Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;shinystuff, post: 1222203, member: 32024&quot;]Thank you for the replies. Especially BR549 for the comment about the Philadelphia mint contracting different vendors to provide the envelopes, since that explains the variations.</p><p><br /></p><p>Personally, I do not pay any premium for unopened sets as I&#039;d guess there&#039;s more sealed sets with ugly coins from poor storage than there are cameos and errors. Even for the opened sets though, I&#039;m still not sure when the envelope is authentic or not. My main concern is at some point falsely selling the set as authentic OGP when it isn&#039;t. I have attached a couple pictures:</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><ul> <li>Picture 1: a 1955 set (which I believe is authentic), and a 1957 set which feels dated, but the way the date is printed seems a little suspicious.</li> <li>Picture 2: two 1960 sets of different color</li> <li>Picture 3: two 1961 sets of different color</li> </ul><p>If there are any give-a-ways on these to indicate they&#039;re replicas, or anything there that would help identify them as original, please point it out. For now I basically go by the feel of the paper, and look for the&nbsp; diagonal &quot;fade lines&quot; on the front, which I&#039;m guessing are from where&nbsp; the envelopes were stacked or something prior to being used and appear&nbsp; over time as the envelopes age (not sure if this is a sure-fire sign&nbsp; of actual aging or not).</p><p><br /></p><p>One other oddity, which I do not have anymore, was a set with the address line as &quot;PHILADELPHIA 30<span style="color: #ff0000">.</span> PA.&quot; instead of &quot;PHILADELPHIA 30<span style="color: #ff0000">, </span>PA.&quot;, which I assume was a reproduction.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in