Warning: session_start(): open(/var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74/sess_1379fa34e6f24b8dff942cb46ed3a8d43408aaa005fe871a, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/cpanel/php/sessions/ea-php74) in /home/devwehrmacht/public_html/forums/includes/vb5/frontend/controller/page.php on line 71 The LDO and its marks - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums
Emedals - Medalbook

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The LDO and its marks

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
    #31
    Brett,
    It was always possible for soldiers to get free official replacements for awards lost or damaged in service. Old timers who had served in WW1 and wore the 1914 EK1, if it were lost or damaged in active service would be entitled to a free replacement so its quite logical that nazi-period replacement 1914 EK1s would be supplied officially to the Ordenskanzlei with PK marks. I'd say these would be much rarer than LDO marked examples.

    Comment

      #32
      Thanks for the reply Gordon, much appreciated.
      The reason I asked is that a friend of mine has 3 Third Reich manufactured Imperial EK1's, one marked "26", one marked "100", and one marked"L/16 and 4". All look 100% original with genuine ageing to them and I was thinking of buying one off him.

      Cheers,
      Brett

      Comment

        #33
        I don't know if this helps or confuses, but here is an EK 1/Spange combo with the cross marked "4" for S&L. This piece is identical to the one on page 465 of Gordon's book wherein he speculates that it is "believed to have been constructed from original parts."
        A combo by itself shouldn't have a P number, since it was a privately purchased item and not officially awarded.
        While I suppose it is possible that someone took original parts and assembled them into an "unofficial" award, I consider this piece to be bad and it resides in my "Fakes Case."
        George

        Comment

          #34
          The back of the EK. The quality of workmanship on this thing is quite good.
          Attached Files
          George

          Comment

            #35
            Another reverse view.
            Attached Files
            George

            Comment

              #36
              The "maker's mark."
              Attached Files
              George

              Comment

                #37
                Not quite sure about either the Cross or Spange, George. The Spange is quite different to the one in my book, especially the swastika wreath and the "W" and dates and other details on the Cross don't match either.
                Whereas the other was assembled from what look like perfectly original parts, this does look like an out and out copy.

                Always possible I suppose that someone back then with an official issue 1914 EK1 could take it to a jeweller and have a Spange added, but I'd have though they more likely just buy an LDO combo set.

                Comment

                  #38
                  Upon closer examination....

                  I believe you are correct, sir!
                  George

                  Comment

                    #39
                    ”No one is suggesting that LDO awards are intrinsically worth less than official awards.”
                    I AGREE

                    “ Its purely a matter of personal choice,”
                    I AGREE.

                    ”One was made to be sold over the counter at a retaile… and the other was made as an official award piece.
                    I DISAGREE. The facts simply do not bear that out, and this is my major point of contention. (EDIT: Pieces with the LDO stamp could go BOTH ways. Pieces without the LDO stamp could not be for retail.)

                    I propose that in all likelihood, LDO marked badges came out of the same production run as badges that were issued by the Präsidialkanzlei as official award pieces. I see no evidence to preclude that statement and I think that logic would imply that. Let’s examine the information we have here:

                    To start…let’s look at the chronological facts as I believe them to be:

                    Prior to July 15,1940, there was no control over the badges and awards that were being sold in authorized retail outlets.. The purpose of the retail outlets was to enable documented awardees to purchase duplicates or replacement awards for those original awards that may have been lost or damaged. In many cases, the original awards had been lost or damaged in subsequent battles. Although awardees COULD have received replacement free-of-charge through military channels, it is probably safe to assume that most opted to buy replacements outright from approved retail outlets to avoid long waits and bureaucratic processes that seem to typify all military operations. It should be noted that certain qualified “collectors” were also authorized to purchase these awards, but common sense would dictate that an entire branch of retail operations would not be established during wartime for the sake of hobbyists. Rather, the primary purpose of the retail outlets was to enable awardees to replace their original awards that had been lost or damaged. These replacement awards were intended to be WORN on their uniforms in accordance with military regulations, and therefore, should conform in quality with the standards set forth for the original issued awards.

                    On or about July 15, 1940, the Präsidialkanzlei, which controlled the issue of awards, determined that it was necessary to establish some form of controls over awards that were being sold from retail outlets.

                    What do we suppose prompted this action??

                    I think it is safe to surmise that retail inventories were being supplied by approved manufacturers with production overruns of badges that were originally produced for issue.. There is nothing to suggest that retail inventories should be stocked with anything less than the equivalent of the original awards.

                    However, as human nature and profit motive dictates, a few unscrupulous award manufacturers probably began offloading their mis-strikes and rejected stock to the retailers for resale to awardees. In some cases, it is possible that some manufacturers actually produced INFERIOR stock for the retail market.

                    With NO CONTROLS over the retail market, young airmen, seamen and infantrymen were now replacing their original awards with sub-standard, inferior products!

                    Upon hearing of this practice, the Präsidialkanzlei said “NEIN!.. We will have none of THAT! We will not have our young men and women who have sacrificed and earned their awards in military combat, then having to replace those awards, receiving substandard or inferior awards to the benefit of profiteering private enterprise interests!”

                    Accordingly, the Präsidialkanzlei instituted the LDO for the sole and stated purpose of ensuring that awards sold in retail outlets to awardees were of the EQUIVALENT quality as their original awards. Or to quote: “..maintain the quality and thus the prestige of military awards and decorations”.

                    EXTREMELY important here is that the Präsidialkanzlei DID NOT establish a “secondary” or separate standard of quality for retail products. The awards sold at retail outlets were to “ maintain the quality” of original awards. It was the Präsidialkanzlei’s sole intent to ensure that replacement awards were the EQUIVALENT quality as original awards…and what better way to ensure that than to see that retail and issue awards were of the SAME production genre?

                    The LDO then was established and instituted a qualifying system for manufacturers whose products were approved for retail sales. The LDO mandated that all products supplied to retailers must bear the approved and authorized LDO stamp. There is no evidence to suggest that the LDO mandated a separate and distinct production run of retail products.….merely that the product had to bear the LDO stamp.

                    There is nothing presented here to suggest that the same stamped product could NOT be issued by the Präsidialkanzlei, should it choose to do so. As stated…” Only the Präsidialkanzlei was responsible for official award pieces” and “ Orders made through the Präsidialkanzlei for awards, and all associated technical matters are NOT to be dealt with by the LDO..”; and “if the manufacturer supplied a Panzer Assault Badge in day-glo orange to the Präsidialkanzlei, the LDO couldn’t do a thing about it.”

                    Therefore, there is nothing presented in this thread to cause us to assume that a manufacturer could not fill his order to the Präsidialkanzlei with an LDO stamped award, and nothing to prevent the award from being issued.

                    Consider this…It would be ILLOGICAL for the Präsidialkanzlei to NOT issue awards that IT ITSELF had dictated be of the same quality as original issue pieces. The Präsidialkanzlei established the LDO to ensure that retail awards were of the same quality as the original awards. There is NOTHING in either logic or documentation presented in this thread to suggest that an LDO stamped award could not or would not be issued by the Präsidialkanzlei.

                    Short of documented evidence to the contrary, I submit the LDO marking system was simply a natural progression of the numbering system that extended quality controls to cover products that ended up in the retail markets.. It did not preclude those awards from issue but merely added additional quality controls over them.
                    Last edited by Lorenzo Brown; 07-20-2003, 01:36 PM.
                    Visit my Badge Collection: http://lbmilitaria.homestead.com/home.html

                    Comment

                      #40
                      I'm sorry to bump a very old post, but since I am spending some time trawling throught the depths of the search facility on EK1's thought that a few people who hadn't seen this article may like to see it. It has certainly been an eye opener for me.

                      Regards,

                      Gareth

                      Comment

                        #41
                        Originally posted by Garethmk1 View Post
                        I'm sorry to bump a very old post, but since I am spending some time trawling throught the depths of the search facility on EK1's thought that a few people who hadn't seen this article may like to see it. It has certainly been an eye opener for me.

                        Regards,

                        Gareth
                        i'll bump it again..it really is a great read
                        some superb points bought to the table here

                        Comment

                        Previous 1 2 3 template Next

                        Users Viewing this Thread

                        Collapse

                        There are currently 4 users online. 0 members and 4 guests.

                        Most users ever online was 10,032 at 08:13 PM on 09-28-2024.

                        Working...
                        X