*POLL* - what did this common used USA stamp just sell for?

Frank E Ring · Post by **Frank E Ring** » 12 May 2009 18:20

GlenStephens wrote:
And I know in 10 years time, which one I'd rather be betting on to get the higher price.

Hundreds more perfect centred 6c Columbus stamps must exist out there, but I bet no other blocks like this NWPI do.

I don't know how the situation is on your latitude, albeit I try to keep informed by reading Stamp News at the Helsinki postal library, but I see how blocks are treated up here: ripped apart to escavate one or two or three MNH stamps that the dealers can auction off to somebody with bigger wallet than brains.

The last Germeten auction in Oslo, Norway, for instance, had 95% of mint blocks auctioned off to two dealers. Come July or October, we are sure to find them split into singles at two of the other leading local auction companies.

How is the common dealer practice in Australia regarding blocks? Do collectors still collect them, or are they left to twerps who think only of money and nothing of the beauty and importance of mint units?

(And yes, I see that Glen offers them as blocks, so no need to mention that, but he also thinks they are bargains, which to me would indicate low demand).

doug2222usa · Post by **doug2222usa** » 12 May 2009 18:36

Frank, we had a big hoo-rah here several months ago, before
you joined up, when I posted a poll inquiring whether my
blocks of Australian postage dues should be broken up (and
offered on StampBoards) so that more people could own a
mint set. I had to run for cover merely for asking.

I just bought a few more blocks, and when they arrive, the
whole business will be offered AS BLOCKS in our For Sale
section.

The next dilemma is whether to offer all 9 blocks as one lot,
or to price them individually so that folks can fill in sets, if
that's the way they collect.

As I have pointed out several times, Scandinavian and Italian
used blocks seem to carry immense premiums, at least if you
study the Facit and Sassone catalogs.

grizzley · Post by **grizzley** » 12 May 2009 18:39

Just having a guess I would say 75 dollars 8)

crazygerman · Post by **crazygerman** » 12 May 2009 18:44

So my guess with 500 - 7500 AUS$ wasn't too bad

Sometimes I think that this concentration on well-centred stamps is a little too intense

But as long as I do not have to pay for it ....

pandadog28 · Post by **pandadog28** » 12 May 2009 19:11

Frank,

3 posts and your calling people twerps. I think i waited until about 30 posts before i started offending fellow Stampboarders.

Kev · Post by **Kev** » 12 May 2009 20:04

pandadog28 wrote:Frank,

3 posts and your calling people twerps. I think i waited until about 30 posts before i started offending fellow Stampboarders.

I agree!

I'm still interested in the colour I noted a few posts ago re the non listed blue.

Cheers, Kev.

lawrencem271 · Post by **lawrencem271** » 12 May 2009 21:30

fine indentation is the ultimate ?. But the perfs are uneven- do perfs not come into value at all in US?.

Post by **admin** » 12 May 2009 21:38

lawrencem271 wrote:
But the perfs are uneven - do perfs not come into value at all in US?.

Don't be silly -- CENTERING is GOD over there. The rest of the stamp is a sideshow.

The late Simon Dunkerley and I used to discuss this idiotic price - from the same set actually ... over $A100,000 paid for this thing, with an ugly top RH corner, and short perf at base, that the "cash rich - brains poor" nutters over there decided was "wonderfully centred" and paid accordingly! Who CARES about perfs?

Glen

kellysboytoy · Post by **kellysboytoy** » 12 May 2009 23:26

admin wrote:
Don't be silly -- CENTERING is GOD over there. The rest of the stamp is a sideshow.

....the "cash rich - brains poor" nutters over there decided was "wonderfully centred" and paid accordingly! Who CARES about perfs?

Glen

Not all of us care only about centering...

Now about that remark Glen.....

Post by **gavin-h** » 12 May 2009 23:44

pandadog28 wrote:Frank,

3 posts and your calling people twerps. I think i waited until about 30 posts before i started offending fellow Stampboarders.

I'm quite impressed - I don't think I could insult anyone in Norwegian (or Finnish) if my life depended on it - and I'm sure many other Stampboarders are in the same boat...

jobi01 · Post by **jobi01** » 13 May 2009 00:25

Forget about perfs and centering, collect postal stationery entires.

Frank E Ring · Post by **Frank E Ring** » 13 May 2009 02:50

pandadog28 wrote:3 posts and your calling people twerps. I think i waited until about 30 posts before i started offending fellow Stampboarders.

And marketing VPs wonder why their television commercials don't hit home... pandadog, Kev, and gavin-h: I honestly did not mean to offent any Stampboarders, and I am sorry if so has happened.

But if I did annoy somebody who routinely is splitting classical mint blocks into singles for the sake of making a buck, then I feel all fine and dandy about it.

Any breaking up of classical large entities of stamps, I feel is like wiping out the traces of philatelic history. And I will voice my concerns over it whenever I find it appropriate. Period.

As for the amount of posts needed to qualify for foul or offensive opinions (something one of you hinted)... please have a beer on me if the culture shock was too much to digest.

kellysboytoy · Post by **kellysboytoy** » 13 May 2009 04:45

Frank E Ring wrote:

... routinely is splitting classical mint blocks into singles for the sake of making a buck, then I feel all fine and dandy about it.

Any breaking up of classical large entities of stamps, I feel is like wiping out the traces of philatelic history. And I will voice my concerns over it whenever I find it appropriate.

Gee, that could be a whole thread in itself... "To Break, or not To Break"

OttawaMike · Post by **OttawaMike** » 13 May 2009 05:27

Frank E Ring wrote:
pandadog28 wrote:3 posts and your calling people twerps. I think i waited until about 30 posts before i started offending fellow Stampboarders.
And marketing VPs wonder why their television commercials don't hit home... pandadog, Kev, and gavin-h: I honestly did not mean to offent any Stampboarders, and I am sorry if so has happened.

But if I did annoy somebody who routinely is splitting classical mint blocks into singles for the sake of making a buck, then I feel all fine and dandy about it.

Any breaking up of classical large entities of stamps, I feel is like wiping out the traces of philatelic history. And I will voice my concerns over it whenever I find it appropriate. Period.

As for the amount of posts needed to qualify for foul or offensive opinions (something one of you hinted)... please have a beer on me if the culture shock was too much to digest.

Frank, I think maybe your post was misread. I took the "twerp" (are you sure it's not "twirp"?

) remark to be directed not at Stampboarders but at those who would break up blocks, especially blocks of classics.

There have been other threads on that subject, and as I recall they reached heights of passion. I just love to make the occasional post to the effect of "Let 'er rip!" just to see the reaction of our most strident members. I believe at one point I gave a suggestion that selvedge could be removed. Clearly a lesser offence. I believe I was called the "Anti-Christ". The word "unclean" has also been used. "Twerp" seems rather mild, particularly as I was not the target.

Frank E Ring · Post by **Frank E Ring** » 13 May 2009 06:44

@OttawaMike: Oh yeah, selvedge removal... Many old stationery cards have been mounted on album pages with selvedges, so the way-back-then-collectors probably shaved them off their stamps too. But today's practice in auction houses, I'm told, is to rip them off before offering the stamps â€” because the MNH-collectors typically don't place bids on stamps that have appendixes.

I'll start a new thread about the occurrence of MNH with selvedges intact profiled in auction catalogues. I know for sure they are a rare sight on my latitude.

Kev · Post by **Kev** » 13 May 2009 11:19

Just to get back to the original topic in this thread - and a question I raised.

I should have looked at my Mystic Catalog at the start of this thread and even before I cast my vote.

It's the wrong colour! It should be purple! Blue is not even listed in my 2003 Scott's Specialized Catalog.

Does anyone know how the blue stamp came about? Is it a fake or a rare wrong colour?

Cheers, Kev.

OttawaMike · Post by **OttawaMike** » 13 May 2009 11:23

The colour looks to me to be well within the normal range for that stamp.

Post by **admin** » 13 May 2009 12:31

Kev wrote:
Just to get back to the original topic in this thread - and a question I raised.

I should have looked at my Mystic Catalog at the start of this thread and even before I cast my vote.

It's the wrong colour! It should be purple! Blue is not even listed in my 2003 Scott's Specialized Catalog.

Does anyone know how the blue stamp came about? Is it a fake or a rare wrong colour?

Cheers, Kev.

Kevin if you had READ the thread, you'll see your question was answered post 50 - the post AFTER after you asked it.

If you collect USA you will know this is the perfectly usual colour range for this stamp. Get a real catalogue and not Mystic free lists if they says otherwise. :

doug2222usa wrote:In Scott, this stamp is listed in both purple and red violet, of equal value; it is not the blue of the 1c Columbian or the ultramarine of the 4c Columbian.

And as I posted at the onset there is NOTHING WHATEVER unusual about this stamp that makes it any different from the 20 I have laying about here.

Not the colour, not any variety, no printing errors, nothing unusual about the cancel, no watermark errors (ha!) .. it was sold for $A8564 *ONLY* because of the centering.

And hey .. what member snuck in and voted for the correct answer AFTER it was announced???!!!

Kev · Post by **Kev** » 13 May 2009 12:32

OttawaMike wrote:The colour looks to me to be well within the normal range for that stamp.

Thanks Mike,

I must say that, to me, the original post of Glen's looks quite blue in comparison to the purple and dull purple.

However when I emailed it to my address I received the image as purple!!!!! and compares very well with another I copied from the internet.

Just another idiosyncrasy of computers that I do not understand???

Cheers, Kev.

Kev · Post by **Kev** » 13 May 2009 12:49

admin wrote:
Kev wrote:
Just to get back to the original topic in this thread - and a question I raised.

I should have looked at my Mystic Catalog at the start of this thread and even before I cast my vote.

It's the wrong colour! It should be purple! Blue is not even listed in my 2003 Scott's Specialized Catalog.

Does anyone know how the blue stamp came about? Is it a fake or a rare wrong colour?

Cheers, Kev.
Kevin if you had READ the thread, you'll see your question was answered post 50 - the post AFTER after you asked it.

If you collect USA you will know this is the perfectly usual colour range for this stamp. Get a real catalogue and not Mystic free lists if they says otherwise. :

doug2222usa wrote:In Scott, this stamp is listed in both purple and red violet, of equal value; it is not the blue of the 1c Columbian or the ultramarine of the 4c Columbian.
And as I posted at the onset there is NOTHING WHATEVER unusual about this stamp that makes it any different from the 20 I have laying about here.

Not the colour, not any variety, no printing errors, nothing unusual about the cancel, no watermark errors (ha!) .. it was sold for $A8564 *ONLY* because of the centering.

And hey .. what member snuck in and voted for the correct answer AFTER it was announced???!!!

Glen,
Thanks for your comments - I did read Doug's post which I took to be a comment rather than an answer, but the stamp looked blue on my computer and still does, however when I emailed it to me it came out as purple.
I do collect US and have a 2003 Scott specialized and have tried to update but postage is far too high even for a 2nd hand one. Do you have a later one for sale?
As for your final question - Not me!
Cheers, Kev.

Trent · Post by **Trent** » 13 May 2009 12:53

this stamp is explained here :
http://www.stampboards.com/images/stampauctionnetwork/?CFID=3142952&CFTOKEN=28344654

Lot 107 - #235, 6c Columbian, absolutely perfect centering within incredibly large margins, rich luxuriant color and a sharp impression, light Indianapolis oval cancel, a superb gem in every regard.If one could imagine the features needed to make the "perfect" used Columbian, they would be mathematically precise centering, huge margins, beautiful color, even perforations and a light town cancel - all of the traits this stamp possesses. That all of these marvelous attributes would converge on a single Six Cent value, which is widely regarded as the most difficult value to find in gem quality, is truly amazing. The PSE also concurs with this stamp's perfect status, assigning it the highest grade possible - Gem 100 Jumbo. No other used Columbian has graded higher than 98J. In fact, there are only two mint Columbians to grade 100J, both of which were offered in our September 2008 sale of the Westchester Collection, where they each sold for in excess of $50,000.00.A stamp that has no equal, being the finest quality used copy of any Columbian value we have ever seen. Accompanied by a 2009 PSE certificate (Gem 100 Jumbo; SMQ $860.00 for a mere 98, which is totally irrelevant on this spectacular stamp); this is the only used stamp in the entire Columbian series to receive a grade of 100, whether Jumbo or not.....CV. $22.00 ...Sold for $5,500.00

So ... the price hinges on a certain level of grading. That's a big stretch IMHO given how subjective grading can be. Is 100J really that much different / better than 95J+? What happens if a different group of experts decide it is 99J or 98J instead of 100J and can demonstrate perfectly reasonable arguments for this grading. That's leaves the value in a pretty precarious position when compared to something else that is rare because there aren't many of them.

OttawaMike · Post by **OttawaMike** » 13 May 2009 13:02

There already are two major outfits in the US doing grading, and they do come up with slightly different results. The market recognizes which one is stricter (I forget which one it is offhand) and assigns higher values to their graded stamps.

Personally, I think they pay far too little attention to short perfs and heavy cancels, but the idea is basically sound and is here to stay. (Just ask coin collectors.) Particularly as it applies to 19th century U.S. issues where exceptional copies are truly rare. The price realizations are often silly IMHO, but that's not the fault of the graders.

Post by **admin** » 13 May 2009 13:14

Trent there were over 4.7 million sold of this common 6c stamp.

Many 100s, if not 1000s of those existing are obviously exactly the same centered - mint AND used. No doubt about it.

Just that so FAR no-one has bothered to pay money to get a piece of paper saying "allegedly perfectly centered".

When 100 x 6c stamps have such a piece of paper, the value will likely be $100s each not $1000s. Still better than the $10-$20 I'd presently (as would most local dealers) sell this same stamp for as cat is only $22.

However the block of £1 Roos above, or other clearly RARE pieces will continue to rise in price.

In 5 years time if you handed me 2 Hagners - one with that Roo block, and one with FIVE x 6c used Columbians, all graded 100, and asked me which I've prefer to have, the answer is simple.

The far too rich peanut who paid $A8,564 for the used 6c will then of course greatly regret his rush of blood to the head!

So lets all get it straight.

This stamp is not 'RARE' by any stretch of that word. Right now it is simply "attractive" - and expensive.

OttawaMike · Post by **OttawaMike** » 13 May 2009 13:49

I dunno, Glen.

While the price realized is truly silly, I doubt that the number surviving in that condition would reach 3 digits. The light parcel cancel alone is exceptional. Probably more like a couple of dozen at best. But we'll never really know for sure until they all have certs, will we?

PeterS · Post by **PeterS** » 13 May 2009 13:55

I have to tell you that, if that was a nice 4d Kangaroo with the same centreing then there is absolutely NO WAY I would be paying 250 times the catalogue value for it. A premium? Sure, nicely centred are worth a bit more...but THAT much more?? Please!

I agree with Glen, with prices like that there will be more come out of the woodwork and the premium will fall. Most collectors will settle for a nice copy and spend all the extra on other stamps.

I hesitate to suggest the mania for centreing is a fad, it's been around for a while. But it does have all the hallmarks of a boom/bust scenario.

kellysboytoy · Post by **kellysboytoy** » 13 May 2009 14:12

OttawaMike wrote:There already are two major outfits in the US doing grading, and they do come up with slightly different results. The market recognizes which one is stricter (I forget which one it is offhand) and assigns higher values to their graded stamps.

Personally, I think they pay far too little attention to short perfs and heavy cancels, but the idea is basically sound and is here to stay. (Just ask coin collectors.) Particularly as it applies to 19th century U.S. issues where exceptional copies are truly rare. The price realizations are often silly IMHO, but that's not the fault of the graders.

PSE I believe is the major one. But, Mike is right there are two and they differ WILDLY, Ken Lawrence did an experiment with a stamp....gave it to both entities and one gave it a very high mark and the other ranked it nearly average....they are probably here to stay but I don't think that their prices will hold over the long haul....IMHO

Frank E Ring · Post by **Frank E Ring** » 13 May 2009 18:49

I occasionally imagine overly amazing auction results are due to either or combos of the following:

a) impatience
b) poor advice
c) money laundering

The first alternative is the avid collector who has vast financial resources, and has been searching for a certain item for so long that she doesn't care what it goes for.

The second shows how some collectors with bigger wallets than brains rely on philatelic advisors.

Advisors, however, may have hidden agendas â€” they could even be the actual sellers â€” and do not necessarily give sound advice.

pandadog28 · Post by **pandadog28** » 13 May 2009 19:03

A,B and C just about sum me up i reckon.

Post by **admin** » 13 May 2009 19:07

Frank E Ring wrote:I occasionally imagine overly amazing auction results are due to either or combos of the following:

a) impatience
b) poor advice
c) money laundering

The first alternative is the avid collector who has vast financial resources, and has been searching for a certain item for so long that she doesn't care what it goes for.

The second shows how some collectors with bigger wallets than brains rely on philatelic advisers.

Advisor's, however, may have hidden agendas â€” they could even be the actual sellers â€” and do not necessarily give sound advice.

Don't forget option #4 .. STUPIDITY!

I have a STOCKBOOK of 100s of mint and used USA Columbians, duplicated, 1c to 50c laying around. Scott cat many $1000s, and 100% untouched and original from the estate I bought it from years back, where in turn it had been untouched for decades.

There are also many "superb" centred copies in there, but at 20% Scott for the lot or $700, I do not care less, sell it, and move on ... as this numerical grading mania is a silly trend that will burn a lot of fingers.

Maybe I should mail it to Shreves.

Didge · Post by **Didge** » 13 May 2009 21:41

GlenStephens wrote:
I do know I just sold this superb MUH "ABC" Strips £1 Roo block for a lot less than that.

And I know in 10 years time, which one I'd rather be betting on to get the higher price.

Hundreds more perfect centred 6c Columbus stamps must exist out there, but I bet no other blocks like this NWPI do.

Folks,

I certainly know which I would rather have.

Tim

kellysboytoy · Post by **kellysboytoy** » 13 May 2009 21:54

Didge wrote:Folks,

I certainly know which I would rather have.

Tim

Agreed!!

Post by **admin** » 20 May 2009 01:25

As a perfect example of how many lovely centred, light cancel Columbians there are out there, I was pricing up an ancient 1890s leather album tonight, which has not had a stamp added for 100 years or so:

https://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=12383&start=0

I laughed when I saw this superb looking 5c Brown (above) in there, nestled among a pretty decent early USA 19th Century lot.

More on the $8,500 price madness in my next column - https://www.glenstephens.com/snjune09.html

My pet chimp assures me it is "JUMBO GEM 105" and assures me it worth at LEAST $10,000! 8)

I allowed 5 bucks for it, but if someone wants to extract it, wash it, send it for a grading cert and retire, well be my guest.

Glen

Frank E Ring · Post by **Frank E Ring** » 20 May 2009 03:11

Yeah, just look at what the "jumbo gem" race got me doing today: washing stamps. There's something I don't do often. This batch was $1 parcel stamps that were sticking together, and a nice soaking did them well...

...until I noticed that many of the stamps had faked backs: selvedges had been glued to the backs to cover up thins, and then sanded down until near unison thickness. Something to think about when staring blindly at margins?

I don't know if the majority of these stamps have thins because they are high denominations, and that postmaster therefore glued them into the post offices's stamp books so that they would not be lost by accident?

For this particular stamp, the faking by sanding down selvedges can to some degree fool collectors. However, these stamps must have been printed in sheets without selvedges, and the faker-pundits used selvedges of a different paper grade. How much of an issue is this type of fakes with the Australian Roos and KGV stamps?

Post by **GlenStephens** » 20 May 2009 03:18

Frank E Ring - don't forget USA stamp of this era had a "straight edge" all around the sheet of 100 in many cases.

Like this 10c green at the right -

So a LOT of copies in each 100 had at least one straight edge, so the re-perfers got VERY busy.

https://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=5631&start=50

doug2222usa · Post by **doug2222usa** » 20 May 2009 03:38

The Parcel Posts had sizeable margins at top (and one side), as
evidenced by the large-format plate blocks.

The $1 stamps are no doubt thin because someone simply pulled
them off from discarded boxes. In 2008 Scott, the loose stamp
catalogs US $45, but on cover, $1,250.

Parcel Posts afford a great trivia question -- they were printed in
panes of 45 (!), four such panes making up a complete plate
impression of 180 subjects.

For a short time, Parcel Posts could be used on ordinary mail;
I have several examples of the 1c value used on postcards.

Frank E Ring · Post by **Frank E Ring** » 20 May 2009 04:09

Thanks, doug2222usa, for explaining the margin/plating of these stamps. I notice I have a vertical corner-strip of three, in case any platers out there would want a scan.

As for the stamps being hastily torn off parcels or dispatch cards, I guess it could signal that the stamps I have here once were found in the cheapest type stamp bundles available on the market.

From reading stationery cards mailed between collectors and dealers 100+ years ago, I have noticed that often the collectors were asking prices or shipments of "the cheapest grade" available. I have often wondered why, and thought that they perhaps were small time dealers who sold them on to schoolboys for next-to-nothing? Or were plating the stamps? Or collected postmarks? But could it also be that they were instead small time crooks who faked damaged stamps with paper, glue, or syringes (yes Glen, I hate reperfs) â€” and made a good profit from their shady business?

doug2222usa · Post by **doug2222usa** » 20 May 2009 05:32

Except for a few selected issues of the Civil War era, there
has never been much interest in Plating U.S. stamps.

Efforts are seldom made to reconstruct sheets in the same
sense as the GB Penny Blacks and Reds, and the early
Australian issues, etc.

Even the Scott Specialized lists a negligible number of such
items, and there are no spaces in printed albums for them.

Surprisingly, it's the postal stationery collectors who pay the
most attention to tiny variations, and Scott reflects this with
a zillion varieties. I am no good at identifying them.

Our collective mania remains covers and postal history.

tooler · Post by **tooler** » 20 May 2009 08:17

That 15¢ indigo Henry Clay above, is worth more.

admin wrote:
As a perfect example of how many lovely centred, light cancel Columbians there are out there, I was pricing up an ancient 1890s leather album tonight, which has not had a stamp added for 100 years or so:

https://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=12383&start=0

I laughed when I saw this superb looking 5c Brown (above) in there, nestled among a pretty decent early USA 19th Century lot.

More on the $8,500 price madness in my next column - https://www.glenstephens.com/snjune09.html

My pet chimp assures me it is "JUMBO GEM 105" and assures me it worth at LEAST $10,000! 8)

I allowed 5 bucks for it, but if someone wants to extract it, wash it, send it for a grading cert and retire, well be my guest.

Glen

doug2222usa · Post by **doug2222usa** » 20 May 2009 08:46

That 15c Indigo has a beeeeg crease headed northwest out of
the left-hand "1".

Oh, wait, that doesn't have anything to do with centering LOL LOL.

PeterS · Post by **PeterS** » 20 May 2009 08:55

doug2222usa wrote:That 15c Indigo has a beeeeg crease headed northwest out of
the left-hand "1".

Oh, wait, that doesn't have anything to do with centering LOL LOL.

Quite right, don't let little things like creases or short perfs get in the way of grading based on centering.

Joking aside, ARE defects taken into account when determining these grades? Or is centering all that matters?

kellysboytoy · Post by **kellysboytoy** » 20 May 2009 09:42

It is my understanding that the defects do affect the grading.....but my wife says I don't understand very much.....LOL

tooler · Post by **tooler** » 20 May 2009 10:43

I wasn't so much talking about the one on that page. What I ment is the 15¢ Henry Clay Scott #227 is worth much more than that 5¢ columbian if they were both the same condition. $4.00 max for the columbian and $10.00 for the Clay, Used of course.

doug2222usa wrote:That 15c Indigo has a beeeeg crease headed northwest out of
the left-hand "1".

Oh, wait, that doesn't have anything to do with centering LOL LOL.

Global Admin · Post by **Global Admin** » 08 Apr 2019 12:42

GlenStephens wrote:$A7,500-$A10,000 4% [2 votes]

Is the correct answer for this used stamp cat $US22 in Scott!

Less than 4% of members voting got it right.

Invoice price before shipping was $US6,425 - and at the weekend exchange rate of 1.33 that came to $A8,564.

He'd be lucky to get $50 from any ozzie dealer if he sells, (more members here voted for it being worth $25-$50, but what would we know about American stamps. )

Ten years on - I wonder how the buyer for near $10,000 on today rates, for a stamp I'd GLADLY sell for 10 bucks - then and now - is feeling about his GENIUS buy?

Glen

borsac · Post by **borsac** » 08 Apr 2019 13:33

GlenStephens wrote:$A7,500-$A10,000 4% [2 votes]

Is the correct answer for this used stamp cat $US22 in Scott!

Less than 4% of members voting got it right.

Invoice price before shipping was $US6,425 - and at the weekend exchange rate of 1.33 that came to $A8,564.

He'd be lucky to get $50 from any ozzie dealer if he sells, (more members here voted for it being worth $25-$50, but what would we know about American stamps. )

---------------

*POLL* - what did this common used USA stamp just sell for?

Under $A25 0% [ 0 ]
$A25-$A50 6% [ 3 ]
$A50-$A100 6% [ 3 ]
$A100-$A500 16% [ 8 ]
$A500-$A1,000 16% [ 8 ]
$A1,000-$A5,000 16% [ 8 ]
$A5,000- $A7,500 16% [ 8 ]
$A7,500-$A10,000 4% [ 2 ]
Above $A10,000 22% [ 11 ]
None Of The Above 0% [ 0 ]

Total votes : 51

----------------------------

I do know I just sold this superb MUH "ABC" Strips £1 Roo block for a lot less than that.

And I know in 10 years time, which one I'd rather be betting on to get the higher price.

Hundreds more perfect centred 6c Columbus stamps must exist out there, but I bet no other blocks like this NWPI do.

I reckon these £1 NWPI Roos would be tracking a lot better.....

Global Admin · Post by **Global Admin** » 08 Apr 2019 14:00

borsac wrote:
I reckon these £1 NWPI Roos would be tracking a lot better.....

Agree! Any reports on how the Brainless American Dope who spent near $A10,000 in today's money on this $10 stamp, if it were in my stock, (then and now) which had ugly corners, is feeling today?

That cretin paid near THREE HUNDRED TIMES full Scott catalogue value.

https://www.glenstephens.com/snjune09.html

TEN years back Charles Ponzi and that idiot were linked in one of my columns - every word there has come true -

And let this be a history lesson to all Barnum and Bailey hucksters -

Charles Ponzi died penniless in a charity hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on January 18, 1949.

At the time I used this block as an example. A superb centred, fresh MUH original gum Block of 6 £1 Roos with Certificate both being in ABC setting vertical strips 3. That I had just sold for a LOT less than the 6c Columbus got. About HALF that figure in fact.

The rest of us do not need a number grade piece of paper to tell us this is superbly centred. AND has nice corners.

My exact words from 10 years back were -

"In 5 years time if you handed me 2 Hagners - one with that Roo block of 6, and one with FIVE x 6¢ used Columbians, all beautifully centred, and asked me which I've prefer to have, the answer is simple. The Roos every time.

Indeed using the SAME sale, you could have bought about FIVE of the lovely VFU $3 Columbus shown above, for around the same money as the single 6¢ got. Quite crazy."

Those words are just as true today.

I'd still sell the used 6c for about 10 bucks, and in fact do in near every collection of USA I offer.

Glen