The 2 holes do not appear to line up with the 3 hole spacing, but I didn't adjust for the slight angle, so still need to rely on your physical stamp comparison.
This may just be my imagination running away with me, but looking at the front of the 2 hole stamp, there does appear to be a circular mark to the right (just beneath the 2nd jewel from the right). In the snippet below, I have circled it in red (the possible "blind perf" is a little smaller and concentric with my red circle). The spacing is roughly correct. The blind perf cannot be seen from the back. Maybe it is just a coincidence.
Going through a load of perfins and came across these 2, just two perfin holes in the first one and three in the second with no sign at all of any "blind" perfins. Not sure what to make of them.
Could the two hole be just a poor attempt by someone to fake a perfin? Note the 2 holes are very crude and uneven when compared to the very clean cut 3 hole example. This is just a suggestion on my part as I know little about perfins even though I have quite a few.
OK, what I thought might be a blind perf, I guess was just an artifact of the lower resolution scan (rather than admit it was my imagination! ).
As far as I know, there is no documented case of a Rothmans EFO. But I'm not a perfin specialist. All I know is that the Rothmans perfin is known for having the least number of perfin holes among UK perfins. So there should be no "normal" 2 hole perfin among UK perfins.
It's either a poorly altered stamp (but then I wonder why they didn't bother to punch a 3rd hole), a Rothmans perfin produced during late stages of badly worn pins, or just totally coincidental stamp damage...
We are Happy to have you here!! New members, we would love to get to know you. Please feel free to introduce yourself HERE
Otherwise - Jump right on into the conversations!! We look forward to your participation.
If you are not a member yet, register today!! It's all free and we want to hear from you!!
Please share our site on social media networks. Thanks!!!