Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
http://ie.ebid.net/for-sale/35c-sg-97-w-pl-5-used-cat-131296406.htm
(Modified by Moderator on 2014-08-25 07:32:00)
Login to Like
this post
Well this is getting better.I have contacted SG on the Helpline and this is what I'm told,and I quote
ear Anton,
Thank you for your email and for contacting Stanley Gibbons, we would be delighted to assist you!
Our specialists have reviewed your query and the scans that you provided.
In this instance, we believe this item to be SG84.
We hope that this information helps?
Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require any further assistance.
Kind regards,
Amy Pugsley
Stanley Gibbons Customer Support
Now if you go to the above link and look at the 3 scans you tell me is that SG:84???.SG:84 has small white letters.!
Could you please let me know if anyone has seen a stamp like this ?Thank you.
Login to Like
this post
I have looked at this in my old Stanley Gibbons British Commonwealth catalogue. It seems to me that Gibbons have mis-identified it and the seller is rather hopeful.
This looks like SG 97 (with hyphen; Plate 5). The watermark is not an error but is W20 (2 roses, 1 shamrock and a thistle).
As for the seller's interpretation of a half inverted watermark (the roses): I would have thought this is due to slight variations on the dandy roll.
Perhaps, the seller should have been more specific in his question to Gibbons and queried the top part of the watermark (the roses) to get them to open their eyes and offer an explanation. They can at times be rather lazy with these sort of queries.
Login to Like
this post
You are quite right,however the normal Watermark has the rosettes pointing downwards not upwards.That' why I have given the normal watermark in the scan as well.
Login to Like
this post
Sorry, you replied while I was editing my reply. Please note my edited comment above.
By the way, I'd only be too pleased to be proved wrong.
Login to Like
this post
After some more scans:
Amy Pugsley (Stanley Gibbons)
Sep 02 11:19
Dear Anton,
Thank you for your reply and for further scans.
Our specialists have reviewed these and believe this to be the standard SG97.
We hope that this helps?
Please do let us know if you have any further questions.
Well I have never seen a standard SG:97 wityh that kind of WMK,have you ???
Login to Like
this post
I've made inquiries about this anomaly. One comment I've had back is.....
"The roses in the watermark do appear to be inverted, I've never seen this before. I would love to see the stamp first hand or at least have a high resolution scan of the back.
I'm very suspicious about it and having a hard look it appears the top ¼ has been overlayed.
If you look at your scan you will hopefully see what I mean."
There does in fact seem to be a visible line at the top of the stamp on both the front and back scans.
Have you been sent any hi-res scans that we could use?
Login to Like
this post
Yes there would be a line across both back and front since it is in a stockcard.However I will make a PDF scan of 600DPI.
Login to Like
this post
Can't load a PDF file,so I made a 600DPI scan and sharpened it a bit:
I hope that helps.
Login to Like
this post
Thanks for the clarification and the new scan. I have passed this on for comment.
I must say there seems no evidence of jiggery pokery based on the new image. But what do I know?
Login to Like
this post
Having shown the hi-res scan, the response I got was:
"Well it certainly looks as though the roses are inverted.
I'm really intrigued but I still need convincing, it would certainly be worth getting an RPS certificate.
Fingers crossed it's as it seems."
I think this has caused a lot of head scratching. What bothers me is Stanley Gibbons rather feeble response. Okay, if they consider this to be a "standard SG97", why not volunteer a little explanation, as to how the roses of the watermark vary.
There seems to be an in-bred laziness towards ordinary collectors in SG these days. Had the enquiry come from a prominent dealer or high profile collector, perhaps things may have been different.
Login to Like
this post
How much would one of these certificates be I wonder ??
Login to Like
this post
I'd imagine that there are other members here who would be better placed to answer. Much depends on who the expertising body is, whether they charge a percentage of it's catalogue value (bit difficult if it isn't even known). Or will they charge a fixed price. Is the 'body' providing the service acknowledged by the philatelic community? Note there are certain certification bodies/individuals who have a record of issuing bad certs.
Another question needs to be raised: why doesn't the seller get this expertised? Too lazy? Too poor? Not actually convinced himself?
Will he refund your money if a certificate paid for by you, comes back 'negative'?
Finally, are you in a position to have this looked at by a club or preferably a study group? The benefit here is that the strength of other's opinions might guide your decision whether to submit it or not.
Login to Like
this post
I have only bought this recently with a lot of other stamps and paid € 45.00 for the lot.I have since been advised that a RPS Cert should be about £ 50.00 but if further expertise is required it could cost substantially more, whatever that means.Now if this is indeed an unknown Wmk how can anyone get further expertise ? Anyway I'm going to go onto the RPS site tomorrow and see what's what.Thanks for the response.At least I know I'm not imagining things.I've been looking at stamps since '72 and have never seen one like it.
Login to Like
this post
Well you kept that under your hat. So it wasn't a case of risking quite a lot of money on an unknown!
To my eyes you may have an absolute steal. Even if it's not what you hope it is, you won't need to beat yourself up about it.
Login to Like
this post
Auctions
I came across this in a recent purchase from Delcampe.SG: 97,1865/7,6d Lilac.This issue,amongst others,is known for "Watermark Errors".I have the Specialized Cat but this is not mentioned and I cannot find anything anywhere else.Has anyone come across another one like this ??
http://ie.ebid.net/for-sale/35c-sg-97-w-pl-5-used-cat-131296406.htm
(Modified by Moderator on 2014-08-25 07:32:00)
Login to Like
this post
Auctions
re: Unknown Watermark ???
Well this is getting better.I have contacted SG on the Helpline and this is what I'm told,and I quoteear Anton,
Thank you for your email and for contacting Stanley Gibbons, we would be delighted to assist you!
Our specialists have reviewed your query and the scans that you provided.
In this instance, we believe this item to be SG84.
We hope that this information helps?
Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require any further assistance.
Kind regards,
Amy Pugsley
Stanley Gibbons Customer Support
Now if you go to the above link and look at the 3 scans you tell me is that SG:84???.SG:84 has small white letters.!
Could you please let me know if anyone has seen a stamp like this ?Thank you.
Login to Like
this post
re: Unknown Watermark ???
I have looked at this in my old Stanley Gibbons British Commonwealth catalogue. It seems to me that Gibbons have mis-identified it and the seller is rather hopeful.
This looks like SG 97 (with hyphen; Plate 5). The watermark is not an error but is W20 (2 roses, 1 shamrock and a thistle).
As for the seller's interpretation of a half inverted watermark (the roses): I would have thought this is due to slight variations on the dandy roll.
Perhaps, the seller should have been more specific in his question to Gibbons and queried the top part of the watermark (the roses) to get them to open their eyes and offer an explanation. They can at times be rather lazy with these sort of queries.
Login to Like
this post
Auctions
re: Unknown Watermark ???
You are quite right,however the normal Watermark has the rosettes pointing downwards not upwards.That' why I have given the normal watermark in the scan as well.
Login to Like
this post
re: Unknown Watermark ???
Sorry, you replied while I was editing my reply. Please note my edited comment above.
By the way, I'd only be too pleased to be proved wrong.
Login to Like
this post
Auctions
re: Unknown Watermark ???
After some more scans:
Amy Pugsley (Stanley Gibbons)
Sep 02 11:19
Dear Anton,
Thank you for your reply and for further scans.
Our specialists have reviewed these and believe this to be the standard SG97.
We hope that this helps?
Please do let us know if you have any further questions.
Well I have never seen a standard SG:97 wityh that kind of WMK,have you ???
Login to Like
this post
re: Unknown Watermark ???
I've made inquiries about this anomaly. One comment I've had back is.....
"The roses in the watermark do appear to be inverted, I've never seen this before. I would love to see the stamp first hand or at least have a high resolution scan of the back.
I'm very suspicious about it and having a hard look it appears the top ¼ has been overlayed.
If you look at your scan you will hopefully see what I mean."
There does in fact seem to be a visible line at the top of the stamp on both the front and back scans.
Have you been sent any hi-res scans that we could use?
Login to Like
this post
Auctions
re: Unknown Watermark ???
Yes there would be a line across both back and front since it is in a stockcard.However I will make a PDF scan of 600DPI.
Login to Like
this post
Auctions
re: Unknown Watermark ???
Can't load a PDF file,so I made a 600DPI scan and sharpened it a bit:
I hope that helps.
Login to Like
this post
re: Unknown Watermark ???
Thanks for the clarification and the new scan. I have passed this on for comment.
I must say there seems no evidence of jiggery pokery based on the new image. But what do I know?
Login to Like
this post
re: Unknown Watermark ???
Having shown the hi-res scan, the response I got was:
"Well it certainly looks as though the roses are inverted.
I'm really intrigued but I still need convincing, it would certainly be worth getting an RPS certificate.
Fingers crossed it's as it seems."
I think this has caused a lot of head scratching. What bothers me is Stanley Gibbons rather feeble response. Okay, if they consider this to be a "standard SG97", why not volunteer a little explanation, as to how the roses of the watermark vary.
There seems to be an in-bred laziness towards ordinary collectors in SG these days. Had the enquiry come from a prominent dealer or high profile collector, perhaps things may have been different.
Login to Like
this post
Auctions
re: Unknown Watermark ???
How much would one of these certificates be I wonder ??
Login to Like
this post
re: Unknown Watermark ???
I'd imagine that there are other members here who would be better placed to answer. Much depends on who the expertising body is, whether they charge a percentage of it's catalogue value (bit difficult if it isn't even known). Or will they charge a fixed price. Is the 'body' providing the service acknowledged by the philatelic community? Note there are certain certification bodies/individuals who have a record of issuing bad certs.
Another question needs to be raised: why doesn't the seller get this expertised? Too lazy? Too poor? Not actually convinced himself?
Will he refund your money if a certificate paid for by you, comes back 'negative'?
Finally, are you in a position to have this looked at by a club or preferably a study group? The benefit here is that the strength of other's opinions might guide your decision whether to submit it or not.
Login to Like
this post
Auctions
re: Unknown Watermark ???
I have only bought this recently with a lot of other stamps and paid € 45.00 for the lot.I have since been advised that a RPS Cert should be about £ 50.00 but if further expertise is required it could cost substantially more, whatever that means.Now if this is indeed an unknown Wmk how can anyone get further expertise ? Anyway I'm going to go onto the RPS site tomorrow and see what's what.Thanks for the response.At least I know I'm not imagining things.I've been looking at stamps since '72 and have never seen one like it.
Login to Like
this post
re: Unknown Watermark ???
Well you kept that under your hat. So it wasn't a case of risking quite a lot of money on an unknown!
To my eyes you may have an absolute steal. Even if it's not what you hope it is, you won't need to beat yourself up about it.
Login to Like
this post