard about UV dye used for cancellations, and there really is no way that ordinary mortals can know if a stamp was used for postage and not cancelled, or if the gum was soaked off intentionally or accidentally.
I avoid “MNG” and “Unused” stamps like I avoid surprise inheritances of a million dollars from distant cousins I didn’t even know I had, even if all I have to do is send a couple of thousand dollars to a bank in Eritrea to cover the cost of paperwork. I still regret buying an expensive but hard-to find-copy of Italy Scott #341, picturing a combat medic comforting a wounded soldier.
I can’t look at that stamp without remembering that it has no gum! That’s stupid, I know, but….
Bob
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
11 Oct 2022
07:29:34am
re: Unused Stamps
I know this doesn't contribute much to the conversation but with some very early stamps early collectors got rid of gum because it dried out, cracked and partially destroyed or harmed the stamp. As I've said a few times, it's the front of the stamp that interests me, not the back. Of course I don't want thins. Bits of hinges and pencil marks are fine. All of this talk about the difference between MNG and used is not that important to me as a collector.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Unused Stamps
"I always assumed if a stamp had never been used (unused) it must be mint"
Joe, not stupid at all. we all are always learning and you just learned another thing.
Mint refers to its state in relation to how it was issued by the postal authority. Any stamp issued with gum will automatically be NOT mint if the gum is gone; and most people who collect mint, collect it as Mint Never Hinged (or disturbed; MNH). This was not always so; collectors two or three generations ago hinged many things, which is one reason (age another) why so few earlier stamps are in this condition.
In nomenclature, many of us use 'mint' as equal to 'MNH' but other might use only 'MNH' to ensure there is no misunderstanding (MU); as some have already alluded to, there is also 'MH' or 'MDG' to indicate mint hinged or mint disturbed gum. There's also 'MNG as issued' to indicate the stamp never had gum.
David
Login to Like
this post
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
11 Oct 2022
10:02:35am
re: Unused Stamps
The day we stop learning is the day we die!! I am getting in the habit now of not using hinges except for very cheap material. I really like the look of the black, either top or center loading, mounting. And I would never hinge a stamp that has never been hinged before, regardless of the value of the stamp. But on most material the back of the stamp doesn't bother me but I try not to make it worse. I know some stamps that were not really meant to be used as postage were not gummed. My BC#1 was never gummed and, as far as I've been able to learn, was never meant to be used as postage - sort of like a test copy. Also some US material was not gummed - the Farley stuff for example. But you seem to be saying the Penny Black wasn't gummed. I have one used copy without gum, of course, but I always thought they were originally gummed. No mention is made in my Scott's about them being released un-gummed.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Unused Stamps
Slight correction , the penny black was the worlds first adhesive stamp, yes it was gummed (gum Arabic). The confusion arises because it was issued imperf.
Login to Like
this post
re: Unused Stamps
Victor,
thanks for the correction; i've revised my post to reflect real stamps. Appreciate it.
Login to Like
this post
re: Unused Stamps
and, like Joe says, we keep learning
Login to Like
this post
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
16 Oct 2022
12:17:28am
re: Unused Stamps
" .... . As I've said a few times, it's the front of the stamp that interests
me, ..."
Bravissimo ! ! !
Although it seems like you walked that back a bit in the later post.
I agree with that pretty much as well.
I prefer neat generally unobtrusive postally canceled when possible.
But with nearly 800,000 postage stamps collectable, plus far too
many interesting variations or errors possible, some of which are
simply not, and never will be, available postally cancelled, some
compromise had to be made as to "Mint" and the gum applied.
So I will seek which of the two states is available and affordable,
using hinges for just about all of them.
I get just about as much pleasure from either condition, and at
my age, I've not got that much time left to obsess over the
"never hinged" fad.
I think of myself in the J. G. Wentworth commercial with the
Viking horn cap on my head sing along, and substitute
"Collerction" for "Money.
Sing along with me
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.