The Samovar
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
Author: Subject: Gumming
Jeff
Super Administrator
*********


Avatar


Posts: 265
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: Herndon, Virginia
Member Is Offline

Mood: It's developing...

[*] posted on 7/5/2004 at 12:45
Gumming


If a stamp is issued without gumming, and is subsequently gummed, is it considered to be altered?

Would it be in the same category as a stamp that is re-gummed?

I'm curous how this would affect a stamp's "value."




View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Rusalka
DownUnder
**




Posts: 25
Registered: 2/25/2003
Location: Canberra, Australia
Member Is Offline

Mood: Usually Content

[*] posted on 7/6/2004 at 23:20
A sticky situation


Yes I agree with Dangstampr, even if the original gum appears yellow-brown and streaky in appearance as some older Soviet original printings can be, then it should remain that way. Not only does it have an nice inherent character but it is certainly more valuable.

If reprints have the single characteristic variation of being identified by only their gum colour, then it may be more difficult to determine if the stamp has been tampered with for the ordinary collector.

Either way it should lessen the value of the stamp considerably.

I wonder how the process of re-gumming affects the value of the expensive Zeppelin issues from the 1930's? Is it better to leave these issues as mint w/o gum?
~;)~
View user's profile View All Posts By User
msmike
Major Philatelist
***




Posts: 53
Registered: 6/11/2003
Location: Carson City, NV
Member Is Offline

Mood: Hoping for a Long Spring

[*] posted on 8/4/2004 at 14:18


And yet, there is one more possibility. The stamp was gummed to be affixed on a cover or postcard. Somehow it fell off or just didn't make it that far. No intention was made to "regum" the stamp or alter the stamp. Someone just prepared the stamp to postally use it but something failed in the process.

I would carefully look at the stamp and the gum to determine if this was the case. Making a judgement that this was a purposeful attempt to alter the stamp is premature without first investigation of the gum itself. If it were "set up" for postal use, the gum may add historical value to the stamp rather than diminish the value.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Gary
Deceased
****




Posts: 1626
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 8/4/2004 at 17:03


OK MSMIKE. If I lick a stamp and them decide not to use it, the gum is disturbed. How do you tell what my intentions were? DNA? "-))

Like wise, how do you tell if the sender added glue and set it aside?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
GregMirsky
Rossica Librarian
*********




Posts: 244
Registered: 11/2/2002
Location: Palo Alto,CA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Still Optimistic...

[*] posted on 8/4/2004 at 19:16


I guess the real issue is quite simple.

Couple scenarios:

1.If somebody removes original gum from the stamp, puts new gum instead AND trying to sell it as MNH OG stamp - in this case - it is a philatelic forgery made to take advantage of naive "gum collectors" (sorry - could not resist).

2. If somebody takes a stamp, which was originally issued, without gum, adds gum (because of lack of knowledge) and trying to sell it as MNH OG - stamp - it is a philatelic forgery too.

Everything else - things like condition of the stamp, condition of the perforation, and condition of the gum definitely effects stamp value (more or less - depends on buyer priorities).
View user's profile View All Posts By User

  Go To Top

Powered by the Rossica Society
XMB Forum Software © 2001-2017 The XMB Group
[Queries: 17]