Looks regummed to me. The tips on your first picture show some build up on the paper fibers.
Edit
There appears to be gum build up in the perf holes. Can you post a better scan.
What are the inclusions on the gum side, hinges?
If it is regummed it is very expertly regummed. I don't think it is but that is just my opinion
From the pictures provided, it is hard to say if it is regummed. Is it possible that there are some perf repairs at the top?
Please provide a better image, something odd about the perf(s) above the crown?
I returned!
Here you go....
It really looks fine to me. If it were regummed I would have expected the fibers to be much more gummed together. It's just my opinion but I would be happy with the stamp. Matter of fact I would love to have the stamp since the only ones in the series that I don't have mint is the $4 and $5.
Thanks for the new image. It is regummed. Looking at the face of the stamp the top and left perfs show clumping of glue on the perf tips and in the space between the perfs. Since you posted this, you seem to to have a suspicion it may be regummed. What do you think?
If you are still not convinced send it in for a cert, that would make sense considering the value of the stamp.
It also looks like heavy hinging in the back, could be covering a thin, just saying.
I guess I'd really have to see the stamp to know for sure, sorry if I misled you! What does regumming do to the value of the stamp? I'm sure most of us have the odd regummed stamp in our collection, I would be more concerned about a thin if there is one!
My understanding is that if a mint stamp is re-gummed, it’s valued as if it is an “unused” stamp, a sort of philatelic unicorn, neither mint hinged (MH) nor mint never-hinged (MNH) and with less value than a used stamp. Classic MNH Canadian stamps routinely carry premiums of 100% or more.
It is certainly curious why a re-gummed stamp like this one would ever have been hinged, since hinging destroys any premium. I don’t think that the stamp is re-gummed (I just don’t see any evidence of re-gumming), and it seems clear that a long time ago, on at least two occasions, collectors stuck the stamp in albums, using hinges, without a thought about potential value down a long road.
Bob
"I don’t think that the stamp is re-gummed (I just don’t see any evidence of re-gumming)"
Here is a scan from "The Philatelic Book of Secrets, Vol.2" by The Stamp Market Quarterly, 2015. The glue is applied before the sheet of stamps gets perforated, so there should not be glue on the paper fibers.
Can you post a scan of this stamp with another from the same series showing the gum side.
It is obvious that John has his doubts about this stamp or he would not have asked the question.
Hinging is often done to cover up thins.
Perhaps watermarking would be a good idea?
Welcome back Camel!
I can't really tell about the gum, perhaps you should send it in for a cert.!
I really don't see any evidence this stamp is re-gummed. The small fibers seem to be free and clear but to be 100% sure you have to actually have the stamp in hand. If I wasn't recovering from so many financial disasters in December the stamp wouldn't be available to discuss, John's price is excellent and if it's still there at the end of the month I'll personally let you know if it's re-gummed or not because I will have the stamp in my grubby little hands checking it out. I am replacing any used Jubilee's with mint and I only have the $4 and $5 left to go. My used copies are already spoken for by someone here who has other material I want!!
I don't believe it is regummed, either. I think the funky perfs above the crown are from the hinge being removed and taking some of the gum and paper with it.
The parallel line above the red one appears to be a crease.
Update....stamp has been sold. Buyer is aware of all the "issues".
BTW...I appreciate everyone's input.
re: Does this look regummed?
Looks regummed to me. The tips on your first picture show some build up on the paper fibers.
Edit
There appears to be gum build up in the perf holes. Can you post a better scan.
What are the inclusions on the gum side, hinges?
re: Does this look regummed?
If it is regummed it is very expertly regummed. I don't think it is but that is just my opinion
re: Does this look regummed?
Please provide a better image, something odd about the perf(s) above the crown?
I returned!
re: Does this look regummed?
Here you go....
re: Does this look regummed?
It really looks fine to me. If it were regummed I would have expected the fibers to be much more gummed together. It's just my opinion but I would be happy with the stamp. Matter of fact I would love to have the stamp since the only ones in the series that I don't have mint is the $4 and $5.
re: Does this look regummed?
Thanks for the new image. It is regummed. Looking at the face of the stamp the top and left perfs show clumping of glue on the perf tips and in the space between the perfs. Since you posted this, you seem to to have a suspicion it may be regummed. What do you think?
If you are still not convinced send it in for a cert, that would make sense considering the value of the stamp.
It also looks like heavy hinging in the back, could be covering a thin, just saying.
re: Does this look regummed?
I guess I'd really have to see the stamp to know for sure, sorry if I misled you! What does regumming do to the value of the stamp? I'm sure most of us have the odd regummed stamp in our collection, I would be more concerned about a thin if there is one!
re: Does this look regummed?
My understanding is that if a mint stamp is re-gummed, it’s valued as if it is an “unused” stamp, a sort of philatelic unicorn, neither mint hinged (MH) nor mint never-hinged (MNH) and with less value than a used stamp. Classic MNH Canadian stamps routinely carry premiums of 100% or more.
It is certainly curious why a re-gummed stamp like this one would ever have been hinged, since hinging destroys any premium. I don’t think that the stamp is re-gummed (I just don’t see any evidence of re-gumming), and it seems clear that a long time ago, on at least two occasions, collectors stuck the stamp in albums, using hinges, without a thought about potential value down a long road.
Bob
re: Does this look regummed?
"I don’t think that the stamp is re-gummed (I just don’t see any evidence of re-gumming)"
re: Does this look regummed?
Here is a scan from "The Philatelic Book of Secrets, Vol.2" by The Stamp Market Quarterly, 2015. The glue is applied before the sheet of stamps gets perforated, so there should not be glue on the paper fibers.
Can you post a scan of this stamp with another from the same series showing the gum side.
It is obvious that John has his doubts about this stamp or he would not have asked the question.
Hinging is often done to cover up thins.
re: Does this look regummed?
Perhaps watermarking would be a good idea?
re: Does this look regummed?
Welcome back Camel!
re: Does this look regummed?
I can't really tell about the gum, perhaps you should send it in for a cert.!
re: Does this look regummed?
I really don't see any evidence this stamp is re-gummed. The small fibers seem to be free and clear but to be 100% sure you have to actually have the stamp in hand. If I wasn't recovering from so many financial disasters in December the stamp wouldn't be available to discuss, John's price is excellent and if it's still there at the end of the month I'll personally let you know if it's re-gummed or not because I will have the stamp in my grubby little hands checking it out. I am replacing any used Jubilee's with mint and I only have the $4 and $5 left to go. My used copies are already spoken for by someone here who has other material I want!!
re: Does this look regummed?
I don't believe it is regummed, either. I think the funky perfs above the crown are from the hinge being removed and taking some of the gum and paper with it.
The parallel line above the red one appears to be a crease.
re: Does this look regummed?
Update....stamp has been sold. Buyer is aware of all the "issues".
BTW...I appreciate everyone's input.