In my opinion hipvalue is probably not a good indicator of value and rather a lower average price for an average condition stamp. Stamp value mostly derives from condition. The old saying applies; you get what you pay for. I think a trend cloud of which countries or issues were selling the most would be an interesting feature.
What is a HipValue? I am the person that started this discussion. If one wants a particular item, looking for that item and finding it, who gives 2 knobs of goat shite what HipValue says. Sam
I'm noticing in the 1 cent sale that there is a Canal Zone 77 MNH with a HipValue of $170. This cannot be correct. The 2017 SCV is $45. It looks like it is giving the value for Scott US 77 Unused. "The HipValue for United States #77 Unused is $170 based on approximately 18 sales."
In the example of the Norway #38, the stated HipValue is skewed by the sort routine that gathers the information. In the example, stamps other than Norway #38 are included in the determination of the "HipValue". There are Norway #38, #38a, and sets that include #38. Usually minor numbers in Scott catalog higher than the major number, and sets of course sell for more than a single stamp.
Actually that's not the case. When a HipValue is calculated, only the exact Catalog Number is considered, and only when it's the only item which was sold. So in the example of a Norway #38, neither a Norway #38a or any listing which included other stamps, including sets, would be considered in determining the HipValue of a Norway #38a.
That being said, a HipValue Subscription offers two main benefits. One is a quick overview of the trending sales price for the item on HipStamp - the "HipValue" itself, and the other is the ability to click through to see similar actual sales. Those sales will generally include all of the listings which were included in calculating the HipValue, as well as similar listings.
This may include items for the same exact Catalog Number and Condition which we excluded in our calculations because they appeared too far off from the rest, and it was assumed something may be wrong with how the item was classified (for example if there was a US #1 which sold for $1 we would assume that the Country and Catalog Number are actually incorrect and ignore the item in the calculation, but you'll still see it in the past sales). This may also include sales for minor numbers and sets. All of which are provided for you to review - but not included in the calculation of the "HipValue" itself. This is also noted at the top of the page which shows you past sales.
That aside, if you're viewing a specific item, for the HipValue to be correct, the Country and Catalog Number on the listing itself need to be correct. When we import listings from other sites, or if a Seller Bulk Uploads listings and does not fill in the Country & Catalog Number, we will attempt to automatically extract the Country and Catalog Number, which works well in about 99.9% of cases, but not all. So, as a quick way to check what HipValue you are seeing, when you hover over a HipValue it tells you. In this specific case you're seeing a HipValue for United States #77 Unused", not a "Canal Zone #77 Unused" - which explains the discrepancy. It looks like the way the title of the item was created it's a little confusing. We'll review this specific example soon for further enhancements.
Mark, my comment was based on the end of your original post to this thread.
"Once you review a HipValue, you can take it a step further and review a large sample of the sales data behind the HipValue, where you can review over 10 years of items sold online, ie:
It was my understanding that the link goes to a list of sold items from which the HipValue for Norway #38 was based. It clearly shows non-Norway #38 stamps.
Michael - Apologies for any confusion. When you click through in that example, you will see that there are 36 items being shown. However, at the top of the page there's a large note:
The HipValue for Norway #38 Used is $6 based on approximately 19 sales. Note: For reference, additional listings may be shown below, including lots with multiple items, and/or flagged as Cataloged incorrectly - which were not included in the HipValue calculation; and therefore the number of listings may differ from the number of HipValue sales.
Looks like I need a bottle of tequila when I'm browsing around the site...I've been getting confused quite often lately. Well pushing up to 4,000 listings is my next task. I'd better get back to it.
I notice some sellers appear to be using the same photo on similar stamps with major price differences.For example I see what appears to be the same photo on mint Canada #E6 with one at $1350.00 and one at $13.60. How does this affect setting a Hip price?
John, As Mark says in his first reply, above, if a selling price diverges too far from the norm, that figure will not be used in the calculation: "same exact Catalog Number and Condition which we excluded in our calculations because they appeared too far off from the rest, and it was assumed something may be wrong with how the item was classified."
The lower priced ($13.60) one would probably fall within the norm and I would think if a photo is borrowed it would be borrowed from the higher priced one. I think where you have two sellers where the photo of the stamp appears to be the same photo you would eliminate all items with the same photo. What is actually being sold if it is not a photo of the stamp being sold?
Keep in mind that Hip Values are only based off of actual sales of items. Simply creating a listing at any given price will not have any effect on said item's HipValue. That being said, what you're describing, in that one Seller has borrowed the image of another Seller's listing - or another item, would generally be against our terms and conditions.
However, I've reviewed the Canada #E6's which we have listed, and while I do see an item which is priced at $1,350 as well as two at $13.60 - these items all have different images. The higher priced one does have significantly better centering than the rest - though I doubt it would command such a high price. So unless that item actually sells it would have no effect whatsoever on the HipValue of a Canada #E6 - since only sales are considered. However, also as noted, when calculating a HipValue, if any sale of an item is significantly outside the rest - it will not be included.
Mark: Not trying to carry this on forever but I would suggest you get an impartial opinion on whether photo on both of these offerings is the same. Upper left corner appears to be missing a perf and has same appearance on at least two of these. Just look at other corner perfs and you will see many similarities. These stamps do not come with the same perfs. and same corners. John
If so, many of the perfs are rather similar, particularly the corners - but if you take a closer look - they're not all similar, and the centering is different as well. It's not the same image - or stamp pictured in these two listings. If there is another listing you're referring to, which you believe is using the image of ID: 541413 please let us know and we'll review it further.
Yes these are the two photos but there are too many similarities to be a diff stamp. For instance note 5th perf. down at left. UL Corner and lower left corners are the same on each just to start. As mentioned get an impartial collector or dealer to offer his or her opinion.
Well to me these are CLEARLY different images. For example, first two perfs on left from top are clearly different. Top right corner is different. While there are some similarities it only takes one or two things to indicate a different image.
Note also that the paper actually appears a different color. Here is an image of the bottom perfs cropped and put side by side (well top to bottom!). Note also the two whitish lines below the image on the top stamp.
Did anyone notice that there are 2 whitish lines on the top stamp which are not there on the bottom stamp? (The white lines are from lines on the scanner glass)
Also the seller that is trying to sell that stamp has had it graded at Graded SUPERB99 GEM STAMP with cert
Perhaps Hip Stamps should pay the $13.60 price to see what they get. Photos are only photos and can be made to look better. Look what they do to actors and actresses in their publicity photos. If the stamp is the same as the photo I will pay Hip Stamps for the stamp and the shipping, etc. By the way I think the $13.60 stamp looks better in the photo than the $1350.00 one.
I agree. They are two different stamps. Last night I looked at several of the E6 listed for sale, and did not see any that were the same image. Granted I didn't look at all of them, but I did look at the ridiculously priced money-grab because it's "graded" stamp and compared it to the one Mark shows. Clearly not the same.
The expensive stamp has a noticeably narrower right margin than left, while the cheaper one has a narrower left margin (and is the nicer stamp, in my opinion).
Have any of you noticed that the expensive stamp (Top stamp here.) has many fibres extending from many perfs. Cheaper stamp (Lower stamp.) has very even perfs and virtually all the fibres have been cut off of the photo. Most #E6 mint I have handled have fibres at perfs. some I have handled showed signs that a previous owner or whoever sold it to them had used an exacto knife on them. Think of the lower photo as having had some work done on it and then compare photos.
I can't even begin to imagine anyone doctoring a Canada E6 - it's a cheap common stamp, and how would one go about trimming the tiny perforations with an exacto knife ?
I've seen a lot of fake imperfs, a lot of hinged stamps doctored to pass as NH, a lot of cleaned cancels, rebacking, fraudulent cancels and overprints, reperfed straight edges, fake Schermacks and a host of other games played but I don't ever recall anyone using an exacto knife to clean up perfs, much less on a $10 to $15 stamp. It would probably come out looking scissors cut.
Sorry for the long sentence but i couldn't find a logical break point.
In this case I was not talking about the actual stamp but just the photo of the stamp. Some stamps sold at auction are listed by auctioneer as reperforated. People who do this have to practice on something. What explanation do you give for all the perfs looking so clean and no sign of fibres.
You know, I tend to agree with you, John, that the second image is merely a digital alteration of that first image.
Something is kind of fishy -- I overlaid the two images and lightened the second one so that it was somewhat transparent . . . and the two images lined up perfectly!! There's almost no chance that two different sellers making scans of a stamp would scan it at exactly the same size with the same size black field around it and with every perf tooth lining up perfectly!
I think John is right -- those fibrous and somewhat torn perfs could have easily been made to have straight edges in a digital graphics program! I think it's the same image, altered for some reason to make the stamp look whiter.
Here's the image I got with the 'whiter' stamp overlayed on top of the expensive one at 50%.
Dave Bennett: Thanks for your technical input. I have felt what I said and saw was right but perhaps your input should sway the many naysayers that I bumped into on this. Now if everyone agrees I will get an answer to my original questions. John Talman
Comments
I am the person that started this discussion.
If one wants a particular item, looking for that item and finding it, who gives 2 knobs of goat shite what HipValue says.
Sam
Michael
https://www.hipstamp.com/store/the-online-stamp-shop
That being said, a HipValue Subscription offers two main benefits. One is a quick overview of the trending sales price for the item on HipStamp - the "HipValue" itself, and the other is the ability to click through to see similar actual sales. Those sales will generally include all of the listings which were included in calculating the HipValue, as well as similar listings.
This may include items for the same exact Catalog Number and Condition which we excluded in our calculations because they appeared too far off from the rest, and it was assumed something may be wrong with how the item was classified (for example if there was a US #1 which sold for $1 we would assume that the Country and Catalog Number are actually incorrect and ignore the item in the calculation, but you'll still see it in the past sales). This may also include sales for minor numbers and sets. All of which are provided for you to review - but not included in the calculation of the "HipValue" itself. This is also noted at the top of the page which shows you past sales.
That aside, if you're viewing a specific item, for the HipValue to be correct, the Country and Catalog Number on the listing itself need to be correct. When we import listings from other sites, or if a Seller Bulk Uploads listings and does not fill in the Country & Catalog Number, we will attempt to automatically extract the Country and Catalog Number, which works well in about 99.9% of cases, but not all. So, as a quick way to check what HipValue you are seeing, when you hover over a HipValue it tells you. In this specific case you're seeing a HipValue for United States #77 Unused", not a "Canal Zone #77 Unused" - which explains the discrepancy. It looks like the way the title of the item was created it's a little confusing. We'll review this specific example soon for further enhancements.
Form looking at that Canal Zone stamp on here,it looks like it could be the way the title is written
U.S. Scott Canal Zone #77 Stamp - Mint Single
https://www.hipstamp.com/listing/us-scott-canal-zone-77-stamp-mint-single/13552602
"Once you review a HipValue, you can take it a step further and review a large sample of the sales data behind the HipValue, where you can review over 10 years of items sold online, ie:
https://www.hipstamp.com/browse/hip-values/?price[from]=0.75&reference_id=10530967&item_specifics_04_condition=used&item_specifics_05_stamp_format=single&volume_name=Norway&issue_number=38
It was my understanding that the link goes to a list of sold items from which the HipValue for Norway #38 was based. It clearly shows non-Norway #38 stamps.
The HipValue for Norway #38 Used is $6 based on approximately 19 sales.
Note: For reference, additional listings may be shown below, including lots with multiple items, and/or flagged as Cataloged incorrectly - which were not included in the HipValue calculation; and therefore the number of listings may differ from the number of HipValue sales.
As Mark says in his first reply, above, if a selling price diverges too far from the norm, that figure will not be used in the calculation: "same exact Catalog Number and Condition which we excluded in our calculations because they appeared too far off from the rest, and it was assumed something may be wrong with how the item was classified."
However, I've reviewed the Canada #E6's which we have listed, and while I do see an item which is priced at $1,350 as well as two at $13.60 - these items all have different images. The higher priced one does have significantly better centering than the rest - though I doubt it would command such a high price. So unless that item actually sells it would have no effect whatsoever on the HipValue of a Canada #E6 - since only sales are considered. However, also as noted, when calculating a HipValue, if any sale of an item is significantly outside the rest - it will not be included.
Are these the two items you're referring to?
ID: 541413
ID: 11710296
If so, many of the perfs are rather similar, particularly the corners - but if you take a closer look - they're not all similar, and the centering is different as well. It's not the same image - or stamp pictured in these two listings. If there is another listing you're referring to, which you believe is using the image of ID: 541413 please let us know and we'll review it further.
UL Corner and lower left corners are the same on each just to start. As mentioned get an impartial collector or dealer to offer his or her opinion.
Also the seller that is trying to sell that stamp has had it graded at Graded SUPERB99 GEM STAMP with cert
I've seen a lot of fake imperfs, a lot of hinged stamps doctored to pass as NH, a lot of cleaned cancels, rebacking, fraudulent cancels and overprints, reperfed straight edges, fake Schermacks and a host of other games played but I don't ever recall anyone using an exacto knife to clean up perfs, much less on a $10 to $15 stamp. It would probably come out looking scissors cut.
Sorry for the long sentence but i couldn't find a logical break point.
Something is kind of fishy -- I overlaid the two images and lightened the second one so that it was somewhat transparent . . . and the two images lined up perfectly!! There's almost no chance that two different sellers making scans of a stamp would scan it at exactly the same size with the same size black field around it and with every perf tooth lining up perfectly!
I think John is right -- those fibrous and somewhat torn perfs could have easily been made to have straight edges in a digital graphics program! I think it's the same image, altered for some reason to make the stamp look whiter.
Here's the image I got with the 'whiter' stamp overlayed on top of the expensive one at 50%.
John Talman