"Mint no gum" equal or not with "MNH"?...

[gogu]

Good morning gentlemen!
A terminology question:
some times I encounter on eBay an S/S described as "mint no gum" and when I
ask if it's MNH or MH, I receive the following answer: "it's not hinged but
has no gum"!
This answer does not enlighten me a lot, since an S/S can be issued
originally with...no gum but it can also have lost its original gum for
various reasons, so it can't be regarded as MNH!
What is your opinion?

tnx

[Terry Reedy]

Post by gogu
Good morning gentlemen!
some times I encounter on eBay an S/S described as "mint no gum" and when I
ask if it's MNH or MH, I receive the following answer: "it's not hinged but
has no gum"!

With 'hinged' interpreted as a adjective describing the present state,
not hinged now, this seems as much as can be said accurately. The sheet
might have been hinged in the past and washed away, and the seller might
or might not know the complete history.

Post by gogu
This answer does not enlighten me a lot, since an S/S can be issued
originally with...no gum but it can also have lost its original gum for
various reasons, so it can't be regarded as MNH!
What is your opinion?

To my knowledge, MNH is intended to mean unused with gum as issued,
undisturbed. MH means gum disturbed, by whatever means, with hinging
being the most common means. Gum completely washed off is maximum
disturbance and worse than merely being hinged. Reasons for being washed
include: the item was glued down to mount it; it became stuck to other
items due to moisture in storage; it had multiple hinges; or the gum was
of a type that would damage the stamp. It can also mean the item is
actually used but uncanceled or lightly canceled and the ink removed.

For items issued without gum, I hardly see hinging as an issue, as the
traces can be washed away*. Do catalogs mention when issued without gum?

*It is possible that there might be invisible gum traces detectable with
expensive lab equiqment.

TJR

[gogu]

Post by gogu
Good morning gentlemen!
some times I encounter on eBay an S/S described as "mint no gum" and when I
ask if it's MNH or MH, I receive the following answer: "it's not hinged but
has no gum"!

With 'hinged' interpreted as a adjective describing the present state, not
hinged now, this seems as much as can be said accurately. The sheet might
have been hinged in the past and washed away, and the seller might or
might not know the complete history.

Sure, but he never said it's Hinged or Never Hinged!
He just answered "Mint no gum"!
AFAIK there are some S/S that are issued with no gum from the factory!
So how can I understand if this S/S was issued with no gum or lost its gum
some time later?...
His answer seems to me evasive...

Post by gogu
This answer does not enlighten me a lot, since an S/S can be issued
originally with...no gum but it can also have lost its original gum for
various reasons, so it can't be regarded as MNH!
What is your opinion?

To my knowledge, MNH is intended to mean unused with gum as issued,
undisturbed. MH means gum disturbed, by whatever means, with hinging being
the most common means. Gum completely washed off is maximum disturbance
and worse than merely being hinged. Reasons for being washed include: the
item was glued down to mount it; it became stuck to other items due to
moisture in storage; it had multiple hinges; or the gum was of a type that
would damage the stamp. It can also mean the item is actually used but
uncanceled or lightly canceled and the ink removed.

So...how do I understand the state of the S/S based on his answer?!
To me, his answer is not clear (maybe intentionally...).

For items issued without gum, I hardly see hinging as an issue, as the
traces can be washed away*. Do catalogs mention when issued without gum?

I have a local catalogue not mentioning such info, that's my problem...
If you have Scott or Michel catalogue, could you please check for me?
It's Scott# B260 and Michel# block 26.
Thanks!

[Alyn]

Good morning Gogu,

If you give me the country of issue I will look in my Scott if it notes if the stamps were issued without gum.

Alyn
http://phabphilately.blogspot.com
http://alynlunt.com/stamps


On Thursday, November 29, 2012 5:16:45 AM UTC-5, gogu wrote:
<snip>
I have a local catalogue not mentioning such info, that's my problem... If you have Scott or Michel catalogue, could you please check for me? It's Scott# B260 and Michel# block 26. Thanks!

[gogu]

Post by Alyn
Good morning Gogu,
If you give me the country of issue I will look in my Scott if it notes if
the stamps were issued without gum.

Hello Alyn!
As I said it Scott# B260 and Michel# 26.
The issuing country is Romania.

tnx
--
E' mai possibile, oh porco di un cane, che le avventure
in codesto reame debban risolversi tutte con grandi
puttane! F.d.A

Coins, travels and more:
http://s208.photobucket.com/albums/bb120/golanule/
http://gogu.enosi.org/index.html

Post by Alyn
Alyn
http://phabphilately.blogspot.com
http://alynlunt.com/stamps
<snip>
I have a local catalogue not mentioning such info, that's my problem... If
you have Scott or Michel catalogue, could you please check for me? It's
Scott# B260 and Michel# block 26. Thanks!

[gogu]

Post by gogu

Post by Alyn
Good morning Gogu,
If you give me the country of issue I will look in my Scott if it notes
if the stamps were issued without gum.

Hello Alyn!
As I said it's Scott# B260 and Michel# 26.
The issuing country is Romania.

Forgot to mention, on my catalogue its title is "Fundatia Regelui Carol I"
value of 200 Lei, and it was issued on February 10th, 1945.

tnx

[Alyn]

Hi again Gogu

My 2009 Scott states that the souvenir sheet was issued imperforate without gum.

Alyn
http://phabphilately.blogspot.com
http://alynlunt.com/stamps

[gogu]

Post by Alyn
Hi again Gogu
My 2009 Scott states that the souvenir sheet was issued imperforate without gum.

Wow!
Thanks Alyn!
So soon I'll have a mint never hinged piece in my hands and for a ridiculous
price, less than $1.00!!!
Thanks again!

PS
Although we know that prices in the various catalogues many times are
way off, could you please let me know the price Scott is indicating for this
S/S in MNH condition?
tnx
--
E' mai possibile, oh porco di un cane, che le avventure
in codesto reame debban risolversi tutte con grandi
puttane! F.d.A

Coins, travels and more:
http://s208.photobucket.com/albums/bb120/golanule/
http://gogu.enosi.org/index.html

Post by Alyn
Alyn
http://phabphilately.blogspot.com
http://alynlunt.com/stamps

[Alyn]

Good morning gogu,

On Thursday, November 29, 2012 4:28:01 PM UTC-5, gogu wrote:
PS Although we know that prices in the various catalogues many times are way off, could you please let me know the price Scott is indicating for this S/S in MNH condition? tnx -- E'

My 2009 scott values this S/S at $7.50 for both mint and used versions.

Alyn
http://phabphilately.blogspot.com
http://alynlunt.com/stamps

[Terry Reedy]

Post by gogu
Sure, but he never said it's Hinged or Never Hinged!

'He' might not know.

Post by gogu
He just answered "Mint no gum"!

For that to be true, the item would have to have been issued without
gum, as Alyn now says it was, and unused.

Post by gogu
AFAIK there are some S/S that are issued with no gum from the factory!
So how can I understand if this S/S was issued with no gum or lost its gum
some time later?...
His answer seems to me evasive...

Perhaps, or perhaps he is ignorant, or is not completely fluent in English.

Post by gogu
So...how do I understand the state of the S/S based on his answer?!
To me, his answer is not clear (maybe intentionally...).

I checked what Scott says on the general issue. Except for certain types
of items, they have two columns of values for 'unused' and 'used' items.
Note that they do *not* use 'mint'. From US Specialized, Understanding
the Listings p.12A, 2001:

"Unused values refer to items that have not seen postal ... duty... .
For pre-1890 issues, unused stamps must have at least most of their
original gum; for later issues, complete gum is expected. Stamps issued
without gum are noted." It is also noted within sections the date at
which 'complete gum' means 'unhinged' (and, by implication, without
other disturbance).

Also interesting, in recognition of the difficultly of removing used
self-adhesives from underlying paper: "Scott values for used
self-adhesive stamps are for examples either on piece or off piece."

[gogu]

Post by Terry Reedy

Post by gogu
Sure, but he never said it's Hinged or Never Hinged!

'He' might not know.

Well, he has a stamps' shop and although he says he's based in Switzerland,
my stamps come from...Turkey!
(I'm a returning customer...).
So if he doesn't know but he's a dealer, well....that sounds no good to
me....

Post by Terry Reedy

Post by gogu
He just answered "Mint no gum"!

For that to be true, the item would have to have been issued without gum,
as Alyn now says it was, and unused.

Yes, now I know, thanks Alyn if you are reading this;-)

Post by Terry Reedy

Post by gogu
AFAIK there are some S/S that are issued with no gum from the factory!
So how can I understand if this S/S was issued with no gum or lost its gum
some time later?...
His answer seems to me evasive...

Perhaps, or perhaps he is ignorant, or is not completely fluent in English.

You are probably right, his english is quite poor, his first answer was
"...hallo mr the blok is no muni best regards ****...."!
And his next answer was "...hallo mr the blok is not gumi best regards..."!
What should I understand of this?!

Post by Terry Reedy

Post by gogu
So...how do I understand the state of the S/S based on his answer?!
To me, his answer is not clear (maybe intentionally...).

I checked what Scott says on the general issue. Except for certain types
of items, they have two columns of values for 'unused' and 'used' items.
Note that they do *not* use 'mint'. From US Specialized, Understanding the
"Unused values refer to items that have not seen postal ... duty... . For
pre-1890 issues, unused stamps must have at least most of their original
gum; for later issues, complete gum is expected. Stamps issued without gum
are noted." It is also noted within sections the date at which 'complete
gum' means 'unhinged' (and, by implication, without other disturbance).
Also interesting, in recognition of the difficultly of removing used
self-adhesives from underlying paper: "Scott values for used self-adhesive
stamps are for examples either on piece or off piece."

Anyway, I hope I'll have it in my hands next week so I'll let you know if it
was MH or MNH or whatever:-)
Thanks for the insight on Scott and glossary Terry!

Tnx!

[Padraigh ProAmerica]

Re: "Mint no gum" equal or not with "MNH"?...

Group: rec.collecting.stamps.discuss Date: Thu, Nov 29, 2012, 12:16pm
(EST+7) From: ***@Pula.com (gogu)
=CF "Terry Reedy" <***@udel.edu> =DD=E3=F1=E1=F8=E5 =F3=F4=EF
=EC=DE=ED=F5=EC=E1 news:k95vii$en4$***@speranza.aioe.org...
On 11/26/2012 7:46 PM, gogu wrote:
Good morning gentlemen!
A terminology question:
some times I encounter on eBay an S/S described as "mint no gum" and
when I
ask if it's MNH or MH, I receive the following answer: "it's not hinged
but
has no gum"!
With 'hinged' interpreted as a adjective describing the present state,
not hinged now, this seems as much as can be said accurately. The sheet
might have been hinged in the past and washed away, and the seller might
or might not know the complete history.
Sure, but he never said it's Hinged or Never Hinged! He just answered
"Mint no gum"!
AFAIK there are some S/S that are issued with no gum from the factory!
So how can I understand if this S/S was issued with no gum or lost its
gum some time later?...
His answer seems to me evasive...
This answer does not enlighten me a lot, since an S/S can be issued
originally with...no gum but it can also have lost its original gum for
various reasons, so it can't be regarded as MNH! What is your opinion?
To my knowledge, MNH is intended to mean unused with gum as issued,
undisturbed. MH means gum disturbed, by whatever means, with hinging
being the most common means. Gum completely washed off is maximum
disturbance and worse than merely being hinged. Reasons for being washed
include: the item was glued down to mount it; it became stuck to other
items due to moisture in storage; it had multiple hinges; or the gum was
of a type that would damage the stamp. It can also mean the item is
actually used but uncanceled or lightly canceled and the ink removed.
So...how do I understand the state of the S/S based on his answer?! To
me, his answer is not clear (maybe intentionally...).
For items issued without gum, I hardly see hinging as an issue, as the
traces can be washed away*. Do catalogs mention when issued without gum?

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

IIRC Scott does; i.e. the "Farley specials" of the early 1930's.
--------------------------------------

I have a local catalogue not mentioning such info, that's my problem...
If you have Scott or Michel catalogue, could you please check for me?
It's Scott# B260 and Michel# block 26.
Thanks!
--
E' mai possibile, oh porco di un cane, che le avventure in codesto reame
debban risolversi tutte con grandi puttane! =A0 F.d.A
Coins, travels and more:
http://s208.photobucket.com/albums/bb120/golanule/
http://gogu.enosi.org/index.html

--
"Some things take a set amount of time. You can't get a baby in one
month by getting nine women pregnant."--

Unknown

[gogu]

Post by gogu
Good morning gentlemen!
some times I encounter on eBay an S/S described as "mint no gum" and when
I ask if it's MNH or MH, I receive the following answer: "it's not hinged
but has no gum"!
This answer does not enlighten me a lot, since an S/S can be issued
originally with...no gum but it can also have lost its original gum for
various reasons, so it can't be regarded as MNH!
What is your opinion?

Good afternoon!
I received my S/S (actually two identical S/Ss) but still can't say if there
is something fishy with them...
Bear in mind I'm in stamps collecting for just about 8 months, so my
experience in the field is almost zero (I'm an old coin collector
though...).
I was wondering if you could say from a scanning if those two S/Ss are
genuine, MNH or not, etc...
I mean, is it easy for someone to judge by a picture only?....
If someone is confident he can do that, please let me know and I'll put a
scanning on net so he can give me his opinion.

Tnx