Do these holes look right?

[lee]

Seems all the private vending I have seen have much bigger holes than these. Are these real? thanks, Lee

[msgtdavid]

Hi

Its refreshing to see someone include a reverse side scan, most collectors do not think the reverse side is important, a knowledgeable collector can determine a lot of information just from the reverse side image.

I do not know if the hole size is correct or not, but using the reverse side scan, you can see that the middle full perfs, one is way out of aligement, which makes it suspect. 

Sorry I could not answer your question about the size of the hole.

DAVID THOMPSON

MSGT/USAF/RETIRED

[lee]

I did find a similar pair at Siegel auction #873 Lot #3061 in 2004. I tried to link but had problems. It was in the Cheshire Collection of 1902-08. thanks, Lee

[pnjstamps]

Scott catalogue shows some Schermack perforations being this small. They did also produce some with much larger holes (almost 2mm diameter) but the smaller ones do exist. They can also be slightly misaligned (even the image in the catalogue shows some minor misalignment). 

Joe

[lee]

Thanks, looks like I might have to send it in for a cert. Have not been able to find my US Scott catalogue for about 3 months now. I guess the wife was right when she said I need to be more organized. Only have to search thru two full rooms. thanks, Lee

David sorry about being so snippy awhile back. Told myself I would never  be like my 80 year old Uncle in New Hampshire, but it seems the older I get the grumpier I get. Love the Grumpy Old Men movies though.

[jaywild]

Lee:

Here's an image of the pair from the Siegel auction.  It sold for $2400 but keep in mind that this sale was in 2004.  A lot of fluctuations in stamp value since then.

[billsey]

Heh, I would have been leary of the Siegel offering, each row of holes is a little higher on the stamp than the previous... I don't care for the original poster here, with the one misaligned in the center, but not at each side.

[msgtdavid]

Actually the Siegel pair is cut at an angle, so the perfs will look like you describe it, not suspect at all.

If we could see the reverse side, it would have been helpful.

I encourage all posters here, always include an image of the reverse side!

DAVID THOMPSON

MSGT/USAF/RETIRED

[jaywild]

A view of the back would have provided no information on these private perfs.  That’s why Siegel never includes a scan of the back even with stamp lots.

Billsey…

I have my doubts about the pair Lee posted to start this discussion, and for the same reason you mentioned.  If the perforations in the center of a pair are misaligned then the ones on the ends should be misaligned the same way.  These aren’t.   As to why the Siegel pair has strange perfs at the right, who knows?  It’s got a PF cert though.  I wouldn’t have bought it.  Stamps must be like Caesar’s wife before I will spring for them.  I don’t care what kind of cert a piece has—all expertizers have issued bad certs.  If a stamp has a respected cert but looks bad, most serious collectors will stay away from it IMO.

[msgtdavid]

If the reverse image is not available, then you would never know.

The reverse image especially on flat printed stamps often provides valuable information if one takes the time to study.

DAVID THOMPSON

MSGT/USAF/RETIRED