Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Login to Like
this post
In your example, since the stamps never saw postal duty, no, they are not used.
Login to Like
this post
08:45:32pm
Used means that the stamp was used to prepay the fee to the postal agency for the service involved. A stamp that passed through the mails but did not receive a postal cancellation (A skip ) is still used and it is illegal to remove the stamp and use it on a second envelope. At one time I read something about being able to take a stamped un-mailed envelope and have an exchange but I am not sure of the details or if that remains in effect.
For instance a company using somewhat automated mail addressing and stamp application
equipment might run off a thousand envelopes to carry some info to customers, but realize that 500 were duplicates. So the boob who made the mistake would be able to go to the local post office and trade the un-mailed stamps on the envelopes for replacements. I suppose that losing 500 envelopes that cost about one cent a piece is better than losing the value of 500 un-used stamps.
If a skip is removed and cleaned properly, to me it is still used, but some people might consider it as unused without gum.
As a friend used to say quite often "Let your conscience be your guide."
Login to Like
this post
Charlie is correct. However, since the statement was that the envelopes were never mailed, the stamps have not been used. I believe they can be soaked and then attached to another envelope and then submitted to the post office, or left as is and mailed. If the envelopes are not addressed, just add the address. If already addressed, put a label over the old one and write in the new one.
If soaked off the envelope and added to a collection, some will consider them to be unused without gum. Others will consider them used if they are modern stamps since the gum will be of importance.
Login to Like
this post
Clayton, Michael and Charlie are both correct, which leads us to putting your stamps in some nether category. They did not see postal duty, so they are not used, but they are no longer with gum, so they are not mint. They would need to be soaked to be called unused no gum (many conventions might allow one to call them mint no gum after soaking, but that strikes me as just plain misdescription).
Login to Like
this post
07:40:36am
Yes, I should have suggested simply using an address label myself especially if the problem only involves a few envelopes.
A mass mailer might consider that unwieldy for a large lot of envelopes.
Actually for regular correspondents with whom I expect to be sending mail over a period of time, I will usually run off a sheet or half sheet of addresses on regular paper and as needed, cut them apart, attach the label with a dab of glue and then cover it with a clear, wide piece of Scotch Tape so that it is not only attached firmly but the coating protects the address from damage that might make the address unreadable.
This also has the advantage that the address labels I create are usually "copy and pasted" from the internet message that started the correspondence and therefore is in the correspondent's own format as to street, city, post code and nation. As most experienced traders know some foreign addresses have some peculiar sub info that describes the actual destination.
Addressee's Name
Room (10), Bldg (C-9)
Alakahikihou Shopping Complex,
Street address,
Post Code, City, and Country
or
Addressee's Name,
#402 C, 2nd floor,
13th Cross, 3rd Main,
Minor town, 5th Block,
Major City, Post Code, Country
One correspondent with whom I've traded used stamps for some time has something like "Behind Wahoo Hill" included as a part of his address. ( Of course, I have concealed the actual numbers and names for obvious reasons, but they are some actual formats that I send mail to regularly. )
But, I digress.
Here are what I think are the rules under which the USPS can exchange uncancelled, un-mailed stamped envelopes for postal credit. Unfortunately the first quote #9.1.7 is seemingly contradicted by the sentence in 9.1.8.
Whodathunkthat ?
After reading the section several times I have come to the definite conclusion that I have no idea whether regular stamps affixed to a regular envelope in a large lot qualifies or not.
**********************************************
Domestic Mail Manual
600 Basic Standards for All Mailing Services
604 Postage Payment Methods
9.1.6 Exchange of Spoiled and Unused Postal Matter
Unusable and spoiled stamped envelopes or stamped cards, if uncanceled, and unused precanceled stamps and stamped cards, are exchanged for other postage-stamped paper. Only the buyer may exchange stamped envelopes or aerogrammes (airletter sheets) with a printed return address and stamped cards with any printed matter of the buyer. If there is no purchaser’s printing, any responsible person may exchange them. These conditions apply:
a. Stamped envelopes (mutilated no more than is necessary to remove contents): postage value plus value of postage added because of a price increase or for additional service.
e. Stamps affixed to commercial envelopes and postcards: 90% of postage value. Envelopes and postcards must be in substantially whole condition and in lots of at least 50 of the same denomination and value.
f. Unused precanceled stamps in full coils and in full sheets redeemed from precanceled permit holders: 90% of postage value.
9.1.8 Not Exchangeable
The following postage items are not exchangeable:
a. Adhesive stamps, unless mistakes were made in buying, stamps were defective, stamps were affixed to commercial envelopes and postcards or under 9.1.7.
Login to Like
this post
I collect STAMPS I do not collect GLUE
Login to Like
this post
Redneck, I wholeheartedly agree. Many people value the gum more than the stamp itself but I never see them mounting their stamps with the back showing. It use to be common for people to soak the gum off because it only causes problems. A pre 1930's stamp that catalogs for $100 will on average will be valued at $50 unused (no gum) $100 hinged (original gum) and $200 mint NH. Which means that the perfect beautiful gum is worth 4 times more than the stamp. This had never made sense to me but of course did to the dealers that started the fad. It was not until around 1990 that Scott even listed NH
or NG, before that it did not matter that much. When the word got out that Scott was going to do this people started dumping their unused (NG) stamps. If I have two of the same stamps that have reasonable value, 1 being hinged and the other being NH. I will usually sell the NH so I can buy another hinged stamp of similar value. The gum simply does not matter much to me, I collect stamps not gum. I know what all the responses would be to this, I doubt I will re-comment on this subject as it really irritates me.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
It is just what ever you prefer in your collection. My main collection is USA MNH and it is because I think the stamps look like beautiful pictures to me with out a cancel and I like looking at shiny new gum. Just something about the shine makes it pretty to me.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
"Which means that the perfect beautiful gum is worth 4 times more than the stamp."
Also, for the classic era stamps, any stamp that is Mint Never Hinged has a very good possibility of having been regummed.
I read an article in the journal of the Germany Philatelic Society where the author was taken (blindfolded) to a regumming workshop in Germany. The author was told by his host that he had a thriving business, receiving work not just from back alley dealers and collectors, but from major dealers and auction houses from all over the world, even showing him the work orders from one or two of them as proof.
For me, it is simply not worth the extra cost for MNH, when it is more than likely you are just paying for new gum.
Ted
Login to Like
this post
"For me, it is simply not worth the extra cost for MNH, when it is more than likely you are just paying for new gum."
I have been away from general stamp collecting for a long time. In the last 30 years I've been pursuing my Franklins and anything I needed was so scarce that hinging wasn't an issue. Then this past year I decided to build up my general USA collection. After seeing that dealers pay 10% of catalog for stamps and I've been paying 20% of catalog for things I buy, I'm really not worried about resale or "investment" at all. I'm buying stamps I desire for the beauty of the faces, if the reverse has a hinge mark, so be it.
Login to Like
this post
"I'm buying stamps I desire for the beauty of the faces, if the reverse has a hinge mark, so be it."
I'm with you there. When I find a line-engraved stamp with an attractive design, great centering, vivid color, and overall fresh appearance on the face, it matters nary a whit what the backside looks like.
Ted
Login to Like
this post
There's at least one reason why the back does matter (to some). Given two nearly identical stamps, the one with the better backside is going to sell first nearly every time. Higher demand means higher value.
Login to Like
this post
If in doubt collect only postally used ( and postmarked) !
Malcolm
Login to Like
this post
"Given two nearly identical stamps, the one with the better backside is going to sell first nearly every time. Higher demand means higher value."
You're absolutely right. I myself have no qualms about buying older stamps that are hinged, nor for paying a premium for Never Hinged. However, for any issue past the cutoff date which the Scott Catalog designates for MNH pricing, I want MNH, if only for the sake of getting a better monetary return (or, for that matter, being able to sell them at all) at some future date.
I pay no heed to those who pooh-pooh the so-called Never Hinged "fad." There is nothing -- NOTHING -- in this world that costs the same no matter what the quality is, whether you are talking about coins, furniture, automobiles, or oil. Why should stamps be any different?
T
Login to Like
this post
Ted, you are right, as far as you go. The caveat is that better is not necessarily more desirable. A $2 stamp should cost more, but if I"m using it to mail a letter, I'll likely buy that 49c one, or some discounted ones that total 49c with nasty gum at 30c.
Login to Like
this post
01:05:30am
" ... However, for any issue past the cutoff date which the Scott Catalog designates for MNH pricing, I want MNH, ...."
I am sure you have something in mind that I must have missed over the years, and I generally do not pay much attention to stamps that are not postally used,
so I'll ask;"... What cutoff date for MNH pricing?...."
Login to Like
this post
Charlie, for every country, the Scott Catalogue puts a note at the beginning of the listings, like this one, for Germany:
"Catalogue values for unused stamps in this country are for Never Hinged items, beginning with Scott 722 in the regular postage section . . ."
Login to Like
this post
08:38:40am
Aha ! I must have read that a dozen times.
I guess I never paid any attention to that as I think Scott's "value" listings are a joke, and a bad joke at that. I just didn't think of that when I read "Cut off date."
Login to Like
this post
I have come across several envelopes with some stamps on them, but the letters were never mailed. So no postal marks, but on the envelope. So are they considered used?
Login to Like
this post
08:42:33pm
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
In your example, since the stamps never saw postal duty, no, they are not used.
Login to Like
this post
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
29 Aug 2012
08:45:32pm
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
Used means that the stamp was used to prepay the fee to the postal agency for the service involved. A stamp that passed through the mails but did not receive a postal cancellation (A skip ) is still used and it is illegal to remove the stamp and use it on a second envelope. At one time I read something about being able to take a stamped un-mailed envelope and have an exchange but I am not sure of the details or if that remains in effect.
For instance a company using somewhat automated mail addressing and stamp application
equipment might run off a thousand envelopes to carry some info to customers, but realize that 500 were duplicates. So the boob who made the mistake would be able to go to the local post office and trade the un-mailed stamps on the envelopes for replacements. I suppose that losing 500 envelopes that cost about one cent a piece is better than losing the value of 500 un-used stamps.
If a skip is removed and cleaned properly, to me it is still used, but some people might consider it as unused without gum.
As a friend used to say quite often "Let your conscience be your guide."
Login to Like
this post
01:03:44am
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
Charlie is correct. However, since the statement was that the envelopes were never mailed, the stamps have not been used. I believe they can be soaked and then attached to another envelope and then submitted to the post office, or left as is and mailed. If the envelopes are not addressed, just add the address. If already addressed, put a label over the old one and write in the new one.
If soaked off the envelope and added to a collection, some will consider them to be unused without gum. Others will consider them used if they are modern stamps since the gum will be of importance.
Login to Like
this post
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
Clayton, Michael and Charlie are both correct, which leads us to putting your stamps in some nether category. They did not see postal duty, so they are not used, but they are no longer with gum, so they are not mint. They would need to be soaked to be called unused no gum (many conventions might allow one to call them mint no gum after soaking, but that strikes me as just plain misdescription).
Login to Like
this post
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
30 Aug 2012
07:40:36am
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
Yes, I should have suggested simply using an address label myself especially if the problem only involves a few envelopes.
A mass mailer might consider that unwieldy for a large lot of envelopes.
Actually for regular correspondents with whom I expect to be sending mail over a period of time, I will usually run off a sheet or half sheet of addresses on regular paper and as needed, cut them apart, attach the label with a dab of glue and then cover it with a clear, wide piece of Scotch Tape so that it is not only attached firmly but the coating protects the address from damage that might make the address unreadable.
This also has the advantage that the address labels I create are usually "copy and pasted" from the internet message that started the correspondence and therefore is in the correspondent's own format as to street, city, post code and nation. As most experienced traders know some foreign addresses have some peculiar sub info that describes the actual destination.
Addressee's Name
Room (10), Bldg (C-9)
Alakahikihou Shopping Complex,
Street address,
Post Code, City, and Country
or
Addressee's Name,
#402 C, 2nd floor,
13th Cross, 3rd Main,
Minor town, 5th Block,
Major City, Post Code, Country
One correspondent with whom I've traded used stamps for some time has something like "Behind Wahoo Hill" included as a part of his address. ( Of course, I have concealed the actual numbers and names for obvious reasons, but they are some actual formats that I send mail to regularly. )
But, I digress.
Here are what I think are the rules under which the USPS can exchange uncancelled, un-mailed stamped envelopes for postal credit. Unfortunately the first quote #9.1.7 is seemingly contradicted by the sentence in 9.1.8.
Whodathunkthat ?
After reading the section several times I have come to the definite conclusion that I have no idea whether regular stamps affixed to a regular envelope in a large lot qualifies or not.
**********************************************
Domestic Mail Manual
600 Basic Standards for All Mailing Services
604 Postage Payment Methods
9.1.6 Exchange of Spoiled and Unused Postal Matter
Unusable and spoiled stamped envelopes or stamped cards, if uncanceled, and unused precanceled stamps and stamped cards, are exchanged for other postage-stamped paper. Only the buyer may exchange stamped envelopes or aerogrammes (airletter sheets) with a printed return address and stamped cards with any printed matter of the buyer. If there is no purchaser’s printing, any responsible person may exchange them. These conditions apply:
a. Stamped envelopes (mutilated no more than is necessary to remove contents): postage value plus value of postage added because of a price increase or for additional service.
e. Stamps affixed to commercial envelopes and postcards: 90% of postage value. Envelopes and postcards must be in substantially whole condition and in lots of at least 50 of the same denomination and value.
f. Unused precanceled stamps in full coils and in full sheets redeemed from precanceled permit holders: 90% of postage value.
9.1.8 Not Exchangeable
The following postage items are not exchangeable:
a. Adhesive stamps, unless mistakes were made in buying, stamps were defective, stamps were affixed to commercial envelopes and postcards or under 9.1.7.
Login to Like
this post
04:22:25pm
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
I collect STAMPS I do not collect GLUE
Login to Like
this post
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
Redneck, I wholeheartedly agree. Many people value the gum more than the stamp itself but I never see them mounting their stamps with the back showing. It use to be common for people to soak the gum off because it only causes problems. A pre 1930's stamp that catalogs for $100 will on average will be valued at $50 unused (no gum) $100 hinged (original gum) and $200 mint NH. Which means that the perfect beautiful gum is worth 4 times more than the stamp. This had never made sense to me but of course did to the dealers that started the fad. It was not until around 1990 that Scott even listed NH
or NG, before that it did not matter that much. When the word got out that Scott was going to do this people started dumping their unused (NG) stamps. If I have two of the same stamps that have reasonable value, 1 being hinged and the other being NH. I will usually sell the NH so I can buy another hinged stamp of similar value. The gum simply does not matter much to me, I collect stamps not gum. I know what all the responses would be to this, I doubt I will re-comment on this subject as it really irritates me.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
09:33:33pm
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
It is just what ever you prefer in your collection. My main collection is USA MNH and it is because I think the stamps look like beautiful pictures to me with out a cancel and I like looking at shiny new gum. Just something about the shine makes it pretty to me.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
"Which means that the perfect beautiful gum is worth 4 times more than the stamp."
Also, for the classic era stamps, any stamp that is Mint Never Hinged has a very good possibility of having been regummed.
I read an article in the journal of the Germany Philatelic Society where the author was taken (blindfolded) to a regumming workshop in Germany. The author was told by his host that he had a thriving business, receiving work not just from back alley dealers and collectors, but from major dealers and auction houses from all over the world, even showing him the work orders from one or two of them as proof.
For me, it is simply not worth the extra cost for MNH, when it is more than likely you are just paying for new gum.
Ted
Login to Like
this post
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
"For me, it is simply not worth the extra cost for MNH, when it is more than likely you are just paying for new gum."
I have been away from general stamp collecting for a long time. In the last 30 years I've been pursuing my Franklins and anything I needed was so scarce that hinging wasn't an issue. Then this past year I decided to build up my general USA collection. After seeing that dealers pay 10% of catalog for stamps and I've been paying 20% of catalog for things I buy, I'm really not worried about resale or "investment" at all. I'm buying stamps I desire for the beauty of the faces, if the reverse has a hinge mark, so be it.
Login to Like
this post
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
"I'm buying stamps I desire for the beauty of the faces, if the reverse has a hinge mark, so be it."
I'm with you there. When I find a line-engraved stamp with an attractive design, great centering, vivid color, and overall fresh appearance on the face, it matters nary a whit what the backside looks like.
Ted
Login to Like
this post
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
There's at least one reason why the back does matter (to some). Given two nearly identical stamps, the one with the better backside is going to sell first nearly every time. Higher demand means higher value.
Login to Like
this post
08:56:33pm
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
If in doubt collect only postally used ( and postmarked) !
Malcolm
Login to Like
this post
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
"Given two nearly identical stamps, the one with the better backside is going to sell first nearly every time. Higher demand means higher value."
You're absolutely right. I myself have no qualms about buying older stamps that are hinged, nor for paying a premium for Never Hinged. However, for any issue past the cutoff date which the Scott Catalog designates for MNH pricing, I want MNH, if only for the sake of getting a better monetary return (or, for that matter, being able to sell them at all) at some future date.
I pay no heed to those who pooh-pooh the so-called Never Hinged "fad." There is nothing -- NOTHING -- in this world that costs the same no matter what the quality is, whether you are talking about coins, furniture, automobiles, or oil. Why should stamps be any different?
T
Login to Like
this post
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
Ted, you are right, as far as you go. The caveat is that better is not necessarily more desirable. A $2 stamp should cost more, but if I"m using it to mail a letter, I'll likely buy that 49c one, or some discounted ones that total 49c with nasty gum at 30c.
Login to Like
this post
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
17 Mar 2016
01:05:30am
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
" ... However, for any issue past the cutoff date which the Scott Catalog designates for MNH pricing, I want MNH, ...."
I am sure you have something in mind that I must have missed over the years, and I generally do not pay much attention to stamps that are not postally used,
so I'll ask;"... What cutoff date for MNH pricing?...."
Login to Like
this post
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
Charlie, for every country, the Scott Catalogue puts a note at the beginning of the listings, like this one, for Germany:
"Catalogue values for unused stamps in this country are for Never Hinged items, beginning with Scott 722 in the regular postage section . . ."
Login to Like
this post
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
17 Mar 2016
08:38:40am
re: Are uncancelled stamps considered unused?
Aha ! I must have read that a dozen times.
I guess I never paid any attention to that as I think Scott's "value" listings are a joke, and a bad joke at that. I just didn't think of that when I read "Cut off date."
Login to Like
this post