Just me, but the biggest issue I have seen with pencil marks on stamps is the utter disregard for any proper punctuation. Completely ignored...ok the occasional forward "slash" between purported Scott # and the perceived antiquated value, but that's it. Very disturbing. (Just kidding here...don't get too worked up over this!)
It's fun when what seems a simple perhaps innocuous question generates so much discussion (and good healthy discussion at that). I can tell you, no expertizer is going to mention pencil marks and erasures in any cert. The best you might see is "removed pencil marks". The reason for this is, the pencil and attempt to remove them (so long as it doesn't result in a crease or thin) are essentially the same class of "alteration", which is to say, minor. Scuffing on bum would certainly be noted as "gum disturbance" (it's disturbed, diving deeper into how or why isn't the role of the expertizer, only to note condition). This wouldn't even impact the grade in a graded cert. It's essentially the same "level" of alteration. This discussion has extended the OP's original question into what the impact (value and desirability in particular) results from such alterations.
Just (by coincidence, I was actually looking for information on another topic when I stumbled across this tonight): Page XIII of the Scott Specialized Catalog for US has the following comment under Condition.
Factors other than faults that DECREASE the value of a stamp include loss of original gum, regumming, a hinge remnant or foreign object adhering to the gum, natural inclusions, straight edges and MARKINGS OR NOTATIONS APPLYD BY COLLECTORS OR DEALEERS.
(I'd have used bold instead of all caps on that last point, but there is no rich test editing in these field).
I know there's been lots of different perspectives and interpretations, but I would offer that from the "purist" standpoint (which is the view I share), between Linn's definition for Mint, and this acknowledgement within Scott, I think it's pretty clear that markings on the back of a stamp (pencil or otherwise, in formative or otherwise) do (with a few noted exceptions, like 1c Magenta) otherwise devalue the material. It doesn't devalue the C3a, because ALL C3a's are equally effected, at least so long as no additional markings are added.
So, don't have to take my word for it... it's expressed in Scott, which of course as well, you can take or leave.
And that's ok. But just because a pencil note on the back may be present may decrease the value according to Scott (and Scott) does not mean there is no market for it. The market itself establishes the value.
I had a guy call me the other day and ask if I was interested in a cash offer to buy my house. I said, "Sure! Twenty million in cash sounds fair". He hung up on me. I guess there isn't a market for a $300,000 house if I ask twenty million. Point is, and my last on this issue, is that if a stamp is properly described and priced properly, there may be someone out there who wants to buy it under those terms. If not, it doesn't sell or must be discounted. If one asks MNH prices for items that are not, they will not likely move very well.
I'm aware of what Scott says and I along with others have repeatedly stated that we describe the existence of pob or owner's marks in our descriptions for exactly that reason. What Scott doesn't address is the presence of scuffs from pob being erased, so as far as I'm concerned, its a gray area. Again, I leave them be. If the buyers wish to erase these markings once their stamps are in hand, they are certainly free to do so. We're starting to go in circles here...
And I've never stated that there isn't a market for a stamp of any condition. Only that markings on the back of stamps, particularly OG, they impact the value negatively (in general) and in some cases, more so than others, and in some cases can increase value, but these are the rare exceptions. I want to impress this because people have this tendency to hear what they want to hear, especially with the psychology that ownership increases perception of value. I can see lots of delusional sellers (on this site, as well as others) who clearly don't understand how to describe and price accordingly. (And that's the full gamut of the stamp condition). In general the biggest mistakes I see involved: 1) First and foremost, centering 2) Gum condition 3) Physical alterations (repairs, reperforations, chemical alterations, cancel removals, added margins, panting in design, scratching out design, etc.) 4) Damage (tears, thins, pencil marks back stamps -- even when they establish provenance, perf condition in general, creases, fading, toning, color changeling, stains, cancels applied, etc.)
I will be the first to admit, I don't always get it right. Humans make human mistakes. I always appreciate (and hate myself) when someone calls out something I've missed in my listing. Funny however that I find many quick to point out mistakes that lower the value of the material, but I've never had anyone point out something that would increase the value of my listings, (and this is over more than 20 years), I'm sure instead they are happy to benefit from those errors...
That's under damage. The last comment I'd really like to make on this issue is this: How many collectors complain when they go to sell their collections that they can't get what they paid for it? (Ignoring for the moment the debacle that the 1980's was...)
The main reason this occurs is people pay too much for something almost always based on not fully understanding the condition. I advise people on this constantly. I have to disappoint people way too often. (And I'm not buying from them, I'm advising them on the value of their collection, simply for the purpose of insurance, or selling, or just wanting to understand what they have). We've all seen premium stamps sell for premium prices. (I was staggered recently to see a C20 sell for $4,750. It was a plate # single that is graded 100J, but even SMQ topped this out at $500, but only up to grade 100). The highest selling C20 ever before it was $550 in 2019. Now whether that buyer will ever be able to sell that stamp for more than $4,750 (or his heirs, or his heirs heirs) I can't predict. It's just an example of what a premium stamp can command. But that stamp was flawless. Like carbon in diamonds, carbon on your stamp is probably not a good sign.
What do you think would happen to a graded 9 Mickey Mantel baseball card if someone happened to place his initials on the back of the card? Of course the value would drop - really drop. So, shouldn’t the value of a stamp be in the same criteria as a baseball card?
@Phil You can't really blame him as he made his fortune designing and selling shoes. He was a rudimentary collector when he received his brothers stamp album. However, Du Pont was more of a serious collector even from prison apparently. He made almost 9 million from the sale of the stamp, while Stuart took a million loss. One isn't supposed to sign a stamp with black ink for starters.
As for pencil on the back, it's just for a collectors personal reference usually or to deceive as Scott mentioned which is rather rare. On used and mint stamps it decreases the value slightly unless it is really heavily marked. I wouldn't say that much though but depends on the buyer. I would leave as is but it depends on how picky you want to get with your stamps at the end of the day. As for Mint Never Hinged, you can never have pencil or even an eraser touch those beauties. I think we are beating this horse to death here though.
I've tried that link several times now, but I get the same error message others have received. I'm wondering if it is somehow blocked to some locations maybe? (I mean I can't watch some media from various websites from time to time because it's "not available in your country", but I'm in Japan, so not sure what is happening there.
In a "same thing only different" vein - I opened Yahoo Sports on my phone, last night, to watch Thursday Night Football, and was immediately met with the message "This content is not available . . ." Ah, bummer, I thought. But continued reading, ". . . over your wifi network. Please switch to your phone data network to watch." Well, okay, for whatever difference that makes to you. ( Yes, I get it, T-Mobile pays NFL licence fees, Spectrum doesn't.)
WOW, now that is weird. I can reach the site by using my MiFi connection, but cannot reach it from my hard line or WiFi connections. It also strangely works from my mobile phone (yet another unrelated connectivity, as my MiFi is on AU service, my Mobile is on Docomo/NTT which is the same service provider as my hard line, but is SIM based, where the hardline is direct connect fibre (FTTH). VERY weird.
Comments
I learned a long time ago to make a statement short and sweet. One of the many things my dad taught me. :-)
This wouldn't even impact the grade in a graded cert. It's essentially the same "level" of alteration.
This discussion has extended the OP's original question into what the impact (value and desirability in particular) results from such alterations.
Page XIII of the Scott Specialized Catalog for US has the following comment under Condition.
Factors other than faults that DECREASE the value of a stamp include loss of original gum, regumming, a hinge remnant or foreign object adhering to the gum, natural inclusions, straight edges and MARKINGS OR NOTATIONS APPLYD BY COLLECTORS OR DEALEERS.
(I'd have used bold instead of all caps on that last point, but there is no rich test editing in these field).
I know there's been lots of different perspectives and interpretations, but I would offer that from the "purist" standpoint (which is the view I share), between Linn's definition for Mint, and this acknowledgement within Scott, I think it's pretty clear that markings on the back of a stamp (pencil or otherwise, in formative or otherwise) do (with a few noted exceptions, like 1c Magenta) otherwise devalue the material. It doesn't devalue the C3a, because ALL C3a's are equally effected, at least so long as no additional markings are added.
So, don't have to take my word for it... it's expressed in Scott, which of course as well, you can take or leave.
I had a guy call me the other day and ask if I was interested in a cash offer to buy my house. I said, "Sure! Twenty million in cash sounds fair". He hung up on me. I guess there isn't a market for a $300,000 house if I ask twenty million. Point is, and my last on this issue, is that if a stamp is properly described and priced properly, there may be someone out there who wants to buy it under those terms. If not, it doesn't sell or must be discounted. If one asks MNH prices for items that are not, they will not likely move very well.
We're starting to go in circles here...
In general the biggest mistakes I see involved:
1) First and foremost, centering
2) Gum condition
3) Physical alterations (repairs, reperforations, chemical alterations, cancel removals, added margins, panting in design, scratching out design, etc.)
4) Damage (tears, thins, pencil marks back stamps -- even when they establish provenance, perf condition in general, creases, fading, toning, color changeling, stains, cancels applied, etc.)
I will be the first to admit, I don't always get it right. Humans make human mistakes. I always appreciate (and hate myself) when someone calls out something I've missed in my listing. Funny however that I find many quick to point out mistakes that lower the value of the material, but I've never had anyone point out something that would increase the value of my listings, (and this is over more than 20 years), I'm sure instead they are happy to benefit from those errors...
The last comment I'd really like to make on this issue is this:
How many collectors complain when they go to sell their collections that they can't get what they paid for it? (Ignoring for the moment the debacle that the 1980's was...)
The main reason this occurs is people pay too much for something almost always based on not fully understanding the condition. I advise people on this constantly. I have to disappoint people way too often. (And I'm not buying from them, I'm advising them on the value of their collection, simply for the purpose of insurance, or selling, or just wanting to understand what they have). We've all seen premium stamps sell for premium prices. (I was staggered recently to see a C20 sell for $4,750. It was a plate # single that is graded 100J, but even SMQ topped this out at $500, but only up to grade 100). The highest selling C20 ever before it was $550 in 2019. Now whether that buyer will ever be able to sell that stamp for more than $4,750 (or his heirs, or his heirs heirs) I can't predict. It's just an example of what a premium stamp can command. But that stamp was flawless. Like carbon in diamonds, carbon on your stamp is probably not a good sign.
As for pencil on the back, it's just for a collectors personal reference usually or to deceive as Scott mentioned which is rather rare. On used and mint stamps it decreases the value slightly unless it is really heavily marked. I wouldn't say that much though but depends on the buyer. I would leave as is but it depends on how picky you want to get with your stamps at the end of the day. As for Mint Never Hinged, you can never have pencil or even an eraser touch those beauties. I think we are beating this horse to death here though.
Ah, bummer, I thought. But continued reading, ". . . over your wifi network. Please switch to your phone data network to watch."
Well, okay, for whatever difference that makes to you. ( Yes, I get it, T-Mobile pays NFL licence fees, Spectrum doesn't.)
YES! Thank you Scott. It isn't just me. I was beginning to think I had gone insane. Wish I knew why it doesn't work for some.
I can reach the site by using my MiFi connection, but cannot reach it from my hard line or WiFi connections. It also strangely works from my mobile phone (yet another unrelated connectivity, as my MiFi is on AU service, my Mobile is on Docomo/NTT which is the same service provider as my hard line, but is SIM based, where the hardline is direct connect fibre (FTTH).
VERY weird.