Postage Stamp Chat Board & Stamp Bulletin Board Forum
 

As a newcomer to these forums I noticed that one (and presumably more than one) member uses stamp hinges to mount mint stamps. Candidly I do not care what anyone does with their stamps, but I do wonder if everyone is aware of the history behind the swing to MNH.

Some 40 years ago (or more) Stanley Gibbons listed mint and used with no differentiation between mounted and unmounted mint, but they then announced that in the future all their prices for KGVI and QEII mint issues were going to be for MNH only (or unmounted mint as they call it).

This immediately devalued virtually every mint collection in the UK (and elsewhere where Gibbons is the main reference catalogue), as there was no longer a catalogue value for two reigns mounted mint stamps.

It also faced me with the worst decision of my collecting life, as I had a very nice mounted mint GB collection in progress at the time. I decided to bite the bullet and sell the collection, and start a new one of MNH only. Fortunately I acted quickly and did not lose too much money, whereas if I had waited even another year the loss would have been far greater.

Since then, the value of mounted mint stamps has slowly but inexorably diminished against their MNH counterparts where Gibbons catalogues (and Michel catalogues) are in use.

You may say, "what`s that to me, I use Scott which catalogues mint stamps as mounted mint?" so I will make two points:

1) When (if) you ever decide to sell your mounted mint collection, dealers from Gibbons (and Michel) using countries will have little interest in it so your selling options are limited.

2) More importantly, I am quite certain that Scott will fall into line in future and list MNH stamps. When that happens (and I do mean when not if), even if they also still list mounted mint, the values of such mounted stamps will drop considerably.

This is because every collector in every field of collecting always tries to buy the best possible specimens for their collection, be it fine art, antique silver, stamps, etc. and when mounted and MNH stamps are listed, collectors will be irrresistibly drawn to the MNH as being the better specimen.

Now I know we all collect for our own satisfaction, but it is a rare collector who does not keep an eye on the possible future realisation of their collection should they decide to sell, so it seems to me that MNH is the only way to go.

Of course, non-invasive stamp mounts such as Hawid and Showgard are horrendously expensive compared to the humble stamp hinge, but "Don`t spoil the ship for a ha`penny of tar" comes to mind.

Regards,

Mike.

It varies from country to country, but for most places there is a cutoff date after which it is pretty much essential (for want of a better word) to have MNH if you want to be able to re-sell them for anything above nominal value. For commonwealth countries, 1936 seems to be the date. Before that, it's up to you.

As has been pointed out frequently on the Board, paying a massive premium for a 100+ year old MUH stamp is pretty daft. You could buy a load of very tidy lightly hinged examples for the same price, and there's a very decent chance that your MUH is a re-gum anyway.

As has also been said before "If you're that fussed about the gum, why don't you display your stamps face down?"

_________________
Always on the lookout for Australian pre decimal First Day Covers.

Two points from my perspective,

Firstly, I never, ever, look at the backs of my stamps.There's nothing on them. As such, UM or MM are identical to me, and I still use stamp hinges to attach them to my album. I make a point of not buying UM stamps as I think that they are overpriced given the risks (see below!)

Secondly, I find it very hard to believe that a stamp can survive 100+ years without a hinge, certainly not in the volume that they are offered nowadays. As such,in my opinion, anyone insisting on UM stamps from earlier periods will undoubtedly end up with a large amount of re-gummed stamps.

Associated question: How many of you look at the backs of your stamps? Why does it matter to you whether they are hinged or not? It seems ludicrous to me.

Agree with you Mike about the prices, I have always wondered what will (does) happen to all the millions of Mint hinged stamps in the World. Do they just end up in collections like mine where monetary value truly is not a consideration.

I class the "value" of my collection in the enjoyment it gives me not in monetary terms, I suppose that may be different if it was actually worth anything , but as a collector of the most common World definitives there are not too many that have any real "value" so to speak.

A lot of people buy old album pages etc so not everyone goes for the absolute best, just the best they can afford.

I agree with you George I am interested in the front of the stamp, there are only two things that interest me as far as the back is concerned 1) if it is heavily hinged with unsightly marks/remains does it impact on what I see on the front of the stamp, and 2) to check watermarks.

_________________
A man might as well marry ... if he finds a good wife he will be happy ... if not, he will become a philosopher.
Collecting Greater New Guinea & Macropods (Kangaroos & Wallabies).

I agree that to buy supposedly MNH earlier than KGVI is risky at least and could be downright silly, and in any case Gibbons only specifies MNH prices for KGVI and QEII as I said in my posting.

My collection is MNH KGVI and QEII recess printed Commonwealth only, so the issue is of importance to me as to future saleability.

However as I said, it is of no concern to me what you do with your stamps, and as long as you are aware of the consequences you are quite entitled to cut them in half, lick the backs and stick them to your album pages if you so wish.

Regards,

Mike.

Everyone is entitled to collect what they wish and there is nothing wrong with MH.

What I find frustrating is that there are no SG catalog quotes for hinged KGVI and early QEII stamps, in particular the definitives, when there are obviously many examples of these stamps around.

For many other countries the cut-off to MNH only in the catalogs is much later. In Belgium and France for example, it's 1960, which, it seems to me, is a much more reasonable date.

If someone freely chooses to collect mint hinged stamps -- that's fine because it's their money.

If someone freely chooses to collect never hinged -- that is also fine, because it's their money.

If someone freely chooses to collect the world -- all the more power to them ... because it's their money.

If someone would freely rather specialize -- bravo, because it's their money.

People aren't daft for what they do or don't do that differs from our opinion of what they should be doing. The fact we're all different in some way is what makes life interesting.

Scott DOES list prices for hinged sets in the "NH period" for some items.

Here are a few examples from the 2011 catalogues:

ADEN
1937 Dhow set of 12, $1,001 for NH, $550 for hinged

CHRISTMAS ISLAND
1958 QEII first set of 10, $34.80 for NH, $15.00 for hinged
1963 set of 10, $10 for NH, $6 for hinged
1968-1970 fish set of 12, $45.50 for NH, $32.50 for hinged

GIBRALTAR 1953 QEII first set of 14, $199.85 for NH, $100 for hinged

It looks like they've started with some listing, but haven't got very serious about it yet. Most of the expensive QEII sets than one often sees hinged are not priced hinged (i.e. Falkland Islands)

_________________
- aggv
my homepage

Personally, I would rather buy nice lightly hinged high face Kangaroos than MNH. Apart from the problem of regums, the price differential is too high. Having said that, the differential is there for a reason...demand.

So, from a purely investment point of view, MNH has been the better performer over recent times. It might mean, of course, that lightly hinged has some ground to catch up and may prove the better investment going forward? Who knows?

_________________
Peter
Hawthorn - AFL Premiers 1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008.

I hate to say it, but to me mounted mint is mounted mint, regardless of if it is heavily hinged or almost invisibly hinged. After all, as the husband said to his wife, "My dear, you cannot be almost pregnant".

As a collector of only MNH, I cannot view mounted mint as anything but waste paper, although I fully recognise other collectors view them as eminently collectable.

Regards,

Mike.

Mike, if you were to collect high value Australian Kangaroos and would only accept MNH then you are in serious trouble. Nobody in their right mind purchased a £2 stamp in 1913 and didn't hinge it into their album as soon as they got it home. No stockbooks, no hagners in those days.

MNH of these arise from 2 sources, multiples that were subsequently broken up and (much more normally) German regums (cheap but very good and hard to pick). For the price of a single MNH £1 Brown and Blue First WMK, I could buy MLH copies of both the First and Third WMKs of the same stamp and have money left over.

_________________
Peter
Hawthorn - AFL Premiers 1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008.

Two phrases come to mind here Mike.

"A fool and his money are soon parted."

and ...

"A little knowledge is dangerous."

Buy what you want of course, but you are TOTALLY wrong re MUH/Unmounted mint, and folks like you are cheerfully lining the pockets of the re-gummers.

£10,000 spent today on "MUH" Roos or early GB versus £3000 for the same looking stamps lightly mounted - in 10 years will be worth possibly TWICE as much not 3 times as much - that you paid.

So YOU are the loser ... the MVLH buyer is the clear winner. THAT is the "only way to go" if % return is your goal - as it seems to be yours.

Your comments that Scott do not list unmounted prices, and that dealers like SG will not buy mounted mint, illustrate your near total lack of understanding of the stamp market.

Scott has listed MUH prices for Australia for the past 10-15 years at least.

The entire stamp world knows that a MUH 1937 sets sells for about double what a MLH set does. From Caymans or British Guiana or South Africa. It is not rocket science.

I typed this below somewhere else and it bears repeating here, as it may save one more misguided soul from themselves.

However anyone who types this nonsense is beyond saving I suspect -

"I cannot view mounted mint as anything but waste paper"

===============

NONE of the respected Committees will comment on GUM.

The RPSL, BPA, RPSL, RPSNZ etc will simply state "unused" in most cases even for *MUH* .... and generally never even mention if it HAS gum of any kind! "Unused OG" is sometimes used meaning whatever gum is there, appears original.

The stamp might have 10 hinges and be called "OG". Their job is primarily to determine the stamp's correct catalogue number and genuineness, and highlight any thins or tears etc - and they are not interested in gum, or lack of it. And will *NEVER* state anything is unmounted AFAIK -- even if you ask.

Beware of "MUH" from 'dealers' you do not know, who are members of NO leading International Trade Bodies who have strict Codes Of Ethics - or more often, beware of most sellers of *MUH* on ebay.

It often means some spiv may well be CALLING it unhinged who "forgot" to notice the hinge mark, or more likely just spent $5 to regum a $200 Kangaroo in Germany, and magically turned it into a $600 one.

The vast majority of the buyers on ebay are totally clueless in this area, and would not know a regum if it jumped up and bit them on the bum - even AFTER they get it and inspect it. Indeed - they generally leave glowing feedback for the re-gummers!

Anyone imagining 100 year old high value stamps can actually be found genuine MUH are totally kidding themselves. MAYBE 2% actually are.

Sorry, I nearly always refuse to sell top value Roos as "MUH" - as near all are regums.

Richard Juzwin showed me a £2 1st wmk at a large show, that someone well known sold him, that he had bought as "MUH" for 5 figures - that was both regummed and re-perforated.

I think Richard offered him about 10% of what he paid. Phone him and check. A $9,000 lesson for some dill.

Join that brilliant "investment" club if you wish, but I will not be supplying you!

Yes you often see LOW values in pairs etc .. as per these GB KGV I peeled off these album pages, with one MUH, and one MLH in pair. The £1 value you would NOT see MUH in such books as singles were all even a wealthy person could afford generally - and it would have been FIRMLY hinged in after that expense.

http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=13535

Please read this - we saved this dopey UK member VERY many $1,000s buying regummed "MUH" that I ID'd for him from his proud as punch photos here, as being regummed - so what does he do - he returns them for a refund, goes right out and cheerfully does it again! And AGAIN.

http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=9464

Folks like you are doubtless the proud owner of what he returned.

Good German regums are incredibly hard to pick, and 99% of collectors (and a decent chunk of dealers) cannot, which is why for 30 years I have urged folks to collect MLH pre war - or FU.

During my 30 years in stamp dealing, I have consistently said and typed this:

Anyone insisting on MUH for pre-war stamps from ANYWHERE has rocks in their head, and/or has far more money than sense.

Anyone who chooses to aim for the far earlier KGV era in MUH has twice as many rocks.

And as for KEVII and QV "MUH" high value issues .. I will not even waste words commenting on those.

FACT - It is now 74 years ago since the initial KGVI stamps were issued.

FACT - No-one then collected single stamps then without hinging them. It was in fact basically impossible to do. NO Hagners, ShowGard mounts or hingeless albums back then.

FACT - Superb re-gumming in Germany costs a few $$s a stamp. Large firms do many 1000s a day. It is quite legal.

FACT - 99% of collectors (and more than 50% of "dealers") would not be able to pick a good German re-gum if it jumped up and bit them on the posterior.

FACT - When you buy LIGHT hinged not only can you realistically hope to get complete, but in the case of Australia pre-war will cost you about one THIRD as much.

FACT - Whenever you or your family sell a fresh MLH collection, the dealer will value it as a fresh MLH set. There will be likely be an actual profit involved. The owners of 99.99999% of "MUH" collections being sold of pre-war era are given the great news they have a ton of re-gums among them. And lose their shirt. If you want to leave that distasteful legacy to your family - it is a free world of course.

FACT - If there is a differential of say 300% between light hinged and unhinged in top end Roos (as there is now for most of them) that difference WILL grow closer as the years go on. It may settle at double - who knows, but if it does the "MUH" buyer has lost a fortune compared to having bought MLH.

FACT - I have never heard of anyone paying to regum a stamp and then hinging it. Seems a pretty simple concept to grasp. Buying attractive MLH, you have that worry taken away entirely.

Seems like a no brainer to me. (Personally in this climate, Fine USED is my choice whenever anyone actually asks me - it will cost you a TON less than hinged - about $20,000 less for an Australian collection, and fox/tone less.)

A really SMART line in the sand is to decide for the QE2 era (or Post War if you prefer) collect MUH as they are pretty available, and are generally not a great deal dearer than LH. Indeed from 70s on, there is essentially no premium for MUH.

Pre-QE2 or pre-war only collect HINGED (or far wiser still - used) is my frequent advice.

Hundreds of clients over the years have thanked me for this advice, as it ensures collecting is more doable re completion, and certainly FAR more affordable.

Clearly I make MORE money selling MUH pre-war of course, and this advice above is against my best fiscal interests - but it is what I FIRMLY believe.

I've had HUNDREDS of folks selling me stamps that have been sold to them as "MUH" by shonk dealers, or the army of fly-by-nighters on ebay etc - at 3 or 4 or 5 times the hinged price.

Now we are in an era where dealers are paying over $25,000 for single MUH Roos, hinged and VFU copies of them look awful good policy, to those who have decided to follow my advice.

But, what would an experienced dealer know - stamp "investors" are always far, far smarter in my experience. Until it comes time to sell that is.

Glen Stephens


Notice any mention of hinging or otherwise on this pretty Roo pair from the Royal Collection I sold?

As I have already said, I am not collecting issues prior to GV6, so your comments about such issues are not germane to this discussion.

Sorry if this seems somewhat abrupt, but please stay on message.

Regards,

Mike.

And I would say that, on the whole, the future saleability of issues from GVI on is going to be less than that of earlier issues. So, if saleability is the primary issue, then collecting earlier (even if lightly hinged) is more likely to be the successful strategy.

_________________
Peter
Hawthorn - AFL Premiers 1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008.

Ha!

Well I guessed right it seems. You part time 'investors' are far smarter than any experienced dealer will ever be of course.

NEWSFLASH - every word of the following DOES relate to buying your beloved KGVI MUH stamps .. but the re-gummers thank you for your blind mantra that you are right, and experienced dealers are wrong.

Please do not offer to sell your "investment grade collection" to me is all I will add.

_________________
A man might as well marry ... if he finds a good wife he will be happy ... if not, he will become a philosopher.
Collecting Greater New Guinea & Macropods (Kangaroos & Wallabies).

You've been here a whole week, and already mouthing off to the owner of the website? I think anything he says is germane to this website, friend.

I am so glad that I only collect used stamps and never have to worry about the staus of the gum.

_________________
Philatelists are not boring old F A R T S that smell of mothballs

I will take all his waste paper at waste paper rates as well.

Seriously. I collect stamps, not gum. I collect whole world A - Z and do not give a damn as to whether or not they have been hinged. I even have a set of Germany which has a pretty high Catalogue value, but got at an absolute bargain price, because they had been stuck together (because of bad storage) and had the gum soaked off them to make them sellable. Do I care?

They are face up to show the stamps, not face down to show the gum.



Oh, and another lovely German pair. One is mint lightly hinged. one Mint, no gum. Which is which? And *shock* these are also face up in my Germany, not exposed on the gum side. I would need somebody to explain exactly why these are inferior to MUH/MNH.



Norm

_________________
Geelong, VFA Premiers 1878, 1879, 1800, 1882, 1883, 1884, 1886, AFL Premiers 1925, 1931, 1937, 1951, 1952, 1963, 2007, 2009, 2011, .

So far in this discussion, there's one point I haven't seen tackled. And that's about the life and propensities of 'gum' itself in the post-KV1 issues.

As has been pointed out, anything over 70-80 years old which has "perfect" gum is going to be suspect, and for good reason. Issues released in the 1960s and '70s - are they going to be any better in another 50 years time?

I know one collector who insists on washing EVERYTHING before it touches the album, mint or used. Her decision, made years ago, to only collect used was scoffed at, at the time. She only has mint copies where she has to.

As for me personally, if it doesn't have a postmark - I don't want it

_________________
FORESTS OLD, PASTURES NEW
(An expert is one who knows more and more, about less and less)

Geeesh,

Someone finds one regummed 1 pound brown and blue and thinks they are all the same. What a load of crap...

Im sure that most collectors of mnh items and the folk that can afford them know a hell of a lot more than anyone here thinks.

Nothing at all wrong with a lovely hinged stamp, and as Peter said , they have catching up to do, but mnh will always have a massive premium and will always be sought after more than any other copy.

Just because one can afford it does not mean they are a bunch of dimwhits.

..And trust me folks, mnh stamps in premium condition DO survive., why do you think it takes many years to put a collection of mnh roos together.

I could buy a complete set hinged tomorrow, not much fun in that.

And now I suppose looking forward there is the issue of self adhesives, firstly how do you collect them, and secondly as people like Norvic has stated even after only a year or two there are some showing gum degradation.

If you wish to attain completion of almost every Country I can think of, Used is cheaper and achievable .

If you wish to collect Mint for the same reason Mint hinged is possibly achievable.

If you are not worried about completion then Mint never Hinged is possibly the best investment , but are you leaning towards investment in Stamps, a true collector usually wishes completion , you may recall the Inverted Jenny Block swap for 1 missing US Stamp.

Me personally I am like the previously mentioned Lady I collect used and only a Mint when unavailable used and will take Spacefillers for the weeks pay Stamps, I wish very much completion from 1840 aprox , to 1950.

A Used Collector has a look at the back for a thin or crease and then devotes all his attention to the front and the wonderfull bonus can be a time and date and town it was used in it may have a story to tell, that a Mint will never have.

I Know two investors , they buy usually MNH in anything hot , example Aussie Roos, I will ask them next time I see them whether they are still collectors or speculators in Stamps, I suspect they themselves will not be sure .

I am sure that the front of the Stamp only matters thats its not damaged, all the energy is directed at the back, I find that a bit sad .

Someone once said , hinge the front and put them in your collection, a one penny Roo will be the spacefiller for the High Values.

(emphasis mine)

I have a number of Peel and Stick stamps from Australia from the 1990's where the gum has effectively disintegrated and these MUH stamps will no longer stick to anything including the original backing paper.

Norm

_________________
Geelong, VFA Premiers 1878, 1879, 1800, 1882, 1883, 1884, 1886, AFL Premiers 1925, 1931, 1937, 1951, 1952, 1963, 2007, 2009, 2011, .

Then maybe you should think about it a bit harder.

Just because one can afford the best , does not mean they are simply speculators.

I pull out my roos and kgv just about every day as i think they are stunning.

Maybe finally we have worked out the best way to collect self adhesives, buy them new, wait a few years for the gum to degrade and then they can be mounted as normal in hagners, stockbooks etc, because as you say after they degrade they won't stick to anything

Martin - sadly having money, and knowing about stamps are often not connected in ANY way.

All you need to buy MUH high value Roos for $5,000 each, and not $1500 for MLH, is a credit card with a higher limit.

Absolutely NO stamp knowledge whatever is required at all, to do that.

The German re-gummers can make the $1,500 one into a $5,000 'MUH' gem in an hour, for a mere $25 cost to the submitter of course.

Joe Dentist, Billy Farmer and Bobby Stockbroker that often blindly pay 300% more for 'MUH', have in the past, and have in the present day, often been cruelly taken advantage of. On ebay, in real auctions and sadly from many real dealers who should be ashamed of themselves.

I have been a full time high profile stamp dealer for over 30 years - and you have not.

As I have stated above the best quality German re-gums will fool near ALL COLLECTORS AND INVESTORS - AND VERY MANY DEALERS.

A lot of re-gums have snuck into Australia's leading auction house in recent times, as the owner simply has not spotted them when lotting them up.

No suggestion of fraud there, as they amend description and estimate when advised, but they DO fool even him. If you think busy Joe Dentist with his Amex Centurion Card will pick them as re-gums - well you of course are entitled to your opinion.

I have had to break the news to probably a HUNDRED such "investors" over 30 years they've been conned, and you have NOT had that dubious pleasure. It is not pleasant.

As to the "Massive Premium" of MUH over MLH .. well it is NOT as 'massive' as it once was. That is for certain. And thank goodness some sanity is prevailing at last.

I know you are talking up your own book as you have chosen to pay that massive premium in the past for many high price stamps. However the reality is, it is getting closer to MLH every month.

Yes MUH stamps will always sell for more than MLH. No-one says otherwise.

However 5 years back the '$100 MLH and $400 MUH' scenario is now more like '$150 for MLH and $300 for MUH'.

I agree, still double, but the MLH buyer has seen a gain and the MUH buyer has seen a loss, and this will remain the fact - the gap has contracted as the re-gummers are so good, and so active.

I have no 'book to talk up' as I have both in stock. Indeed I make MORE selling a MUH stamp than a MLH one of course.

The same way perf "OS" values have dropped - fakery - is the same reason MUH premiums have dropped in recent years. Re-gumming.

In closing - your avatar stamp the £2 3rd wmk I offered as "superb MVLH" - at a THIRD the price of MUH, and yet it does seem to be in your own collection.

So your fixation with "MUH" seems to recognise that the BEST looking examples of a stamp out there are sometimes the MLH ones.

For errors and varieties MLH is often the ONLY option. Hence anyone who embarks on "MUH or nothing" collections soon get bored, as only a very mediocre Roo collection is ever possible.

Most monogram and imprint pieces are hinged - fancy that. Those old VANDALS 100 years back using HINGES for goodness sakes! Just like they did on this guy.

The gum from many early stamp issues can be horrendously bad of course with crazing, cracking, discolouring, etc. and does it worry me.....nah, it's the front that counts.

And get real people - who the hell ever displays the back of a stamp...duh

Glen,

Sits extremely proudly in my collection as a stamp and the two people involved in its purchase, your good self and Simon of course who taught me as much as he could about regums prior to his untimely passing.

I have kept it because it is stunning, but i have also purchased a similar one in unmounted condition for what you correctly state, 3 times what i paid you for the mounted one.

Both exactly the same from the front , perfection, but a small section of people will call one perfect from the back as well and always pay for that example.

Dear dear, I never thought people would be so passionate about this, so let us calm things down a bit.

1) My heading was Mounted mint or MNH? I do not know who added the "Why bother..." bit. Not my style at all and somewhat inflammatory.

2) Stanley Gibbons do buy and sell mounted as well as MNH and I never said they didn`t. They would be out of business if they failed to do so as there simply is not enough MNH to go around. They simply do not list them for GV6 and QEII.

3) As for collectors always using hinges in the past, this is almost correct, but I have seen collections of GV and earlier issues where each stamp has been carefully wrapped in transparent film and where I know for a fact the collections were formed in the 1930`s, so clearly there was some concern about using hinges even then.

4) Here in the UK I have seen sheets and part sheets of GV6 held by dealers and I know most dealers have multiples in blocks as I see them at every stamp fair, so clearly there is a lot of genuine MNH to go around.

5) There really is no need to worry about re-gumming as most GV6 is still (relatively) cheap and would not make it worth the attention of regummers. The Aden dhows set might be a problem along with the New guinea Airs, the Kelantan Chef`s hat set and the North Borneo 1939 set but as these are outside my price range, I am not going to have to worry about them.

6) As for the Australian Roos, there is only one stamp of the GV6 period that I am aware of (SG.212 a very cheap item) and none of QEII, so the discussion of these issues is simply not germane to my comments on MNH GV6 and QEII.

7) I understood that Scott did not list MNH from comments made on eBay by users of that work. As I have never had a copy I was relying on their advices and accept your correction on this matter as to certain areas.

If I have given offence to anyone, I apologise, it was certainly not my intention.

Regards,

Mike.

No offence to anyone I imagine Mike, just an interesting topic for discussion.

Agree with AFCBGeorge. Of course if I get an unhinged stamp I'm not going to hinge it now

Coincidentally this cropped up at a local fair yesterday, we were looking at some KG6 similar to George's avatar.

One dealer said, "you must buy unmounted if you can, I can't get 10% for mounted" - which to me was a darned good reason for buying lightly mounted, if you can get them at 10% of Gibbons!

_________________
Ian Billings - Norvic Philatelics GB stamps info: http://www.norphil.co.uk - also /catalog for our ecommerce site, blog.norphil.co.uk, shop.norphil.co.uk and Ian_norvic on twitter

Would I be correct in saying that the right hand stamp has no
gum?

_________________
Jay Carrigan
http://www.jaypex.com

Many of you have said that as they are only interested in the appearance of the stamp from the front, mounted is as good as MNH from their point of view.

I have no arguments with that, it is a perfectly valid point.

However as I said in one of my earlier postings, collectors in any field are attracted to the best specimen they can obtain, and I think most of us accept that a MNH stamp is a better stamp than a mounted one even if you cannot or do not display the back, as it has not been disfigured with a hinge mark.

A Lalique signature on the base of a piece of glass may never be displayed, but knowing it is there gives immense satisfaction to the collector.

Similarly a Wedgwood mark on the base of a beautiful piece of ceramic art, or the Troika mark on the base of a piece of art pottery makes all the difference, even though you do not see them without lifting up the piece to look at the mark.

Regards,
Mike.

Very well put Mike - I'm not sure I can add much on top of that, except that I know that I get irking feeling when looking at an otherwise nice piece in my collection and knowing that it has some type of gum defect.

Well, for someone urging me to "stay on message" as my comments were "not Germane" you seem to have forgotten your own advice entirely.

You are talking about a Lalique signature on the base of a piece of glass, or a Wedgwood mark on the base of a beautiful piece of ceramic art, or the Troika mark on the base of a piece of art pottery.

THEY are not "germane" to THIS thread in ANY way nor are they on message (or on topic) for THIS thread.

They relate to overall authenticity - which has nothing to do with MUH v/s MLH stamps, for which the SG number is not in any doubt.

We are talking here about the "wisdom" of spending $5,000 on a "MUH" NZ 1948 £3½ Arms versus $2,500 for the identical looking stamp light hinged.

It is clear to all it is mint, and is SG F209 or F209w.

And you of course overlook that entire series SG F182 to F218 in your generalisation there is not many high priced single stamps in the KGVI reign. Try over $15,000 just on that lot for MUH. $25,000 if you bother with the "a" numbers.

The fact is, you CANNOT get an Expert Committee to give you a Certificate stating your "astute" "u/m" $5,000 buy is indeed U/M - or is just the $2,500 stamp that has had a $25 regum.

So it is not a matter of seeing a Wedgewood mark to know you have the correct stamp - that part is self evident.

The Committees simply refuse to do so. As clearly shown to you on the Cert above, they say "unused" - no mention whatever of hinging or otherwise.

So all the wise "investors" who shell out $5,000 on such a stamp have ONLY the word of the seller they have "MUH" and not a regum. An expensive disaster waiting to happen, when this kind of money is involved.

THAT is "Germane", and that is sadly the real world.

You could never tell a top end regum I am pretty certain of that, and neither could 95% of the other "investors" like you, who only seek MUH KGVI, with open cheque books and gleeful grins.

Which is why is is an absurd pursuit, and WILL bring sadness and much financial loss when you sell - trust me on that.

The ONLY winners are the regummers and their clients..

And as to those who gleefully buy the "waste paper" you scorn so much .. they will always be the winners - and will never be conned by regummers. AND they pay a fraction of what you do at all times - for stamps that look identical in their albums.

Mike,

I agree with Glen on this one, you are confusing authenticity with desirability.

The presence of a Wedgwood or whatever mark on a piece of pottery or glass denotes its authenticity.

Even more so with paintings with the signature of the artist. Even if without a signature, the author is usually readily recognized.

A mint stamp (unless forged) is a singular but multi-production, sometimes containing the names of the artist and designer, but in most cases looks the same on the front whether it has been hinged or not.

I don't see any reason whatever for having a MNH collection over a MLH collection.

_________________
If it erupts, don't blame me!!

I think the thrust of Mike's comments are summed in his words "collectors in any field are attracted to the best specimen they can obtain" - his likening this idea to other areas of collectibles was perhaps misguided but nevertheless rings true, in the sense that there are certain qualities of any collectible that, while maybe not casually observed, still lend itself to a greater level of value and appreciativeness by the collector.

As someone who takes pleasure in owning a little piece of history by collecting stamps, I think there is a certain value in a stamp that is authentically gummed and pristine.

Certainly we would not be paying more for them if this was a lonely sentiment.

All I can say is good luck to all those perfectionists who poo-poo lightly hinged, when in about 30-50 years (maybe less), they may have to soak the gum off anyway. Some museums have already done this to preserve the stamp paper itself.

There are some stamps which are probably just impossible to get never hinged.

Collect them mint or collect them mint hinged - their still unused. It's up to you as to how pedantic and "perfect" you want to try for.

Next you'll all be going on about micro-perfect centering and poo-pooing mint unhinged but 1% off centre!

_________________
Greg - Looking for Goulburn Australia Cancels and Grangemouth Scotland Cancels and Covers
Member of the S.T.A.M.P Club for Slightly Twisted And Mad Philatelists - Motto: "Bring back the lick!"

My comments here refer to George V period, and earlier, Australia. I would never buy a 1964 Navigators set hinged, for the simple reason that MNH are the norm.

As long as the person buying the MNH stamp has the necessary experience and knowledge to identify a regum from the genuine article then good luck to them. I like MNH as well, but I am sanguine enough to know that waiting for only MNH will mean waiting for a very long time, in certain cases.

I am more concerned with other factors than whether the stamp has previously been hinged. Centering and perfs are, in my view, much more important than whether there has been a hinge applied in the past. A nice, MLH, example of a £2 First WMK Kangaroo is still going to get a premium over a MNH version that has a few perfs missing and is poorly centered.

_________________
Peter
Hawthorn - AFL Premiers 1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008.

You must also beware of regums that are then hinged, dont make the mistake of not checking them because they are hinged.

Agreed, but there is less incentive to regum and then hinge a stamp than there is to regum and then claim a stamp to be MNH.

_________________
Peter
Hawthorn - AFL Premiers 1961, 1971, 1976, 1978, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008.

True Peter,

But i wonder how many people would have thought to have checked their mvlh stamps when they bought them, i didnt until i was alerted to it and found 4 in my collection.

Two were from a dodgy dealer in SA and the other two from dealers in Melbourne where i guess they slipped under the radar.

As a relatively inexperienced collector who has both MNH and used stamps in my collection, I wish to thank all of the participants in this thread for their insight on the matter of MNH vs MLH. I am retired and don't have lots of money to spend on stamps but have been making some pre-WW2 MNH purchases when the items are reasonably priced. Given the re-gum concerns expressed by Glen and other seasoned collectors, I am now seriously reconsidering only purchasing MLH issues.

Thanks again bringing this issue up for debate.

The Philatelic Foundation in New York will certify gum, if
requested. From their web site, specifically
http://www.philatelicfoundation.org/expertizing/grading.htm

_________________
Jay Carrigan
http://www.jaypex.com

Jay .. you will find I think that section refers to USA and Related Territory stamps.

This thread is about KGVI British Commonwealth stamps.

They numerically grade USA too, but not non USA AFAIK.

Even if they did do B/C, I'd take anything the PF said about a Commonwelath stamp, with a huge slab of salt.

Glen

Do what I do and collect fine used.

Until a stamp has been through the mail it is just a bit of coloured paper.

Tony

...and after its a damaged bit of coloured paper.

No. The 20pf is mint lightly hinged. The 10pf turned up on an uncancelled Stampshow souvenir, so without the cancellation, I assumed that the postcard without provinence added no value, and soaked the stamp off.

Norm

_________________
Geelong, VFA Premiers 1878, 1879, 1800, 1882, 1883, 1884, 1886, AFL Premiers 1925, 1931, 1937, 1951, 1952, 1963, 2007, 2009, 2011, .