Another bogus stamp... GOOD GRIEF



  • YAY! 2 for 2.
  • John,
    Yes you are right I forgot they said it was never hinged. Of course there was no scan of the reverse though.
  • edited April 15 0 LikesVote Down
    An earlier post about a #389, got me looking at #388.
    An often faked Washington/Franklin coil.
    I see that examples with certs are being listed for over $2,000.
    But one seller had three uncertified examples listed for $350-$500.
    (The $500 one is now gone)

    Why wouldn't a dealer spend 30 or 40 bucks to certify a stamp if the return could be an extra thousand dollars?

    There is also this pair that is obviously not a #388.

    And this pair. I'm not an expert, everything I know has come from Mr. Payton.
    I'm suspicious because the top cut is not parallel with the red dividing line.
  • Alan,
    Yes, the first one would be a 391, not a 388, but I don't believe it is authentic either. The perforation comes out to be perf 9 as opposed to perf 8.5, and the perf hole is much too small for this issue. It's a fraudulently perforated 384V Imperf Coil, if it watermarks as single-line (probably does).

    The latter 388 is suspect, but there are a lot of characteristics that appear to make it a candidate. So without having it in hand, I can't fully make a judgement call on it, but a stamp valued at $3,500 for the pair, the balance of probability if this were an authentic MNH pair, it would have a cert with it already...
    So yes, its suspicious, but I can't make a definitive call on it, so I have to leave it alone. The other is a total misidentify, and a fake, (yes FAKE), so it should be pulled.
    I've reported it, as well as messaging the seller.
  • Scott,

    Yes the first one is not a 388 and it is not a 391 either as you said the perforation is not right and the holes are too small.

    What is really amazing is that they can not tell the difference for 2 listings with the 388 number that are not the same.

    The people who are working for Rosenberg are obviously not philatelists and know nothing about stamps.

    Again, the really bad thing about this is the way they are talking about hip stamp on the chat forums.
  • Well Bill, when it comes to the FW's, I have a little forgiveness. The FWs are a tough group, and easy to confuse/miss identify. It's worse when you throw in the fakes.

    Note this thread, and the PSE are supposed to be the TOP of the TOP of FW ID...

    Everybody makes mistakes.
  • Did I ever get my prize from that thread? LOL!!!!!!!!!!
  • You're still alive aren't you???
  • Yup....I'll take it! Lol! A gift that keeps on giving, thanks!
  • Scott,

    Yes I have been working with FW's with these things for 50 years. I still will not call myself an expert but I do a pretty good job IDing them.
  • Wow, some REALLY thick heads on this FAKE 391 misidentified as a 388! I've reported it twice now, and it's just been "closed". Come on, it's not even close people LOOK AGAIN!

    (P.S. Please report this one as well... it's an abomination)
  • Also, this is in dire need of removal. Have reported it, but it's still there:

    There is no such thing as diagonal ribbed paper. The "ribbing" visible on both front and back of this stamp is from an ink impression (not sure how it got on the back as well, almost looks like an old telegraph cancel). I have seen this cancel on one other LBN and was able to very closely examine it. In the end I identified it as simply patter in the cancellation, and has nothing to do with the paper.

    Ribbed papers are either exactly horizonal or exactly vertical, and can't be seen with the "technique" demonstrated here. (i.e. even when cancelled, the ribbing does NOT absorb the cancellation ink, nor creating any visible lines as a result. (Think about what would have to be at play here for the ink to follow the lines perfectly... they don't it appears this way because of those lines actually appear in the cancellation itself.)

    In addition, the lines are much much to wide, heavy and widely spaced to be ribbed paper. (Guess it's time to write an LBN series now...)
  • Scott,

    I reported the #388 and the #166. Hopefully it will get resolved.
  • Escalated it again through a different channel, and 388 is gone.
  • Yes I contacted them last night again on the 388 and told them it was probably a 384V that was perforated and it is gone.
    They responded to me late last nite on my 2 reports but and said they were looking into it.
    The 166 seller is on vacation so they are probably waiting for a response from them.
  • The 166 is gone now too.
    Dunno if it had anything to do with the LBN article I just posted, but I did direct them to it in my 2nd message to report it. Thanks Bill, and all that reported it, we win again.
  • Scott,

    Yes we do!
  • And yet another "mistaken" ad:

    It lists a US466 plate single w/ plate no. 9117.

    Plate no. 9117 was used to print US504, not US466, according to the BIA Plate No. List and the Hebert catalog. no. 9117.

    Significant difference in value.
  • Well, it's a 524 not a 523, BUT it's ended. and the $107 for a MNH Plate # Single is an excellent rate for the $5. I suspect it's just a matter of fat finger during entry. People bidding on this were bidding on the item they saw, not the description...
  • Well yes the 466 you can tell it is perf 11 not 10. Another Rosenberg folly.
  • Ken, you are right on the 504 as well. Well spotted... unfortunately someone just paid $34 for a stamp with a value of $18 CV... I guess if you consider it is a Plate # single, it might justify something closer to $30. But wish we had spotted it earlier. I've been away a lot lately, as I'm tied up with several other engagements.
  • I report fraudulent listing all the time. I think they do nothing with these reports.
  • Steve, it depends. I have had quite good success with getting listing removed. Even from the BIG guy.
  • Scott I believe it's time for you to do your philatelic duty again. I found a used 363 uncertified. What do you think about that? Save us all please
  • Do you have a link to the listing? I don't see any when I just do a search.
  • edited May 27 0 LikesVote Down

    Archived listing.
    Appears to be removed.
  • Can't tell if it was removed, or that the auction ended and it sold for $395.
    In any case, it's a terrible ID it wasn't even Perf 12, it was a perf 11 508... Which a s a used stamp is 65 cents.
  • Scott,

    The picture is a type A140 which is either a 337 or 380.
    It is definitely not a bluish paper and it sold for $395 by Rosenberg.
  • Yes, 337 or 380. $3 or $15.
    I agree, it's not on bluish paper. It's a Washington, not a Franklin.
    Just matched the face value against the matrix at the time, and I was tired, so sorry for my mistake.
Sign In or Register to comment.