Discuss about Waldeck-Pyrmont Verdienstkreuz 1.Klasse mit Schwertern on Emedals

[Josias]

Hello again:

This is an excellent point about the e-medals business. I believe that they probably realized that it was not a correct piece and removed it from their inventory. I think that they are learning about theses pieces and make mistakes from time to time. Not everyone can know everything about such items. I mostly study/collect Imperial German items, and it takes years of studying these items to know what is genuine (and I learn something new every day). E-medals has a huge inventory with all countries and eras covered. I do not think that they are willfully trying to deceive collectors, but are trying to run an honest business. I have known of some dealers however who will do ANYTHING to make money!

Best regards,

Yup, They are not bad.
But speaking about business they did try to make profit.
I have a Waldeck-Pyrmont Verdienstkreuz 3. Klasse and it is from Emedals.
BUT it is originally from Floyd medals and they sold it for $700.
Emedals took it and sold it for $980 to me, So I shoot mail about that and I offered about $50 discounts for that reason. But they declined it so I had to buy for $1010!!

And I'm sure everyone hates Emedals shipping costs and Paypal fee..

[Josias]

Hello,

I think that the cronology should be this one:

1) an auction house put for sale this cross (omitting by mistake, to say that it was a copy) late in 2007- early 2008;
2) eMedals bought the cross and put for sale on its site;
3) eMedals sold the cross to a collector;
4) the collector, once detected the copy, returned the cross to eMedals;
5) eMedals returned the cross tho the auction house at point 1, being refunded;
6) the cross appeared again at Künker's in Nov. 2013, correctly described as a copy;
7) the cross was sold for 380,- Euro;
8) the cross appears again on a webpage, just depicted as an exampleo f this order;
9) the cross appears for sale at Leipziger Münzhandlung, correctly described as a copy (only I don't agree for having dated it as made between 1918 and 1950. I am sure that it could be dated between 1970-'85).

Points from 1 to 7 are chronologically correct and I am sure about that.

E.L.

Well this makes case over.
Thank you.

[Rangemaster]

Hello,

I think that the cronology should be this one:

1) an auction house put for sale this cross (omitting by mistake, to say that it was a copy) late in 2007- early 2008;
2) eMedals bought the cross and put for sale on its site;
3) eMedals sold the cross to a collector;
4) the collector, once detected the copy, returned the cross to eMedals;
5) eMedals returned the cross tho the auction house at point 1, being refunded;
6) the cross appeared again at Künker's in Nov. 2013, correctly described as a copy;
7) the cross was sold for 380,- Euro;
8) the cross appears again on a webpage, depicted as a specimen of this order;
9) the cross appears for sale at Leipziger Münzhandlung, correctly described as a copy (only I don't agree for having dated it as made between 1918 and 1950. I am sure that it could be dated between 1970-'85).

Points from 1 to 7 are chronologically correct and I am sure about that.

E.L.

Hello Elmar:

Good detective work! Thank you for properly describing the sequence of events. This is a good example of how garbage keeps circulating in the collecting sphere. Someone should take a hammer to the counterfeit piece and destroy it! Otherwise, it will rear its ugly head in the future again and again. But, it is like a game of tag, whoever has it last wants to recover some of their monetary losses.

Best regards,

[Elmar Lang]

Yup, They are not bad.
But speaking about business they did try to make profit.
I have a Waldeck-Pyrmont Verdienstkreuz 3. Klasse and it is from Emedals.
BUT it is originally from Floyd medals and they sold it for $700.
Emedals took it and sold it for $980 to me, So I shoot mail about that and I offered about $50 discounts for that reason. But they declined it so I had to buy for $1010!!

And I'm sure everyone hates Emedals shipping costs and Paypal fee..

Well, if a dealer sells a piece for 100 to another one, and this later one sells for 180, I don't see anything immoral: one cannot sell for what he paid for and if I've found acceptable a certain price, I cannot honestly discuss the price paid, only because I see that earlier, the same piece was sold at a lower price.

Just my own opinion.

E.L.

[Josias]

Well, if a dealer sells a piece for 100 to another one, and this later one sells for 180, I don't see anything immoral: one cannot sell for what he paid for and if I've found acceptable a certain price, I cannot honestly discuss the price paid, only because I see that earlier, the same piece was sold at a lower price.

Just my own opinion.

E.L.

I respect your opinion actually that's right , I just I was angry that I paid more money.

[Montgomery Burns]

for a official dealer its common practice to put 25 to 35 % on top of the price they paid ..

also its common practice to pay 25 to 35% less then marked the price
if an item is offered to them fore a trade or to buy .

some dealer go over that ,,depending on the items specialty.


its the same all over the world



regards kay

[Josias]

Now I afraid that some evil seller buy that fake piece and resell it as genuine.
As Rangemaster said, someone need to pick up "war hammer"
That fake can easily fooling many collectors, But I think it's now "known fake"
Anyway case is over for now.

[Elmar Lang]

Let's not forget that the expert at Künker's, correctly reported that this class of the order never existed so, a buyer should know for what he'd be going to spend his money. The catalogue description was very detailed and, like ancient Romans used to say, "verba volant, scripta manent" (words fly, what's written, remains).

Besides that, the piece has all the signs and characteristics of the now well-known, infamous copies/fakes typical of the german market from the '70s-'80s.

Best wishes,

Enzo (E.L.)