The value of stamps - answering my fan(s)

I've had a couple of comments on my blogs so far. After this post, one commenter asked:

What is more valuable, the isolated plate block (i.e. separate/ripped out of the pane), or the larger pane/sheet? Are the images of your plate blocks cropped from the larger panes?

Do stamps lose value if stamps from a plate block and/or pane have been folded along the perforated holes?

Finally, any interesting tidbits on stamp counterfeiting? Is it relatively easy to counterfeit stamps? (Granted, for new/recent stamps, I can imagine it wouldn't be worth the effort, given the marginal value compared to paper currency.)

So let me try to answer these good questions.

1. I bought my plate blocks as such. I did buy a couple of full panes, but have kept them intact. I would guess that the most common groupings of stamps sold in the U.S. are as singles, plate blocks, and panes, respectively.

The cheapest plate block prices I am seeing today on eBay for the IGY stamp Scott #1107 are about $1 for the 4 stamps. So, $1/block, or $0.25 per stamp.

The lowest price for a pane of this stamp is $7 for the 50 stamps, including four plate blocks, so that's $1.75/block, or $0.14/stamp. So if you want blocks at a lower price, buy the blocks. If you want a lot of stamps, a pane is more cost effective.

2. There is a complex grading system for determining the authenticity and quality, hence monetary value, of stamps (i.e., expertizing) that I have never worried about too much. See, for example, this description from the Philatelic Foundation, one of the big four expertizing groups in the U.S. One of the factors in determining the grade is creasing. So if a block had been folded along the perforations, and this were evident, I imagine that would affect its value.

3. One reason for expertizing (having an acknowledged expert evaluate a stamp, for a fee of several tens of dollars) is the possibility that stamps are fakes or forgeries. Fakes are stamps that have been modified to try to remove flaws and enhance their value, e.g., re-gumming the backs, as might be done by unscrupulous vendors (thankfully, a small minority). Forgeries are the skillful re-creations of very valuable stamps. "Counterfeit" stamps per se are more mundane attempts to imitate valid postage stamps that could be used in the mail. I don't really know how easy or common these practices are, but they certainly exist. 

People collect stamps for different reasons. Most of us are not, or should not, be concerned about the monetary value of our stamps. In this YouTube video, Mr. Ted shows us that in recent decades stamps in general have not been a good investment, or store of value (my older son swears that Bitcoin is!). On the other hand, one expertizing company says "Collectors who spend more than $50 per stamp are considered advanced and can amass a valuable collection over time." This isn't me, though; so far, I have not spent that much on any stamp or cover. I assume that stamp values follow some variant of the Pareto principle, where 20% of items account for 80% of their total value. For one extreme, check out Graham Beck's excellent vlog on his selections of the most interesting valuable stamps, 

including the over-$1 million dollar 1856 British Guiana 1¢ Magenta (1856) and the U.S. Inverted Jenny (1918). The former is valuable just because there is only one extant copy, the latter because of a printing error in one sheet of the original issue.

I have not been logging the purchase prices of my collections. But I think the most expensive stamp I have bought so far is the Soviet Union stamp issued on Nov. 28, 1957, showing the pioneering Russian rocket scientist Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, which cost me $20. An earlier Tsiolkovsky stamp (Russia, Scott #1991) was issued on Oct. 7, 1957, about a month after the centennial of his birth, but presumably timed to nearly coincide with what turned out to be the successful launch of Sputnik 1 (Earth's first artificial satellite) on October 4, during the IGY. On Nov. 28, 1957, another stamp with the same design was issued, but now with an overprint caption (Russia, Scott #2021) to specifically acknowledge the launch. By the way, one factor in stamp grading is centering of the design on the stamp; you'll notice that neither of these excel on that criterion.

Scott catalog Russia #1991, issued Oct. 7, 1957

Scott catalog Russia #2021, issued Nov. 28, 1957

Possibly my most expensive cover purchase so far, also for $20, is shown below.

Philatelic cover for the 25th anniversary of America's first successful satellite launch, signed by James Van Allen

This was postmarked on Jan. 31, 1983, twenty-five years after the first U.S. satellite, Explorer 1, was launched into orbit in 1958, also during the IGY but several months after Sputnik 1. The price was higher because of the signature of physicist James Van Allen, who confirmed the existence of the eponymous Van Allen radiation belts as a result of data collected during the Explorer 1 and Explorer 3 missions.

Any more questions?