Stamp Condition?

I would call them used to, but I see that a lot of people call them "unused".

Also on some listings on the auction sites, people will list them as MNG - Mint No Glue. That burns me up because it's not mint if it doesn't have it's original glue ( unless it was issued without glue).

That's my rant for the day

Given the last part of your question, I am only considering stamps that were issued with gum but lost the original gum.

unused no gum -- stamp that you know was never postally used, but lost its gum
used uncanceled -- stamp that you know was postally used but didn't get canceled

An example of how unused no gum stamps occur -- mint stamps got stuck down/together and had to be soaked by owner.
An example of how used uncanceled stamps occur -- stamp on item that went through mailstream missed being cancelled.

Most of the time, only the original owner knows for sure. So if the source is not known to a dealer, the dealers I know will base their selling price whichever has the lower catalog value comparing mint/used. Either way, it will be a significant discount from the catalog value, as either one would be considered a major fault.

I used to keep a mini-collection of used multiples in which one or more stamps missed getting cancelled while the other stamp(s) was cancelled properly.

Good point. The OSTROPA 1935 souvenir sheet comes to mind.


The above example (not mine) has the gum removed, but not before the sulfuric acid has started eating into the paper. Most obvious if you look at the first "O" in "OSTROPA". Paper is thinner at the watermarks, so those are typically the first to get eaten through. The gum was probably removed afterwards by the owner when they noticed the damage...

A theoretical reconstruction of that unrecorded convo:


= Put sulphuric acid in the gum!

- But why, mein Fuhrer?

= It will silence the tongues of traitors!

- But won't it also silence the tongues of your supporters?

= Them? They don't need tongues, only ears!