Group splitting by sellers

[new world]

About the question of groups preservation and keeping them intact.

Don't you hate it when seller splits the groups and lists each item individually?

I just went through terrible experience when seller put for sale bunch of items from various groups. I placed my bets and here's what happened:

- I convinced the seller to keep ONE group intact and sell it outside the auction (luckily this is the most interesting one - to important historical figure, although it cost me heavy premium, about twice of what I would have paid on the auction),

- I won ALL items from ONE group,

- I won SOME items from FIVE other groups (I was outbid on the rest).

I am so pi**ed of at this point : the groups survived through over 60 years of turbullent history and now they are split between multiple winners.

I'd like to keep the groups together if possible at this point. How to re-unite the items ready to go aover several countries?

What would you do in my situation?

William

Edited March 11, 2007 by new world

[Tom Y]

It's a long shot, but you could try asking the seller to contact the winners for you. If you convinced him to keep one group intact he might be amenable to forwarding your request.

[Dave Danner]

I have a nice vaulted Iron Cross 1st Class to an Austro-Hungarian artillery officer. I do not have his medal bar. Bidding ended for the medal bar about 5 minutes after the EK1. Having won the cross, I went to protect my bid on the bar. I was outbid by a sniper who had never placed a bid until the last minute (this is a practice that peeves me. If you are interested in an item, let other potential buyers know by placing at least a minimum bid so they can gauge how much interest there is). Fine. He wanted the bar enough to bid alot for it and it was the seller who split the group to begin with; I could live with losing. When I received the winning bid notice, I contacted the seller and told her to offer the EK1 to the winner of the medal bar. He wasn't interested. All he wanted, apparently, was his pretty little medal bar and he didn't care about the history, the man, behind it.

Well, now I have a pretty little EK1, but it is severed from the man and the history behind it.

[Guest Rick Research]

As I have aged and decayed, I have come up with a stunningly wonderful, fool-proof, zero-aggravation method for dealing with group splitters:

I do not bid on ANYTHING from such dispersals, EVER.

[Kev in Deva]

Hallo Gents,

at the end of the day it seems to boil down to the seller wanting a good return for his items, we might consider it bad taste to split items up but many people dont care about the history of the man or his items.

We, can stand and shout about it from the rooftops, and post about it till the cows come home but, in reality the seller is exercising his right under a free and democratic world to do with his property what he wants.

So it will always remain a "put up" (more cash) or shut-up debate.

Kevin in Deva.

Edited March 12, 2007 by Kev in Deva

[Great Dane]

Fortunately I have only rarely encountered this problem, but it happened a few months ago in a DNW auction and it really made me think:

DNW was auctioning away award documents and letters belonging to Field Marshal John French. Each award document and each letter was a separate lot. This could have been an obvious case of 'group splitting', but on the other hand

- The items for auction was not his complete set, so even if they were one lot it wasn't the whole picture.

- Should letters/documents be separated or not? The letters were not related to the award documents.

- If yes, then what about a wooden box also belonging to him? Also part of the same lot?

I hope you see what I mean...

I'm just trying to point out that some cases are obvious whereas some other cases are not so clear...

/Mike

[Ulsterman]

As I have aged and decayed, I have come up with a stunningly wonderful, fool-proof, zero-aggravation method for dealing with group splitters:

I do not bid on ANYTHING from such dispersals, EVER.

This is what i try to do-but i do take notes. Group splitting destroys a link of evidence that proves certain things-like imagine if we could go back to 1965 and find complete groups with BB & Co. Stars along with "awarded to me at X, on X.I.1917" on them (in the original envelope with a company name and address on it even better). We would have proof positive that BB & co. were war time awards and we would not have spent the better part of 10 years arriving at that conclusion from a variety of different sources.

Splitting destroys history.

[new world]

As I have aged and decayed, I have come up with a stunningly wonderful, fool-proof, zero-aggravation method for dealing with group splitters:

I do not bid on ANYTHING from such dispersals, EVER.

Problem is that not many groups stayed intact through 60-80 years of turbullent history of this particular Balcans nation. We are talking WWI, WWII, revolts, purges, socialism period, post-socialism.

I guess I can ignore this particular seller, but believe me - I have not seen such groups very often in many years of collecting...so the natural instinct is to jump on and try to salvage whatever I can...

William

[Ed_Haynes]

Part of the problem lies in this idea of "property", in the faulty concept that we "own" the things in our collections.

The only legitimate owner was the original recipient (known or unknown). We, as mere later custodians of someone else's things and what are often the sole surviving relics of their lives, have the duty to the legitimate owners not only to preserve and study their phaleristic legacy but, in so far as we can, keep their record intact and pass in in that fashion on to the next custodian, whether this happens within a few days or after a few decades.

But, then, few dealers (and far too many collectors) see things that way; they look at history and see only currency symbols and an opportunity to maximise profit.

[slava1stclass]

To all:

Regarding Soviet Full Cavalier of the Order of Glory sets, one should consider oneself lucky to find a complete set of the three Glory orders to begin with.

Instances of Full Cavalier sets that are supplemented by all the recipient's other valor awards (where applicable) e.g., Order of the Patriotic War, Red Star or Medal for Bravery, are extremely rare.

While a split of any sort is unconscionable, sometimes the nature of the split can be even more critical.

Regards,

slava1stclass

Edited March 12, 2007 by slava1stclass

[Kev in Deva]

Part of the problem lies in this idea of "property", in the faulty concept that we "own" the things in our collections.

But, then, few dealers (and far too many collectors) see things that way; they look at history and see only currency symbols and an opportunity to maximise profit.

Hallo Ed, My point exactly, as stated in my post preivious Kevin in Deva.

[Gerd Becker]

Sometimes these happy reunitings happen

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=15397

Well done to keep the groups together, William

[new world]

Sometimes these happy reunitings happen

http://gmic.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=15397

Well done to keep the groups together, William

Gerd,

Great encouraging story!!!

Too bad groups I am trying to save are not Soviet.

William

[JimZ]

So sad to see this as a recurring topic!! So very sad!

Jim

[coolldad]

i have a set of 42 pic's from the pacific theater. Iwo Jima and tarrowa. these are a so called set that has been together since the end of the war. i dont think any one will pay what i want for the set, so breaking it up is the only option. the most valuable pic of the bunch i think is the flag raising on Iwo. i'm told if i sell the set together, i would likely get the same just selling the iwo pic.

i know other people that remove the chin strap from helmets they sell and hangers from daggers. because as i have seen, the item will sell for about the same with or with out chin strap or hanger, and the rest sold seperatly. most sellers are looking to get the most they can for there items, just as buyers are looking to get the best deal possable. but the bottom line is, if you dont like how it's being sold, dont buy it.

i know there are many ways to look at things. but what i have I own. i'm not a caretaker, i own it.when, how, and why i sell, will be up to me.

the reason most groups are broke off and sold seperatly is because most collectors cant afford the whole thing. thats just a fact of life. be greatfull for what you can find and afford.

but if your so passionate about keeping groups together, buy my set of pictures before they get seperated. put up or hush up.

[PKeating]

Splitting up groups is vandalism. If collectors cannot afford high end groups like the ones seen on the market in the last couple of years, then the asking prices are simply too high. Selling and buying items from groups recently split up should be treated in the same way we treat the issue of trading in stolen items. It should attract the same stigma. We can perhaps forgive splittings that occurred years and decades ago but there should be zero tolerance for it today. Oh, and I have "put up", in that I have several groups that are unsaleable as a whole because of artificially inflated price levels. I could sell them if I broke them up but I won't. So I am left with groups that are valuable but unsaleable as things stand. I managed to rescue one of the groups and some of the man's photos but not before his album had been ripped to shreds and sold off piecemeal. I got some of the photos from it, including a set of snapshots from 1944 with greetings written in the 1950s by survivors on the veteran's business cards. These had been mounted on a page in the album. But the rest were scattered to the four winds. Nobody will ever convince me that this is a defensible practice. In this case, the man had wanted his papers and photos to go to someone he had nominated but his family disregarded that as soon as the dealer called up with a cash offer. Bloody vultures!

PK

[love4history]

Hi there,

The only real group I have (14-15star, BWM and Vic) I got from eBay after having to win three different sales. At least one that was saved there.

What I was wondering about, why hasn't there been a site created between collectors where one could list his/her incomplete groups, so maybe someday the medals could be reunited again?

[JimZ]

That was done for Russian Soviet medals and orders and I think with great success, a group is reunited here and there!! I'll look up the link and post it.... Of course its only applicable to the russian stuff but for those of u unaware.....its a start!

[JimZ]

Here goes!!! I reformatted my computer some days ago so I lost some stuff

Hope this helps for some!

http://www.soviet-screwbacks.com/cgi-bin/o...ng=0&ref=ok

Jim

[Bob]

Is splitting up a group unethical if the original recipient of awards does it?

[ChrisB]

Hi there,

The only real group I have (14-15star, BWM and Vic) I got from eBay after having to win three different sales. At least one that was saved there.

What I was wondering about, why hasn't there been a site created between collectors where one could list his/her incomplete groups, so maybe someday the medals could be reunited again?

There is for brit medals. This site is used mainly for Death plaques but there is a section if you make a donation you can also put in a request for medals.

Web site:-

http://www.members.aol.com/deathpenny1/index.htm

Cheers

Chris

[JimZ]

Is splitting up a group unethical if the original recipient of awards does it?

Although I always feel that a recipient should be allowed to do what he wants with his medals .... after all they are HIS award for deeds of valour, bravery or service and it is the state or country that is for ever in debt to HIM (and not vice versa just because they gave him a medal or two!) He is therefore, in my opinion, free to split his group as he pleases and sell or give them away if he may! I would however go so far as to say that if he choses to split the group, I do not think it is unethical - just ignorant.

It is unethical if a group passed on or sold to someone else is split up thereafter!

Jim

[Kev in Deva]

Although I always feel that a recipient should be allowed to do what he wants with his medals .... after all they are HIS award for deeds of valour, bravery or service and it is the state or country that is for ever in debt to HIM (and not vice versa just because they gave him a medal or two!) He is therefore, in my opinion, free to split his group as he pleases and sell or give them away if he may! I would however go so far as to say that if he choses to split the group, I do not think it is unethical - just ignorant.

It is unethical if a group passed on or sold to someone else is split up thereafter!

Jim

Hallo Jim,

what has to be taken into consideration is the family, I remember many years ago meeting my Uncle in Nottingham, he had served in WW2 and was in possesion of two medals, while he was alive, they were on display in his home, after he passed away, his wife remarked while she still lived she would keep them, but when she passed away, one each were going to her daughters, who by then were married and living on two different locations.

Ignorant or not, its the families right to decide what to do with them, in this case the daughters would have something of their fathers to treasure.

However when its a dealer breaking up a set its just out of desire for pure profit, and it can be well argued that he as the right to do what he likes with items he has paid for with his own money.

It is a problem that will never be resolved, I fear.

Kevin in Deva

[JimZ]

Hey Kev.....

My percpective is that of a collector. Granted that for sentimental reasons, group may be split up. Let me rephrase and just call that a pity as opposed to ignorance. Much as I would not like to, I can understand and even border on appreciating that different perspective!

Then again there are groups and groups....although at the end of the day.... No group should even be split! And so the dilemma and discussion goes on.....

Jim

[PKeating]

Hard to say. I would tend to view it as unfortunate. That said, I have Martin K?hne's EK2 document for Moerdijk in 1940, when he was with II./Fallschirmj?ger-Rgt 1. K?hne got the RK for Leros as CO of I./FJR2 in 1943 and the DKiG at Cassino.

The rest of the group remains with the family but Herr K?hne apparently made a present of the EK2 document to Klaus Peters when the latter was researching his Fallschirmj?ger-Rgt 3 books. Peters sold the document to George Petersen afterwards, who subsequently sold it to Robert Queen, from whom I acquired it. It's the closest I have so far come to a Fallschirmj?ger RKT in document terms. I missed the Witzig preliminary document for Eben Emael a couple of years ago. Had K?hne not given this EK2 document to Peters, I wouldn't have it now. Should I offer it back to the K?hne family? Is it unethical to keep it? Am I perpetuating group-splitting?

Uncomfortable questions, aren't they? How many of us have things in our collections that might not bear close scrutiny in an ethical context? I don't think the veterans who gave things to Klaus Peters intended that he should turn around and sell them as soon as he had finished his books. Peters has been criticised in the past for this by various people but some might argue that the recipient of a gift is free to do whatever he likes with that gift. Tricky issue! Maybe other members can give their opinions.

Veterans often make gifts like this to people they like. It explains why so many German groups are missing EK2 documents! They have the right to do this because no money is involved. The shame is that the recipients of such gifts sometimes sell them afterwards. There again, I suppose they have the right to sell them. I think the question of ethics only arises when a complete group is acquired by a dealer or a collector who then breaks it up for financial gain. A veteran has the right to do whatever he likes with his awards and effects. I would always advise veterans against splitting but would never view them in the same light as a dealer or collector who splits up a group.

PK

Edited March 20, 2007 by PKeating