Looking to get this Knights Cross

[Panzer Rob]

Thanks David!

Here is a translation of the COA (leaving the usual "in my opinion" out):

"... The Knights Cross has a non-magnetic core which results in a certain value reduction for the Knights Cross compared to a magnetic core. Material, quality and construction correspond to the norm as verifiable in the technical literature."

Apart from the fact that a real pre-May 1945 non-magnetic core Knights Cross should demand more money (since they are very early like the 3/4 ring and the Juncker) I am a little surprised that Mr. Niemann judges a non-magnetic cross by S&L, awarded in 1943, as genuine.

The discussion of A- and B-Type evidently went past him without any thoughtful impact - the COA is dated 04/07 and well past the discussions and publications regarding the B-Type (also in Germany in a Militaria Magazine...). I also wonder on which literature he is basing his opinion on?

However, I do not know whether the cross discussed here is the same as in the COA. But that doesn't change the fact that a non-magnetic S&L (and the cross IS an S&L) is not pre-May 1945.

But that is just MY opinion, based on studies ... And yes, there should be a value reduction ... to about $ 500.- - the going rate for a post war fake from S&L.

Dietrich

Dietrich-

Interesting and very valid points you have stated. I too am surprised that Detlev would give this cross his blessing, especially considering the award date of 1943... just last year matter of fact.


Rob

[Dietrich Maerz]

Maybe he knows more than the collective wisdom here and also more than the state of the research has revealed without any doubt. If that is so, he's certainly not sharing. But why should he?

But it could also be that he just took it form the family and based on that he thought it must be real. Unfortunately, that is not how it works - there always needs to be a 'sanity check'.

[Leroy]

Whether or not this is the same cross which started this thread, Detlev has "blessed" (IF the COA is a real one from him) a non-magnetic core S&L , supposedly awarded in 1943, as an authentic wartime piece.

I, for one, would be very interested to read his comments should he elect to post here.

Perhaps he believes, in light of his years of experience handling S&L crosses and dealing with German veterans and their families, that the recent articles and other publications are just..............wrong.

IF the COA is his and IF the cross in the COA is the same one which started this thread, complete with beading flaws on 3 arms, then that will be interesting indeed.

Does anyone know him well enough to elicit one of his rare posts?

[Dietrich Maerz]

Don't worry - he will find about this thread. He might even "jump" in.

I advise you to buy as much and as many non-magnetic S&L B-Types as possible - you might make the killing of your life! Mr. Niemann will (maybe) even give you positive COA with a guarantee to buy for some of them.

However, bear in mind that he doesn't like the 935 B-Types (which have also a silver frame and a non-magnetic core) and opinions those as post-war. So even he makes a cut somewhere!

And if that doesn't work, you might get a positive COA from Geissler any time for every S&L. No problem.

... that the recent articles and other publications are just..............wrong.

As long as there are dealer who give out COA's for their own wares everything else will always be somewhat wrong. This has started with Klietmann, Hartung and Nimmergut and will not end with Mr. Niemann. And I know for a fact that Mr. Niemann is convinced that the "recent articles and publication" is wrong - in his opinion.
You as a lawyer know better than everybody else that you can have an expert OPINION about everything at any time of the day.

But the proof is in the pudding, isn't it?

Dietrich

[Leroy]

I advise you to buy as much and as many non-magnetic S&L B-Types as possible - you might make the killing of your life! Mr. Niemann will (maybe) even give you positive COA with a guarantee to buy for some of them.



Dietrich

Don't you know, Dietrich? There are already many who are doing just that.


Oh, and by the way, who made "the pudding"?


In the immortal words of J.P. Donleavy: "Only for the moment am I saying nothing...."

[Dietrich Maerz]

Don't you know, Dietrich? There are already many who are doing just that.

Yes! Nothing better that the good old Wall Street rule " Buy high, sell low!

[Leroy]

Dietrich,
If you can find me an S&L EXACTLY LIKE Bob's Kitzingen RK, I will be
happy to buy it for your estimated value of $500. I'm quite serious and will anxiously await your discovery. In fact, I would buy several if you can get them for me.
Regards,
Leroy

[Dietrich Maerz]

Oh, and by the way, who made "the pudding"?

Ah, this muddy pudding was made since years by just a very few. Each pudding came with a nice story, a trustworthy handshake or even with a piece of paper. When it turned out that the pudding was not so good ... "oh, well live goes on and I give you (maybe) the money back you paid at that time."

I have no intention to pick a fight with you or anybody else. All I wanted to do and will continue to do is searching for the truth based on visible hard facts. And in that department the pudding cooks are lacking big time in certain areas IMHO.

But they always have and always will continue to sail their own way. Or don't you think that returned fakes will be destroyed?

... and I'm not bitter, I'm just realistic!

[Leroy]

Dietrich,

Do not misunderstand me.

There are, of course, many fakes and many crooked dealers. There are honest dealers who have been fooled. There are also honest dealers who, based on their real experience, honestly disagree with your opinions and believe that not everything is as "black and white", or as limited in timeframe, as you believe to be supported by scientific proof. Be that as it may, on a personal level, I believe you have written the best book available so far on the RK. So there is no "fight" here, just disagreement. To my knowledge, I have never met Mr. Niemann, nor do I think he is infallible.

Just so you will know, it is my personal view that your beginning timeframe for "B" types is off by many months. That's really about the extent of it. Non-magnetic versions are just an anomaly. Not the end of the world for anyone, really, if you think about it.

Regards,
Leroy

[Dave Kane]

......"Non-magnetic versions are just an anomaly".....

Leroy you must be joking! There are MORE non-magnetic post war Crosses than you think and they proliferated for years in dealer's offerings.

In fact Weitze has 2 on his site and of course 'value priced'.

[Dietrich Maerz]

There are also honest dealers who, based on their real experience, honestly disagree with your opinions and believe that not everything is as "black and white", or as limited in timeframe, as you believe to be supported by scientific proof.

When I was in Stuttgart I talked to a lot of dealers. I did the same at the SOS as you know. I still have to find one who told me that I'm wrong - the ones I talked to agreed with me.
I haven't talked to Mr. Niemann but I know he disagrees. There are for sure others who disagree, too - and not always out of experience but also out of personal gains. "They" will not drop roughly 50% of the S&L crosses without a fight.

Just so you will know, it is my personal view that your beginning timeframe for "B" types is off by many months. That's really about the extent of it.

That could be. I doubt it, though. But what I don't doubt (and neither do you) is that this cross, awarded in 1943, is not the real deal!

Non-magnetic versions are just an anomaly. Not the end of the world for anyone, really, if you think about it.

Now that is misleading. The early Juncker are not an anomaly, the 3/4 ring crosses are not an anomaly. They are real, awarded, proven and recognized. The S&L un-magnetic B-Types are an anomaly in such that they are completely contrary to the late Juncker and even to the (very own) 935-4 (and even to the 800-4).
The anomaly lies in that they are post-war!

Dietrich


PS: It would be very nice to have the name of the soldier of this group. Captured in Russia or by the GIs is always a good reason to obtain a cross after the war....

[Brian S]

Not to pile on here, but what's the story on these documents with the punch holes? This isn't the piece of paper given the awardee, am I correct? Weren't these more or less duplicates in Berlin?

[Dietrich Maerz]

This clearly looks like a regular and perfectly good preliminary document. This was given to the awardee.

[Leroy]

When I was in Stuttgart I talked to a lot of dealers. I did the same at the SOS as you know. I still have to find one who told me that I'm wrong - the ones I talked to agreed with me.
I haven't talked to Mr. Niemann but I know he disagrees. There are for sure others who disagree, too - and not always out of experience but also out of personal gains. "They" will not drop roughly 50% of the S&L crosses without a fight.....

You are right that some disagree out of personal gain. They are the crooks and to hell with them. Others, though (Hritz, etc.) are totally honest and highly knowledgeable. Perhaps you haven't met or spoken to them, or if you did, perhaps they wished not to argue about it at the time. Again, it is not personal at all. There are MANY very fine people in this hobby who like and respect your book, but who disagree with PARTS of it.

Dietrich:....

...what I don't doubt (and neither do you) is that this cross, awarded in 1943, is not the real deal!....

Agreed, but it is not the core that bothers me, but rather the extensive beading flaws.....THIS CROSS, IN MY OPINION, IS NOT RIGHT.


Dietrich:....

Now that is misleading. The early Juncker are not an anomaly, the 3/4 ring crosses are not an anomaly. They are real, awarded, proven and recognized. The S&L un-magnetic B-Types are an anomaly in such that they are completely contrary to the late Juncker and even to the (very own) 935-4 (and even to the 800-4).
The anomaly lies in that they are post-war!....

I disagree, but only in the sense that I meant that the use, BY S&L, of a non-magnetic core was highly unusual and was probably for a reason (wrong box picked up, shortage that day, or something else) we would just be guessing about. (I was NOT speaking about Juncker or anyone else.)I agree that an S&L with a non-magnetic core is MOST unusual, but not necessarily the "kiss of death" as you believe. There are, indeed, as Mr. Kane pointed out, many, many postwar S&L crosses with non-magnetic cores and I am perfectly aware of their existence. So what?

I agree that there are now more postwar S&L crosses than wartime ones, so there is no need to quarrel over that at all. That's a "given". There are also 100times more Picasso and Van Gogh paintings out there than Pablo or Vincent ever did.

Best,
Leroy

P.S. Sorry I am not better at using the "quote" function to reply.

[Dietrich Maerz]

... but not necessarily the "kiss of death" as you believe.

I base my believe on one fact and one fact only: Not one single A-Type with a non-magnetic core. Not one!

And not ONE absolute 100% sure, safe and sound B-Type that was awarded, magnetic or un-magnetic!

BUT lot's of shady non-magnetic B-Types that pop-up in all kinds of stories, groups and in all war years - from early pre-LDO to the last defenders in Berlin!

My conclusion is not believe - it is strictly empirical and realistic based on evidence everybody can see for his/her own!

If a dealer says (which they do)' "Oh, I had a lot directly from the recipient and they are rare (or late, or early, ...)" and they don't give names and dates it means nothing. Absolutely nothing. Actually, it means the complete opposite!

The difference is this: I say and show why I have this believe and why I am of such an opinion. And - by he way - it is not only me!

The doubter only says "I don't agree"!" or "It is nonsense" or "It is misleading!" but never ever comes some counter proof or believable evidence forward. Because there seems to be none! If it would be so easy to dismiss all the evidence, believe me, "they" would have done it already with a vengeance!


But we are straying away ...

This cross is bad - we all agree to that - and if it really is the one in the group, the COA is also bad. Plain and simple.