 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
05-11-2009, 12:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Scott is correct, but the number of stamps that fall into that gem category is extremely small. Nearly all stamps typically transacted have at minimum small flaws, and often are poorly centered with narrow margins. And these sell for a fraction of catalog.
Scott 8a is an early 1850's stamp and quite scarce. Of course if it is a gem PSE 98 it is going to sell for a huge premium. But maybe 1 in 10,000 examples would fall into that category. You are citing a high end extreme, and that area of any market is always in high demand. Please note each of my paragraphs begins with "Scott" but are entirely unrelated. Last edited by barrysloate; 05-11-2009 at 12:09 PM. 
|
|
#2
05-11-2009, 12:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I can relate, I am sitting on 10s of thousands of dollars in face value stamps from the 60s-70s. I have thoughta about going through them but I just don't think it's worth the time as I have yet to hear from anyone that there is anything worth a thing. Most are 6,8 10 or 12 cents, but damn sheet after sheet adds up to a huge value fast.
I found some neat baseball and football sheets from 69 that are probably worth more as a sports collectible then as stamps. How I wish my grandmother collected cards or almost anything aside from stamps but that and coins were the in thing then.... James G
|
|
#3
05-11-2009, 12:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
James- when I was growing up in the late 1950's and early 1960's the big thing was Proof Sets. Every year my dad would send away to the Mint for a bunch of them. We felt certain they were going to be really valuable one day.
If he only took the same amount of money and bought boxes of baseball card wax packs and put them away unopened. But nobody ever thought of doing that. And that's why they are so valuable today.
|
|
#4
05-11-2009, 04:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think maybe the term face value was misused. Maybe he meant book value. If it was face value, then the collection is worth at least that much - I believe the post office will take it back and pay you at face value.
|
|
#6
05-11-2009, 06:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
This used to be true, you could get cash or current stamps. As far as I know that all changed as on 2009 they will no longer do that.
Some stamps are damn nice, its kinda a shame no one really cares anymore. James G
|
|
#7
05-11-2009, 06:54 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
There's an active market in below-face value postage. The Post Office has no use for all those scuzzy part-sheets of 13 cent stamps with the gum missing. My dear, late father-in-law, however, delighted in the thought that he was putting one over on Uncle Sam by paying only 90 cents on the dollar for postage stamps on the secondary market. Bill
|
|
#8
05-11-2009, 07:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Back in the Day
When I used to do card store visits for my dealings in the 80's -- many of my better friends had combo card/stamp/coin stores. A good trade off; they'd let me look through NWPS (New Purchases) and I would teach them things they might not always know.
However; I did learn a few things. 1) Stamps bought over the counter were purchased at approximately 10 percent of catalog (that is; if the dealer were interested) 2) Unused postage was bought at 75-80 percent of face. Yes; bought at less than face. What I remember; but could not google. Supposedly; there was a big lawsuit between Greg Manning Auctioneers (who later owned Teletrade) and Scott's catalog when Scott lowered the prices in their catalog to reflect more of the reality of the real "market" rather than a market based on this purchasing of stamps at 10 percent. I heard this a couple of times but never saw anything. A link to a story or the suit about this would be great. A google using the terms Greg Manning and Lawsuit brings up fascinating links which are not germane to this discussion. In other words; unless you have a real scarcity -- take a reasonable offer and move on Rich
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
