Announcement

**Andreas Klein** · 08-28-2008, 07:57 AM

Dietrich,

once again i would like to make some things clear:

1.
The Schickle catalog has no KC it it - that's a fact.

2.
The so called supplement pages aren't supplement pages ... these are photos from a presentation cushion. That can clearly seen on the KC photo were the KC ribbon is folded over the uper edge of the cushion.

So these photos are a proof for nothing - in any direction because we don't know where, why and with whose awards on it they were made. You see an L/15 cross on it, some german collectors see a Juncker on it but we shouldn't open another discussion.

Btw can someone identify Schickle awards on the photos? I can't ...

We were in contact with Lauer directly but there are no information left from the wartime. The same goes to the Finanzamt ..... and any Schickle documents.

Attached Files

rk.jpg (89.8 KB, 136 views)

**Dietrich Maerz** · 08-28-2008, 08:10 AM

OK, I see. But I don't see why Schickle (or any company) should not put a picture of a presentation display in it's catalog. It happens all the time.

But it is always the same: one sees what one wants to see.

and we are going in rapid circles.

The task is clear: proof that L/15 is Lauer as indicated by the advertisement.

**Andreas Klein** · 08-28-2008, 08:18 AM

Originally posted by Dietrich Maerz View Post

OK, I see. But I don't see why Schickle (or any company) should not put a picture of a presentation display in it's catalog. It happens all the time.

Dietrich,

i think we should discuss serious on that subject. Please show me the catalog of another maker with pictures of a presentation cushion in it if it happens all the time.

But one thing you said is important "(or any other company)" .... because if we don't know where those pictures came from than they can't be used as proof that they show a Schickle KC on it.

Perhaps the pictures show us an LDO store in Berlin and we have a KC from Juncker and the IAB from Mayer on it - who knows?

**Dietrich Maerz** · 08-28-2008, 08:42 AM

Again, you misunderstood me. What I meant is - let's say an automotive catalog. There are very nice pictures of the cars in a field or town and with girls. This is in contrast to the pictures in the dull sales catalog. Thats what I meant.

The supplement page is an interesting subject and I think we can theorize about this till the cows come home. But it neither will prove that Lauer was L/15 nor will it disprove that Schickle was L/15. So what does it prove? Nothing. Other then that there was a "Schickle RK".

So there is only one thing left: prove that Lauer was L/15

**Andreas Klein** · 08-28-2008, 09:01 AM

No i didn't misunderstood you Dietrich but i'm not willing to compare the Mercedes Benz catalog of 2008 with an awards sales catalog in the wartime to make obvious conspicuousbess explainable - expecially if this page is used as the only evidence for the existence of a "Schickle" KC.

If we talk about awards sales catalogs of the wartime than we have to compare them amongst themselves and you won't find such pages in the Assmann or Steinhauer catalog.

The page proves nothing because we have no knowledge about it ... and if we agree on that point than it can't be the evidence for a Schickle KC.

So there is only one thing left: prove that Lauer was L/15

- i have the ad from Lauer with the L15 on it.
- i have the proof the Schickle left the market in july 1941
- i have the proof that L15 marked badges fit the making standards of 1942 and later
- i can't find L15 marked badges in the Schickle catalog which show them based on photos

... and what's up with you:

Which proof do you have that Schickle was L/15 or Lauer wasn't L/15?

**Dietrich Maerz** · 08-28-2008, 09:30 AM

... and what's up with you?
Which proof do you have that Schickle was L/15 or Lauer wasn't L/15?

I have no proof at all. And I don't think I need to prove anything. I did not even start this topic.
As I said, I took the Schickle - L/15 as a given (as all others before me) and that is that. My book was and is not about proofing that Schickle is L/15 but rather "This is how a genuine "Schickle" looks." If it turns out to be Lauer one can still identify it by the book.

In the next edition I would mention the Lauer advertisement but as a serious and honest writer I would also need to mention that nobody knows where the advertisement comes from and that as of today nobody could make a direct connection between a Lauer product and L/15. And I would mention that the same holds true for Schickle but that there is at least one EK2 marked L/15 found in a Schickle package. But that could have been paired later. However, I would also say that to my knowledge no L/15 EK2 have been found in Lauer packages. And that -for whatever reason I am not aware of - nearly everybody up till today thinks that L/15 is Schickle. Right or wrong. And from that the reader can make up his own mind and put the importance of this question in the framework of the book topic.

That is how it stands for me and you can beat me up I will not change it before new hard evidence comes up for both sides.

**Andreas Klein** · 08-28-2008, 09:39 AM

I did not even start this topic.

... me too

I think we aren't that far away from each other because imo to put everything which is know on table and let the reader make his own opion his the best way until we get a 100% proof.

Btw there is no need to beat you up ... you are still invited to catch a beer together in Kassel --- ok perhaps i would try to drink "Schickle" under the table

**Sal Williams** · 08-28-2008, 01:16 PM

Dietrich, You are a very logical fellow but in this case I think that you weigh your evidence oddly. (and I don't mean for any strange motive!).

What seems to me to be the most logical assessment is this:

For some completely unknown reason the collecting community has believed for a long time L/15 =OS (this collector wisdom has been wrong before on the numbers topic)

The ONLY thing in support of that is one (as far as has been mentioned here) L/15 ek2 found in an OS packet.

The only thing in support of L/15=Laurer is an advertisement, which looks to be genuine by the way it is written and there is no "profit" motive to fake such a thing.

That seems to me to be much higher in favor of L/15=Laurer.

If one is going to decree that so and so is maker # such and such, this is more evidence than many accepted maker/numbers have is it not?

I don't suggest that more evidence to be sure is not required, but I would say that based on the evidence one has so far that if you are going to say L/15 is ANYBODY then one would have to go with Laurer.

The only other choice is declare L/15 unknown.

But I do wonder why the evidence of the ad (which is much more than many makers have) seems less reliable to you than the unverified faith we have in so many makers with absolutely NO evidence to support them?

In all the official publications all of you seem to have access to there is no other L/15 ad?

Isn't this ad traceable to who had it originally? The photo came from someone!

It also seems that the proof criteria is high due to a commonly held (but unproven) belief that is entrenched with all of us that L/15=OS. If none of the maker numbers were known today and we sought to figure them out I think this maker would quickly be attributed to Laurer by everyone due to the ad. In fact, from what I understand so far, even without the ad I don't think anyone would say L/15=OS due to what seems to be a complete lack of evidence.

I am not saying that L/15=Laurer for sure, I am saying that it seems way more likely if one is objective as to the reasons we believe in ANY numbers, and the criteria used as "proof" for any other makers.

**Sal Williams** · 08-28-2008, 01:31 PM

Also, I can not see why(if there was any profitable motive) one would fake that ad and not use L/15. The wording itself makes me believe it is real. A faker would use the "slash" for sure. But again, WHY fake it????

**Dietrich Maerz** · 08-28-2008, 01:43 PM

Just call it conservative!

Everything I and my friends came up with the Rounder was extremely logic and made absolutely sense ... and was 100% bullocks.

I'm not saying this is the case here. Far from it. I will say exactly what I wrote earlier - the facts as they stand.

There is a reason (which I have no knowledge of) that generations before us in Germany were of the opinion that L/15 is Schickle and I don't think there were sittting down and were throwing the dices.

I took the time to look through all the Uniformenmarkt issues (all of them!) and all the Schwert and Spaten (only some years): no Lauer advertisement at all. Not even one! And if I would list all the other ones that were in there the post would be two pages long.
Does that mean anything? Not really! Only that this company did not advertise and especially not with the famous advertisement in question in thetwo most important and official organs of orders and medals in Germany during the war. Most - if not all- of the other manufactuerers did, though.

Let's put is this way: I rather stay on the "safe side" right now and plead ignorance, running the risk to be wrong. Honestly truly I do not go nuts about this and I really like to lean back and see more evidence. Why is it so 'strange' that I like to know where this advertisement came from?

If the conclusion right now is that L/15 is not Schickle - fine with me. Would I rewrite the Schickle chapter right now and call it the "Lauer Knights Cross". Not even close!

**Leroy** · 08-28-2008, 01:45 PM

As Bob Hritz noted, all this right now is speculation, but I have to say that what Sal says makes sense.

P.S. Maybe we should look in some of the other publications (Die Wehrmacht, Der Adler, etc.) - that's where the customers were.

**Bob Hritz** · 08-28-2008, 01:46 PM

Please provide proof of Lauers PZK number.

Bob Hritz

**Dietrich Maerz** · 08-28-2008, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by Sal Williams View Post

Also, I can not see why(if there was any profitable motive) one would fake that ad and not use L/15. The wording itself makes me believe it is real. A faker would use the "slash" for sure. But again, WHY fake it????

Nobody was or is saying it is a fake!

But honestly truly I believe that the place and time where this advertisement was printed has something to do with the case. Wouldn't you think so?

Also - and I don't understand the resistance here - why is it so extremely outrageous and hard to find some early war badges from Lauer and later L/15 marked ones? During the 50 month of production there surely should be one physical clue linking Lauer with L/15 in the "badge forensics" that is being done on a daily basis here?

I don't even know what badges Lauer made!

**Dietrich Maerz** · 08-28-2008, 02:01 PM

I just did a quick search in the Wound Badge and the other Wehrmacht badges forum for Lauer...

Did this company produce any orders and medals at all???? Does somebody know?

Dietrich

**Sal Williams** · 08-28-2008, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by Dietrich Maerz View Post

Nobody was or is saying it is a fake!

But honestly truly I believe that the place and time where this advertisement was printed has something to do with the case. Wouldn't you think so?

Also - and I don't understand the resistance here - why is it so extremely outrageous and hard to find some early war badges from Lauer and later L/15 marked ones? During the 50 month of production there surely should be one physical clue linking Lauer with L/15 in the "badge forensics" that is being done on a daily basis here?

I don't even know what badges Lauer made!

I did not mean to imply you said it was fake Dietrich! And yes Where and why the ad was placed is very important! Yes later I will start a "Laurer" thread in the badges sections.

My only point was that Based on reasons to believe, Laurer has a stronger case. If we had no preconcieved ideas OS wouldn't even be in the game for the L/15 designation!

It is all very interesting! I think as it stands L/15 is an unknown maker with the strongest candidate being Laurer!

Announcement

Is Schickle really L/15 ??

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread