Postage Stamp Chat Board & Stamp Bulletin Board Forum
 

I bought these on ebay. Yea!! Afterwards, I asked the dealer a question and he didn't respond to it.

Now, I am stuck wondering if he didn't answer me because the stamps are indeed fake.



My question was that the 10 shilling brown should be on pink paper, but it doesn't appear to be on pink paper.

Can anyone help me out here?

What was the lot number?

Did description say the 10/- was on pink paper?

If it did not, why assume it was, seeing you had the photo?

What on earth is with the heading "FAKE"???? I'll bet my house nothing in that scan is "FAKE".

If this is a leading dealer, why brand him as selling "FAKES" just because you appear unable to read?

I was just including the context to my question without mentioning the dealer's name. I have edited the reference to his position in the stamp club out now. If you edit yours, there will be no reference to the word 'fake.'

I guess the question should have been formed to ask whether all 10/- should be on pink paper, and I am guessing now that the answer is NO!

The heading had no description concerning the 10/- . It was just Victoria Revenue stamps

You stated he was a past APTA President and asked if he was selling fakes.

That is a very serious accusation.

So again - what was the lot number, so we can see EXACTLY what it was described at.

Admin

It was only meant to be an inquiry about the stamps. I assumed that all 10/ are suppose to be on pink paper. It doesn't look pink to me. Is it fake or not?

An inquiry and an accusation are different. An accusation comes with a judgment. I have made no judgment.

It would be great if you would just delete the whole thread. I apologize if I did wrong thing here.

I think this may be the item.

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Victoria-Revenue-Stamp-Duty-10-etc-original-document-/160806311158

Yes, that is it. Now can you delete this thread?

I think the question has been answered. All 10/- do not have to be on pink paper. I am begging the mods to delete this thread least it cause more misunderstandings.

Unless someone say that all 10/- were suppose to be on pink paper, then I will leave this thread forever.

Well spotted caddyman - yes those are the same stamps -

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/ws/eBayISAPI ... true&rt=nc

Described simply as:

"Victoria Revenue Stamp Duty £10 etc on original document"

And clearly showing 1964 ballpoint cancels on a revenue document.

No other wording in text or lot write-up.

Why this goose above bought them, and then alleged they were fake, and complained the 10/- was not on pink paper, is a mystery to me.

It does not look to be on pink paper in the scan, and is not described as being on pink paper.

The seller Rodney Perry is a respected dealer, "Stamp News" columnist, an active member here, and formed THE finest collection of the stamps of Victoria that has ever existed.

So a valuable lesson to our member missionshk - THINK first before starting threads re "FAKES" and imputing respected dealers are selling them.

You might get a defamation writ on your desk if you keep doing that.

Just because YOU are obviously clueless, and bid on things you have no idea about is your problem, not the seller's problem.

The smart thing is to ask questions FIRST before spending your money as most savvy buyers do. But if collectors did that, ebay would be a far quieter place.

Glen

Check the dates of the Transfer of shares, and the current rate of duty applicable then.

CSR transfer, Company incorporated in NSW, but the shares on the Melbourne Register of the company, but going through a NSW stock firm.

With the Agent's cancel, I see no reason for reasons to query this item.

And it did not sell for a million dollars.

Sigh.

Rod Perry is a nice guy, I had no idea it was him.

Again, I was not accusing him, I was providing the backdrop for my question on the board entitled, 'Ask a question someone will answer."

Its always great to get my questions answered, one way or the other, even if the questions are misunderstood by some. I find it strange that clueless people have to be punished for being clueless. Perhaps you should change the title of the thread to "Ask reasonable questions and someone will answer."

Now, please delete this thread.

Well Rod does not hide the fact.


http://members.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=rap_com_au

Who are we?

Rodney A Perry (rap) has been a Philatelic trader since 1962. We are proud members of ASDA, APS (member #074745), PTS, and of course APTA (Rod was President 1999-2001).

Why do you want to keep this thread going?

Are you unable to delete this thread?

You think this object lesson, whoever is to blame, is welcomed by Rod?

Please DELETE THIS THREAD.

ps. Apologies for my part in this misunderstanding as my grammar is not that good. "Wondering if" was meant to be a question about the stamps, not a declaration they were "indeed" judged to be fake. The question was whether a 10/ was suppose to be or not suppose to be on pink paper. That question was what I wanted help with. I was not trying to bring an "accusation" as you keep saying.
Nevertheless, I could have worded it better.

Yes we able to, but will not be doing it.

This is a public Bulletin Board. If we deleted a thread every time someone posting something silly, it would be a far smaller board.

This is not the first time you have charged into ebay, bought something you know nothing about, and whined about it here later.

If these forays teach you to think a little first before bidding, you may thank the board one day. For saving you money and time.

Bidding high on fiscal used junk, and then posting this type of nonsense thing below is NOT how we like to do things here, please learn from it.

"I am stuck wondering if he didn't answer me because the stamps are indeed fake"

The real question in all of this.

Why does missionshk think the 10/- should be on pink paper?

That is what its described as in the SG online cat.http://www.allworldstamps.com/results.asp?cid=690&sid=1582&range=N&pg=11

See http://www.ozrevenues.com/Revenue-Railw ... alogue.htm

The stamps on the document are listed as follows:

10s - $5
£2 - $15
£10 - $50
1s - between $2 and $20 depending on watermark
3d - 50c

I don't think the 10s forged - why would anyone go to the trouble of forging a $5 stamp?

_________________
My wantlist for Malta Revenues

With a pinhole, and an ugly biro cancel, it is not worth anything like $5.

50c maybe.

missionshk

What is listed in SG are the printings that were made in the 19th century and which were valid for fiscal and postal use for a limited period of time. These stamps were used throughout the 20th century, for fiscal purposes only and the later printings were made, I presume, on not pink paper.

The value in this piece is in the demonstration of the use of the stamps and not in the stamps themselves. The SG used values are also for these fiscal stamps used for postal purposes. Genuine postal usages are very scarce.

I don't think you deserved the abuse directed your way, but your question was asked in the wrong manner. Hopefully you now have the information you were seeking.

For all of the Australian states there are high value fiscal stamps that were theoretically usable as postage stamps. Just try and find the £20 South Australia Postage & Revenue properly used for postage.

First I've heard that missionshk asked a question about my eBay lot.

Appears to be a genuine misunderstanding, and if you're not happy with the lot I will cheerfully refund eBay cost + shipping.

Members comments above typically are well informed!

As a footnote, the CSR "find" was made a few years ago by two teenage boys, who noticed the hoard of old folios containing the Share Transfer documents (there were 30,000 docs!) in a skip in Melbourne CBD.

They did a fine service repatriating the folios to the philatelic market, and made some useful pocket money in so doing.

Not so sure that former CSR shareholders would be as impressed with privacy breach, although docs were 1950s/1960s vintage transfers.

Rod Perry