



PIX Magazine 3rd May 1952
Article on the British Guiana 1c Magenta and an Australian Owner
Moderator: Volunteer Moderator Team
We now know of course the owner was Fred Small, Anzac Cove Gallipoli war hero. Allegedly even his wife did not know he owned the 1c British Guiana stamp!Allanswood wrote:Found this while searching online. Old article about the British Guiana 1c Magenta
PIX Magazine 3rd May 1952
Article on the British Guiana 1c Magenta and an Australian Owner
A rich Noo Yoiker with FAR more money than sense or taste. Pressing a hard HB type pencil that hard, to ugly graffiti your initials THAT deeply, into a wafer thin paper stamp, is sheer lunacy.capetriangle wrote:This idiot does not know the meaning of light pencil. This will likely be visible from the face. Doesn't he know the meaning of the word custodianship?
We are in absolute agreement on this.Global Administrator wrote:A rich Noo Yoiker with FAR more money than sense or taste. Pressing a hard HB type pencil that hard, to ugly graffiti your initials THAT deeply, into a wafer thin paper stamp, is sheer lunacy.capetriangle wrote:This idiot does not know the meaning of light pencil. This will likely be visible from the face. Doesn't he know the meaning of the word custodianship?
This guy sells women's shoes at $US1000+ a pair, hence the dorky line image of a stiletto shoe (in his mind) - to anyone else, just an ugly meaningless squiggle.
That final very heavy stroke on the "W" for certain, (indeed most of the "SW" letters) will have heavily indented the paper, and will be clearly visible at front, I feel sure, in future facial scans.![]()
![]()
Discreet and subtle is not something most Americans are known for, but this ego trip is obscene vandalism.
Thank goodness the equally classless Trump never bought it - he'd have used a black sharpie marker pen I have no doubt. On the FRONT.
bazza4338 wrote:
And to think Sotheby's were unhappy with the price.gavin-h wrote:
From the oafs playing games of Billy Big Balls bidding it up to the stratosphere...
Well if it is a silver pen (agree that is possible) he is a Grade A cretin. How does anyone know what leaching that might create over decades? Like cellotape - it looked fine to users AT THE TIME.Allanswood wrote:It looks like silver liquid ink to me, not a pencil.
And if I was signing it, I would not have used something that could be rubbed off - no one else did.
Global Administrator wrote:From my ''Stamp News'' article these were the previous owner marks prior to this Weizman American vandal being let loose with his hard pencil on silver ink pen -
REVERSE of the unique 1856 British Guiana 1c Black on Magenta stamp
One of the more fascinating aspects of the British Guiana 1856 1¢ Magenta stamp is the reverse, which shows the personal owner marks of several of its famous owners including:
1. Two strikes of Count Philipp von Ferrary's famous "trefoil" owner's mark. One impression is very faint, at lower left. It sold for then $US32,500 in 1922
2. A large faint "H" of new owner, American Billionaire Arthur Hind at top - said to have burnt a second copy sold to him. "It is now STILL unique".
3. A small "FK" of Finbar Kenny, the manager at Macy's Stamp Department, who brokered the sale by Hind's widow to Fred Small for $US45,000 in 1940.
4. Large, ornate 17 pointed star of Anna Hind, placed OVER her 30 year older husband's "AH" cloverleaf, who had largely cut her out of his will.
5. A small discreet shooting star lower right, added by Australian born WWI Gallipoli hero, Frederick Small, who owned it under total secrecy from 1940-1970.
6. A pencilled "IW" by Irwin Weinberg, head of a group of investors who bought it 1970 for $US280,000 at Sielgels, and later sold it to du Pont via Siegel Auctions.
7. A large soft pencilled "J E d P", initials of the late John E. Du Pont who bought it for $US935,000 in 1980, and died in prison. His heirs sold it in 2014.
8. Vandal scrawl added 2019 of "SW" and a vertical stiletto squiggle in pencil or metallic ink pen, by NY shoe designer, Stuart Weitzman who paid $US9.48m.
Now Glen, a cretin is someone merely with an endocrinological mental deficiency, our shoe peddler is perhaps merely a moron or an idiot.Global Administrator wrote:
Well if it is a silver pen (agree that is possible) he is a Grade A cretin.
Chip, you mean someone got to witness this butchery.chipg wrote:He used a soft pencil.
The conservator at the NPM did his best to minimize any damage.
C.
You mean they talked him out of the Red/White/Blue sharpie pens?chipg wrote:
The conservator at the NPM did his best to minimize any damage.
That really makes the entire situation a whole lot worse, that somebody who should know better stood by and watched this butchery.chipg wrote:He used a soft pencil.
The conservator at the NPM did his best to minimize any damage.
C.
A word for British-made Derwent Cumberland pencils here.Global Administrator wrote:A soft and dark 4B Staedtler. **ONLY** buy Staedtler for BOTH.
Cape Triangle - surely Sotheby's were not unhappy with the price? They managed to attract a cashed-up non-collector. Maybe they were unhappy that Bill Gross did not enter the fray. Hard to see another auctioneer getting more realistically.capetriangle wrote:And to think Sotheby's were unhappy with the price.
Richard
Perhaps Sotheby's were "unhappy" because the price realised fell short of a threshold whereby vendor commission escalated?MJ's pet wrote:The reverse is more visually appealing than the front tbh![]()
![]()
Cape Triangle - surely Sotheby's were not unhappy with the price? They managed to attract a cashed-up non-collector. Maybe they were unhappy that Bill Gross did not enter the fray. Hard to see another auctioneer getting more realistically.capetriangle wrote:And to think Sotheby's were unhappy with the price.
Richard
Rod, no it was a FLAT 20% commission (plus taxes) for this sale -Rod Perry wrote:
Perhaps Sotheby's were "unhappy" because the price realised fell short of a threshold whereby vendor commission escalated?
Rod
One of the few stamps that looks a TON better in Mono than colour! And Sothebys should not have been paid 2% fee, much less 20% after the APPALLING scans they released.capetriangle wrote:
On unnumbered page 7 of the actual catalogue - at the bottom-right corner of the page in a box - is the statement.
SPECIAL NOTICES AND REMINDERS FOR SALE NO9154
There is no online bidding for this auction.
The buyer's premium for this sale is 20% of the hammer price.
Richard Debney
Global Administrator wrote:On April 17 The National Postal Museum in Washington was visited by David Redden, a vice president of Sotheby’s, who took along the 1¢ British Guiana for detailed analysis.
Redden was joined by respected stamp expert Robert Odenweller, of the museum's Council of Philatelists, a security officer, James Barron, a reporter from the New York Times, and a photographer from the paper.
The equipment used included the VSC6000, Leica Microscope, X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer (XRF) and the Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscope (FT-IR).
VSC6000 is the Video Spectral Comparator 6000, which is a high resolution analyser, allowing for the removal of color to better see the stamp and its markings under high magnification.
The wonderfully clear image shown here is from that recent visit and the stamp design, detail and postmark all show wonderfully when in mono as you can see!
This is the best image that Sothebys have bothered to release!
Glen, Vendor commission, rather than Buyer's commission, is what I'm suggesting may have disappointed Sotheby's.Global Administrator wrote:Rod, no it was a FLAT 20% commission (plus taxes) for this saleRod Perry wrote:
Perhaps Sotheby's were "unhappy" because the price realised fell short of a threshold whereby vendor commission escalated?
Rod
"At the first annual Australian Stamp Dealers' convention, held in Sydney recently, delegates planned to form a syndicate to raise "considerably more than £18,000" for the stamp.
But will the mysterious owner rise to the bait?".
"Stamp only non sticky" apparently.Global Administrator wrote:A ''Grade A'' Moron - even by ebay standards!![]()
![]()
![]()
He keeps flogging it time and time again - can it be reported to ebay please folks in case an equally dopey Bunny actually ''buys'' and pays for it, which is the end game of course for this ebay crook mardonn15
https://www.ebay.com.au/sch/mardonn15/m.html?item=3833855835 ... 6732.m1684
Bizarre to see the assistant handle it with no tweezers or cotton gloves?MJ's pet wrote: ↑04 Jan 2021 17:00 Stuart Weitzman signing the 1c British Guiana:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX3BS7453yo
Rigs wrote: ↑04 Jan 2021 17:07Bizarre to see the assistant handle it with no tweezers or cotton gloves?MJ's pet wrote: ↑04 Jan 2021 17:00 Stuart Weitzman signing the 1c British Guiana:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX3BS7453yo
satsuma wrote: ↑12 Mar 2021 11:25 Re the double eagle coin:
If 20 were stolen, 9 including this one were sold in the 1940s, and 10 were claimed by the govt in 2004; why is this the only one that can be legally sold?
Logic would presume that this one can also be claimed by the govt. Presumably the other 8 known to be sold in the 1940s, even supposing they are in institutional collections could also be claimed should the govt choose.
The one which appears to have fallen off the radar between the 1940s and 2004 also could be claimed when and if it re-surfaces.
So why is title to this one protected? If I had a couple of million spare change I'd want to know before I laid my money down.
Users browsing this forum: fchd and 8 guests