Marketplace analogy between pressed notes and hinged postage stamps

News: Registration is free here at the CPMF!

Most members will be aware that mint postage stamps are those that have not gone through the postal system and still have part or all of their original gum on the back. Most earlier (pre-1930) mint stamps have been hinged on the back in order to anchor them in a stamp album. Early stamps that have never been hinged are generally rare and desirable and often sell for 2 to 5 times what the corresponding hinged stamps would sell for. Standard stamp catalogues (Stanley Gibbons, Scott, etc.) list separate prices for hinged (H) stamps and never hinged (NH) stamps in the form of a percentage premium for being unhinged (usually 100% or 200% but sometimes more).

You are probably asking what my point is here! Well, it's this. If you pick up any stamp auction catalogue or stamp dealer's price list you will find that every mint stamp without exception is fully described for what it is, i.e., NH or H. The philatelic marketplace demands this and no self-respecting collector or dealer would ever bid on or buy a mint stamp without knowing for sure whether it had been hinged or not!

Now what about paper money you ask? Well, my point here is that there should be MANDATORY FULL DISCLOSURE of all paper currency being sold at public auction, on dealers' lists, at bourse shows, on eBay, and elsewhere. Just as mint postage stamps are either NH or H, so a bank note is either ORIGINAL (O) or PRESSED (P). If a note has been PRESSED (or otherwise processed) then that's just the way it is, it's never going to revert to being original. Why try to hide the fact and obfuscate using (or not using!) evasive terminology such as "Exceptional Paper Quality"? Some auctioneers will indeed mention that a note has been pressed but more often than not they are inconsistent in this regard and all too often omission of the word "pressed" does not imply that the note is original.

It would be so easy for everyone if every note offered for sale was listed with the code "O" for original or "P" for pressed/processed. This would save a great deal of heartache and would avoid all of the hassles associated with returning material on the basis of inadequate description.

I know that Olmstead Currency (and perhaps others?) have been using the "O" code to denote an original note for several years now and I hope that in the not-too-distant future all sellers and third-party graders will follow suit. It would make life "O" so easy for everyone!

While on this topic, I hope that eventually we will see A PERCENTAGE PREMIUM ASSIGNED TO ORIGINAL UNMOLESTED NOTES in future editions of the two Charlton Standard catalogues. I personally believe that this innovation would significantly reduce the amount of nefarious pressing and processing that goes on behind closed doors.

I agree with Ottawa. I think if your going out to buy a nice note you should know what you are paying for. And I think that the "O" or the "P" would really help.

It would be so easy for everyone if every note offered for sale was listed with the code "O" for original or "P" for pressed/processed. This would save a great deal of heartache and would avoid all of the hassles associated with returning material on the basis of inadequate description.

I would agree with what you have to say, however I still think in some cases telling whether a note is Original or Pressed may not always be that cut and dry.
I have one recent example where a note was sent to a Canadian grader and it was returned graded ...but with neither Original or Pressed in the description.  When I questioned the grading I was told that they were not confident enough to specifiy original or pressed?   This is what really got me wondering?  If they don't know....how am I suppose to know...to me it looked original.
As well, I purchased a note from a very well known Canadian dealer which stated that the note was Original, yet when it was sent to a US TPG it was graded without the EPQ and stated that it was pressed.
I sure that there will always be exceptions.  To avoid any problems the names of the dealer and TPG were not mentioned, but should it be an issue to anyone ...you can email me directly.
FRIEDSQUID

I would agree with what you have to say, however I still think in some cases telling whether a note is Original or Pressed may not always be that cut and dry. I have one recent example where a note was sent to a Canadian grader and it was returned graded ... but with neither Original or Pressed in the description.  When I questioned the grading I was told that they were not confident enough to specifiy original or pressed?

I too have encountered a few (very few) situations in which it is very difficult to take a stand one way or the other. However, these situations have been very rare in my experience (perhaps one in 50 to 100 notes). In these situations I think you have to err on the side of caution. Thus, if I cannot convince myself that a note is unambiguously and fully original then I would describe it as "lightly pressed" or something like that .... or possibly "About Original" . After all, for a note to be unambiguously and fully original it should display clear and obvious characteristics of an original note and those characteristics should literally jump out at you from the word go. If those characteristics don't jump out at you then it's not a fully original note, i.e., something has happened to it along the way, such as being stored in a damp environment, etc.

It's easier to see if a stamp has been hinged than a note has been "pressed".

The real problem relies on the definition of what exactly means a "processed" or "pressed" note.  And to have a good definition, you must have a reference note (or at least a very precise description of it) to which you can compare any note, in any serie, in any denomination. Any difference could be noted and find a "natural" cause to keep the term "original".

And you should see the intention behind any apparent "processing".  Take a case where you place a note for your collection in a Mylar holder and put it flat in an album with many others notes during 20 years: the note will be flatenned and could be seen as "pressed", whereas it was simply properly stored...There was no intention to "improve" the note.  Will you degrade this note simply because it is perfectly flat?

Anyway,  if we refer to the recent "improvement" of the grading standards in the Charlton's (UNC-60, Choice-Unc 63 and Gem-UNC 65) with a system of points of demerits, these new standards were seemingly not precise enough for some gradation companies and dealers and hasn't stopped the inflation of the grades and the abuse of superlative words to describe a note such as having an "exceptional-ultra-super-extra-outstanding-paper-quality-MS69"   ), so I'm not sure that any new system will work  better than this last...

In the case where the proposed system is adopted, I'm afraid to see later a note labelled "half-pressed", or "quarter-original", or  "partially-improved", or "tentatively-restored"...

The real problem relies on the definition of what exactly means a "processed" or "pressed" note.  And to have a good definition, you must have a reference note (or at least a very precise description of it) to which you can compare any note, in any series, in any denomination. Any difference could be noted and find a "natural" cause to keep the term "original".

This is a question I have always had regarding the current Journey series.
In some cases there have been certain prefixes that all I can ever find, even in new sealed bricks are notes that have ripples and or waves in the paper. Is this considered natural when the note is being graded by a TPG or does it automatically drop the grade. I know some notes have the cutting cup and some may not depending on where in the brick they are, but then again at what grade do you originally start the note at and start to minus demerit points.  I think things may seem clear in black and white, but in reality it is not always that easy.

Will you degrade this note simply because it is perfectly flat?

I do try to keep my notes upright,  but sometimes when this is not possible I usually stack very few together with that concern in mind.  I would hate to come back to them years later discovering that my collection has decreased in value because they where flattened.
FRIEDSQUID

It's easier to see if a stamp has been hinged than a note has been "pressed" ...........................

In the case where the proposed system is adopted, I'm afraid to see later a note labelled "half-pressed", or "quarter-original", or  "partially-improved", or "tentatively-restored"...

That's all very true but you omitted "about original" lol! And I'd like to add a few cop-out expressions that we see every day on eBay, things like "possibly pressed", "may have been pressed long ago", etc. Personally speaking, I don't have much trouble identifying pressed notes. However, that may be because I have nearly 40 years of detective experience under my belt but I remember all too well how I was deceived by many pressed notes in my earlier days.

The best way to develop an expertise in recognizing the many differences between pressed and original notes is to wash, bleach, press, iron and even refrigerate some cheap common foreign notes yourself. I've done this myself in the past and it's a great learning experience. You can press wet (under a pile of books), you can press damp, you can iron wet, you can iron damp, you can iron between sheets of white paper, you can iron in direct contact with the metal surface, etc.

Perhaps the biggest giveaways with washed/pressed notes (apart from a possible chemical smell) are flat dull lifeless surfaces (when viewed obliquely), lack of embossing of serial numbers/signatures, and those demoralizing ripply/wavy horizontal edges that just won't sit flat whatever you do to them! It's important to get to know what the paper sheen (microscopic three-dimensional "pickling" or "puckering") on an original note looks like although different papers do exhibit different characteristics in this respect. If a note looks "as flat as an ironing board" without any microscopic surface pickling then that's probably where it's been.

Trying to "improve" notes in many different ways  (wetting, dampening, ironing, etc.) on cheap face value notes is the best way to learn on what to look and how we can interpret what we see in order to tell later that a note has beeen "processed"...  Unfortunately, it's only possible with the current serie, and maybe the 2$ notes of the Bird serie.  For the earlier series, it's much less evident to make such trials...

Unless you know a kindly dealer  (who could also be interested by the results) who borrow you quite some cheap 1$ or 2$ UNC notes in the Multicolor and 1954 serie to "process" them...