EK 1939 Nice but Fake RK

[Chris Boonzaier]

Just for your records before I erase it from my computer...

[Chris Boonzaier]

aa

[Chris Boonzaier]

yyy

[Chris Boonzaier]

qq

[Chris Boonzaier]

qqa

[Chris Boonzaier]

gf

[Bill Garvy]

Here's a nice "Latvian" reproduction. . .

obverse:

reverse:

[JimZ]

What is with the latvian reproductions?? Seem to me to be a bit more than the cottage industry I thought it might be!

Jim

[hunyadi]

What is with the latvian reproductions?? Seem to me to be a bit more than the cottage industry I thought it might be!

Jim

Like Latvia and places like Hungary - the post communist world has 1) cheap labor 2) industry to manufacture available. 3) many folks wanting to make a quick buck.

So this is what you get.

I like Chris's better than the Latvian type as if follows a more 'taditional' form and would look better in a display cabinet or on a tunic.

[Chris Boonzaier]

I like Chris's better than the Latvian type as if follows a more 'taditional' form and would look better in a display cabinet or on a tunic.

I think Gordon knew who made this fake, I lost the emails and details on my old hard drive though...

[Paul R]

I would not mind having one... If I bought it for what it is.

I wonder how much a piece like this really costs?

[hunyadi]

I would imagine not more than $80-100 when you factor in materials and labor and a strugling post-communist economy.

[Edgar Estrada]

Becuase my dream to have a real and original one will never come true (or an Imperial German Navy Dagger), I would like to have at least one like the first one posted here (specially with that price $ 80).

So, if someone is saling it please let me know. But of course it is just because I do not have the money to buy a real one, otherwise...no way I would get the REAL.

Regards

Edgar

[Dietrich]

Actually Chris, the denomination 'fake' for the cross you showed might not be quite correct.

It is a post war S&L B-Type so it comes at least from a company that produced the mayority of the crosses. Unfortunately they continued after May 45 and such pieces are now starting to fetch already hefty sums. The "935" post war S&L which was auctioned of yesterday in Germany at Andreas Thies brought over Euro 1,000.-! At least it was sold as such!

Dietrich

Edited December 17, 2006 by Dietrich

[PKeating]

Come now! S&L wasn't producing illicit 1939-pattern KCs after the war, complete with wartime hallmarks, for the occasional veteran who wished to flout laws forbidding the display of the swastika at reunions! They produced these crosses to make money from collectors, who bought them because they believed them to be original, wartime pieces. And then, in 1981, they sold the cracked dies to a London dealer, who continued production. So Chris is entirely correct in condemning these crosses as fakes. They are not restrikes, or reissues. They are fakes because they were made with the intention of deceiving people.

If some people wish to pay $1,000.00 for one of these crosses, that is their right. However, the crosses will never be original, no matter how many people form cabals and opinion groups to promote the notion. One would probably be better-off buying one of the crisper Latvian fakes or, failing that, a Rounder for less than a grand. I was told by a dealer who preferred to remain nameless, obviously, that the "ex-works" price of the Rounder was around $300.00. I expect there are a few dealers who might let a chap have one for $400.00 if he asked discreetly enough! LOL! Like the S&L repops, the Rounder was "almost original" for a while.

Far better to save up the shekels and buy a real KC. One could always start with a damaged one for a couple of grand. Prices have come down a bit, no matter what some people say, because of a loss of confidence amongst the public at large and the appalling economic crisis nobody wishes to acknowledge. Walk up to any dealer today with five grand in cash and you will walk away with a decent Knight's Cross. Maybe not a Lazy 2 Juncker or a Zimmermann, but a decent run-of-the-mill cross nonetheless. You might even get it for four grand if we're talking Euros and his rent is due. That is the reality.

PK

[Dietrich]

You can call it what you want, it's still a piece manufactured by S&L. In the sense of being an original piece of the time period of 39-May45 it surely is not one. It is a post-war example from the most prolific company in the field of the RK.

My point is not to dictate how much they should cost or how much one need to pay for it. My point is that people should know what it is and what they are possibly buying.

The Rounder is a fake. The flawed S&L was considered post-war, which it is not. The piece shown here is a post-war made example of S&L. By the way, not long ago this one would have been sold as a very rare and very early S&L (and they still are sold as such as a quick glance at a 25% discount site shows..)

But if you want to call it a fake, perfectly fine with me. I don't want to argue with you.

Dietrich

[PKeating]

You can call it what you want, it's still a piece manufactured by S&L. In the sense of being an original piece of the time period of 39-May45 it surely is not one. It is a post-war example from the most prolific company in the field of the RK.

My point is not to dictate how much they should cost or how much one need to pay for it. My point is that people should know what it is and what they are possibly buying.

Now that these crosses have been exposed for what they are, and people have lost tons of money, there seems to be an initiative to salvage something from the trainwreck by rebranding these fakes as 'not quite fakes but sort of genuine crosses from the company that brought you the real thing back in World War Two'. However, the fact remains that any postwar S&L KC bearing wartime hallmarks (and a wartime-style finish) is nothing but a fake intended to deceive collectors. Now it is an exposed fake. That is all it is.

The Rounder is a fake. The flawed S&L was considered post-war, which it is not. The piece shown here is a post-war made example of S&L. By the way, not long ago this one would have been sold as a very rare and very early S&L (and they still are sold as such as a quick glance at a 25% discount site shows..)

We've been through this "flawed S&L" thing too many times. Readers can use the search engine on various forums to find discussions about it between some fairly heavyweight contenders. I will always view flawed S&L KCs with suspicion for reasons I have stated elsewhere on several occasions. In fact, I now view almost all 1939-pattern S&L KCs with a wary eye, except in the handful of cases where they come with indisputable provenance. I am not too excited by mint condition K&Q KCs either.

The Rounder Affair has been done to death here and elsewhere and there is not much point in further discussion of it, except to observe with weary amusement that several of those involved in the scam remain members in good standing of various sister forums while several of those involved in exposing the scam remain banned from the forums in question.

But if you want to call it a fake, perfectly fine with me. I don't want to argue with you.

I don't wish to argue with anyone for the sake of argument but I don't think you ought to encourage the newbies who will read this to pay thousands of dollars or euros for fakes just because the fakers happened to be the firm that made the crosses during WW2. A fake is a fake, period. What next? The "rehabilitation" of Souval KCs on the grounds that they probably made a few examples when tendering for the government contract in 1939?

The fact is that 1939-pattern Steinhauer & L?ck KCs are now like Godet Oakleaves and Oakleaves with Swords: unless they come with rockhard provenance - and a few do, fortunately - there is no practical way of telling a cross made in 1944 from one made in 1954, 1964 or 1974. A 1984 "London" issue does look different but hey, at least it was made using the real dies so it must be worth thousands too.

I am afraid that there is no feel-good factor to buying or owning a fake instead of the genuine article.

PK

Edited December 19, 2006 by PKeating

[Dietrich]

Now that these crosses have been exposed for what they are, and people have lost tons of money, there seems to be an initiative to salvage something from the trainwreck by rebranding these fakes as 'not quite fakes but sort of genuine crosses from the company that brought you the real thing back in World War Two'. However, the fact remains that any postwar S&L KC bearing wartime hallmarks (and a wartime-style finish) is nothing but a fake intended to deceive collectors. Now it is an exposed fake. That is all it is.

So you know where to draw the line between May 45 and post war? Good for you!

We've been through this "flawed S&L" thing too many times. Readers can use the search engine on various forums to find discussions about it between some fairly heavyweight contenders. I will always view flawed S&L KCs with suspicion for reasons I have stated elsewhere on several occasions.

We know your opinion and I duly submitt that you are wrong. At least with the flawed A-Type.

The Rounder Affair has been done to death here and elsewhere and there is not much point in further discussion of it,...

You brought the Rounder up, not me...

A fake is a fake, period. What next? The "rehabilitation" of Souval KCs on the grounds that they probably made a few examples when tendering for the government contract in 1939?

I do not read this as accusing me of fake rehabilitation. I don't think you meant that!

The fact is that 1939-pattern Steinhauer & L?ck KCs are now like Godet Oakleaves and Oakleaves with Swords: unless they come with rockhard provenance - and a few do, fortunately - there is no practical way of telling a cross made in 1944 from one made in 1954, 1964 or 1974.

Absolutely wrong! At least in respect of the S&L Knights Cross. I still have to see a proven post war Godet set. Maybe you can provide a picture.

Dietrich

[PKeating]

So you know where to draw the line between May 45 and post war? Good for you!

Precisely my point! Nobody knows where to draw the line. That is the essence of the problem with S&L KCs.

We know your opinion and I duly submitt that you are wrong. At least with the flawed A-Type.

I am far from alone in this opinion. Given the impossibility of establishing "the line" between wartime and postwar crosses, which you tacitly admit, your assertion that the flawed S&L KCs are wartime rather than postwar fakes produced on dies that have been shown to have cracked sometime after the institution of the 1957-pattern crosses strikes me as unsustainable.

I do not read this as accusing me of fake rehabilitation. I don't think you meant that!

Your interpretation of what I say or write is beyond my control. Sorry.

Absolutely wrong! At least in respect of the S&L Knights Cross. I still have to see a proven post war Godet set. Maybe you can provide a picture!

I take it you mean a set by Godet? There are plenty of detectable fakes from other sources. If I could supply a photograph of a "proven" postwar Godet set of EL or ELmS, then there would be no problem with the award, would there? The only advice I can offer is to gather together as many photos as you can of these awards, line them up and tell yourself one in three might be wartime pieces.

This brings us full circle, back to the issue of the impossibility of telling wartime and postwar S&K KCs apart. I am afraid that the onus is not upon me to produce the proof you request. It is more a question of a vendor producing satisfactory proof for a buyer of the originality of an S&L KC or a set of Godet add-ons. That is the issue.

PK

[Guest Darrell]

.....while several of those involved in exposing the scam remain banned from the forums in question....

I believe "one" was caught claiming their "son" was selling a fakes on e-bay, rather than fessing up to the truth. That's why he was banned HERE and the "other" forum.

[PKeating]

That is not quite how it was but I think there is an embargo on further discussion of the Rounder scam here on GMIC so we ought to drop it.

PK

[Dietrich]

I thought you can tell the difference between pre-45 and post war, based on this statement:

However, the fact remains that any postwar S&L KC bearing wartime hallmarks (and a wartime-style finish) is nothing but a fake intended to deceive collectors. Now it is an exposed fake. That is all it is.

But I see that is not so:

Precisely my point! Nobody knows where to draw the line. That is the essence of the problem with S&L KCs.

Let me try to explain with an example where the problem lies. If you look at the 18th and 19th century and you are asked to categorize which possible occurance was in which century it will be very easy to decide with the Franco-Prussian war and the Second World War. Nobody would mix those up. With some things in 1890 compared to 1910 it might me more difficult but still possible. Really tough it gets between Dec. 1899 and January 1900.

We have the same problem with the S&L. The determination between a flawed B-type and a pristine A-Type is a no-brainer. The difference between a flawed A-Type and an unflawed B-Type is tougher and when entering the mix of all the others that appeared late in the war or after it is even more challanging.

...your assertion that the flawed S&L KCs are wartime rather than postwar fakes produced on dies that have been shown to have cracked sometime after the institution of the 1957-pattern crosses strikes me as unsustainable

If I would say that ALL flawed S&L KC's are wartime I would be very wrong and way out of touch with reality. However, I never said this. There are clearly post-war flawed crosses and they are very, very late! The flaw pattern is not the same as the one of the A-Type and - in addition - there are other flaws which are not present with the war time flawed crosses. It is a question of looking and determination what is what.

This brings us full circle, back to the issue of the impossibility of telling wartime and postwar S&K KCs apart. I am afraid that the onus is not upon me to produce the proof you request. It is more a question of a vendor producing satisfactory proof for a buyer of the originality of an S&L KC or a set of Godet add-ons. That is the issue.

Again, I humbly submitt you are wrong. There is a way to tell most of them apart but I agree that at this point in time some of the B-Types (800-4, 800, incuse 800) are in a grey area and I would advise any possible buyer to stay clear of those for reasons of caution. I also would not rely on the vendors to provide proof since this is easily done (or attemted) with fake provenance and possible COA's. The 25% rebate seller being a prime example right now.

Dietrich

[Guest Brian von Etzel]

Quote Mr. Keating: "The Rounder Affair has been done to death here and elsewhere and there is not much point in further discussion of it, except to observe with weary amusement that several of those involved in the scam remain members in good standing of various sister forums while several of those involved in exposing the scam remain banned from the forums in question."

Something more specific you'd like to say here?

Since you bring up the Rounder in an accusatory manner, let's refresh the reality of the past 5 years. Not one Rounder from any of the big two dealers in Germany, not one from the large dealers in the U.S., if during that a period a couple changed hands on the eStand, it was done so with the full knowledge of the bitter debate, only one eBay attempted sale complete with "old information" and you know which sale I'm referring to...

So "scam" is a big word inferring lost monies and intent to defraud. I know of NO ONE who was involved in any attempt to defraud collectors in the past five years on the sale of a Rounder except for the eBay sale... If any one of us believed in that cross, I don't see how we can now be covered with words like "scam".

The "scam" never occurred... The transactions never occurred. The attempt to complete transactions never occurred.

As for the timeline to S&L wartime/postwar crosses, you are entitled to your opinion but that is all it is. It's not up to anyone to offer a detailed proof for every cross sold in Hamburg. Dietrich has offered the information objectively and scientifically. There are questions and there are people who have crosses from vets and recipeints to try to put a true timeline to the issue. Whether that's proof that's adequate for any collector is up to the collector and anyone can throw stones at their opinions.

Edited December 19, 2006 by Brian von Etzel

[PKeating]

A well-composed response. However, I thought I was being clear in opining that any KC produced on wartime dies after the war but with wartime hallmarks was clearly intended to deceive collectors, anyone suggesting otherwise being either na?ve or disingenuous.

My point, the overriding point in relation to S&L KCs, is that the firm evidently did as certain other firms in producing awards identical to their wartime originals for sale on the collectors' market. It is also clear that Type A and Type B dies were in use after WW2. Therefore, one can argue the differences between types until the moon turns green but the fact remains that the vast majority of S&L KCs have to treated with circumspection given the series of revelations about the firm's - choosing my words here! - probable complicity in fake-mongering. You yourself have described them as the most "prolific" of Knight's Cross manufacturers. I imagine you intended no irony in that statement but it is really quite funny under the circumstances.

What is far from funny is the situation of all those people left holding 900/4 S&L crosses bought for $8k to $10k who can only hope to get $1k back at auction, if they are lucky. After all, how many people actually want to pay a grand for a fake KC when they buy a perfectly good collection filler or mannequin accessory for a tenth or twentieth of that amount? How many reasonably intelligent people will be prepared to pay upwards of $5k for an "original" but unattributed, unverifiable S&L KC given the firm's evident reuse of their dies and tooling after the war?

And now, in addition to the 935/4 crosses, you state that 800/4, 800 and incuse 800 crosses by S&L should be avoided too. In other words, you are admitting that Steinhauer & L?ck KCs are a busted flush as far as any investment potential goes. I would exclude the relative handful with rock-solid provenance from this, of course, but the shadow of doubt now hangs over all S&L KCs. Put bluntly, Steinhauer & L?ck Knights' Crosses of the Iron Cross 1939 are a busted flush as far as any investment potential is concerned. People who own one or more S&L KCs are looking at 90% or more of their investment being wiped out. These are not idiots who bought eBay fakes for two-thirds of the value in the boneheaded belief that they were getting the real thing. These are people who bought these things in good faith from a small group of dealers who trade in high end awards.

This S&L scandal is a good example of the effects of forgery and fakery. The already small market for KCs is shrinking as potential new collectors log onto the internet and read all about S&L KCs, K&Q KCs, Godet Oaks and Swords and, of course, "Maybauer" and "Rounder" KCs. What sane or intelligent person would invest thousands in such a risky area? Why do you think the forging of coin and banknotes is considered such a serious crime? Because it devalues currency by reducing public confidence in it. Forgers used to be hanged or branded and mutilated. Accomplices were also severely punished. A bit of direct punishment dished out to dealers and their accomplices by ripped-off collectors might not go amiss, given that there doesn't seem to be any real prospect of punishment or censure from other quarters.

Fraud is fraud.

PK

[PKeating]

No, Brian, I have nothing to add, really. It's all been said before. People aren't stupid. They read and reflect upon the various statements and debates about this on several forums and they make their own minds up about it. All I will say here is that it's a good thing for some of the people involved in the Rounder affair that they will never have to defend themselves in a court.

Season's greetings to you.

PK