RK Oaks Strike or Restrike

[Brian S]

Rich, do you have a Type I oaks by Godet in your collection?

[magprint]

Type I Oaks

Brian,

The photos of one of my L/50 Oaks were already posted as a comparison to Craigs piece. I also posted photos of a L/50 Oaks I sold via the e-stand a few weeks ago.


Rich

[Brian S]

Do you see the exact die characteristics of the one you sold on e-stand to Craig's? That's not a question of authenticity, just match. I was able to match yours easily to the Paepcke piece.

[magprint]

Opinion

Brain,

Sorry, but I am not interested in discussing any aspects of the comparisions you are trying to make.

Again, I wish to offer no opinion on these Oaks.

Thank you for understanding.

Rich Moran

[Macmedal]

Rich

I am a little bemused by your stance on not wishing to discuss the oaks. Thank you for contributing your photo's but I would also value your opinion. Obviously you have your reasons. But your silence does nothing but add to the quandary.
My opinion is no one is infallable and if it means going against someone elses opinion, no matter how respected that opinion may be, so be it.

I am also a little sad to see other important members keeping a wall of silence. This is not about proving people wrong or blackening anyones reputation, it is about a search for the truth !!!

Brian I commend your enthusiasm for searching for the truth............ if it can be found.

Nick

[magprint]

Opinion

Nick,

Thank you for your post and I appreciate your concern.

This was a private matter between myself and another party. I agreed to post the photos AND personal photos of pieces that I have in my collection. With that agreement it was asked that I not be brought into the good/bad discussion about the piece.

My opinion is just that - mine. I feel I have the right to voice it, or remain quite, if I so choose. That is the same right I believe everyone should have. No person on this forum, or anywhere for that matter, is obligated to share an opinion if they choose not to. I still see nothing wrong with this stance, and intend to honor my original agreement.

My opinion on this piece means no more than any other persons'. If you like the piece, I think you should buy it - I already have a "first type" with 900/21 markings and I have seen "second type" with L/50 markings.

This will be the last post I make on this issue. Frankly I am not concerned what other people think is the right thing for me to do. I do what I feel is correct.

Rich Moran

[Macmedal]

Rich

Thank you for your reply. I respect your decision regardless of whatever I or others may feel and I certainly was not trying to force your hand. I just valued your opinion that was all.

But there are other valued members who are also noteable by their absence.....

Nick

[Brian S]

The silence is deafening.

Rich, it's great we at least got good photos, so thank you for that. And I understand you have to honor your word.

I tread on thin ice by making anything other than comments regarding the piece, but I am profoundly disappointed. Everything I thought we were as a collector's community is now shaken. My positive feelings toward the Forum are unchanged, most of us are open, giving and try genuinely to offer knowledge to a hobby beset by thieves. I had no idea when I posted this thread that a single item could result in such devisiveness. For that I apoligize. This thread was, unfortunately, dead on arrival.

Quote removed as it was "out of context".

[magprint]

Out of context

Brian,

I don't appreciate you taking my words out of context. It was I who requested not be be brought into the discussion - No one else. These "discussions" degenerate into what you see here - the one with the loudest opinion wins.

Craig, although I don't know him very well, is an honorable man. He is not trying to cheat anyone or make the quick buck. In my experience with him he has always done the right thing.

The fact that you downloaded his images, without persmission, to foster your re-strike theory and then change to calling the Oaks a fake is just not right.

That is MY opinion.

Rich Moran

[Brian S]

Rich, you don't want to be involved, that's fine, I'm not going to lure you into this thread.

We've discussed Gailen's, Detlev's and Craig's items here more than once as well as Weitze and the whole gambit of full-time dealers. Sharing of knowledge to avoid someone getting stuck with a fake is wrong?

I will edit the quote out above.

[magprint]

Ty

Thank you for your edit

Rich Moran

[Brian S]

Brian,

...Craig, although I don't know him very well, is an honorable man. He is not trying to cheat anyone or make the quick buck. In my experience with him he has always done the right thing.

That is MY opinion.

Rich Moran

Now I have to quote you again...

I NEVER NEVER NEVER called Craig's character into question. I NEVER NEVER NEVER implied any wrong doing.

Actually, I'm amazed that you defend Craig, make these comments to me about my actions, and I come out the bad guy for posting it on a thread?

All this arguing about what is so painfully obvious to the eye is what is bringing people to look for a conspriacy. I never imagined this would turn into the 10,000 lb. White Elephant it's become.

[magprint]

You win

Brian,

I am done - You win.

I can't write as "loud" as you.

Congratulations . . .

Rich Moran

[Brian S]

What is going on here? I never called your character, anyone's character into question? How is this a personal thing? Why isn't this just a clear cut it looks exactly like it or it doesn't? This move to a personal issue, as if, between us is a total obfuscation.

I've won nothing Rich. Obviously as I now have you suggesting I am calling Craig names and I'm yelling at you.

Looking for answers? This is over my Muppet head and the thread is closed from my perspective. Anyone who might be able to contribute to our knowledge, won't. So rather than create any more enemies than I have, I'm done.

[George Stimson]

My silence

If I can step into this....
First of all, I want to say that I personally know very little about Oaks and Oaks/Swords, other than knowing about the different grades. I've never seen (much less examined) a set and I've never considered obtaining any. It's a personal decision; I just feel that it's too much money to spend on what is (to me) a small item. So I find much of this discussion confusing. First Type, Second Type, 900/21, 900 L/50 SiLBER -- it's confusing to me.
Now, having never even seen a real set, I have no way of knowing whether anything in the manufacturing process (buffing, polishing, plating -- whatever) could affect the minute details (pebbling) of a piece. So, I can't say whether apparent differences in such details are disqualifying. I did point out some areas on various pieces in this thread where I thought shapes were different, but whether those perceptions were based on lighting or camera angles, I can't say. Again (and again) I haven't seen any of the pieces that have been presented in this thread.
So if anyone is wondering why I haven't come forward with an iron-clad opinion as to the veracity of any of the Oaks presented in this thread, the answer is simply that I am not informed or educated enough to have one. And I firmly believe that if you don't know what you're talking about, by all means shut up.
Others have opinions here, and some have said what they are and some haven't. I feel that this may (may) be one of those many areas in this hobby where we might never have a definite answer. And if that's the case, I hope that other contributors to this very interesting and informative thread can accept that and let the matter rest. If someone is sure that a piece is good/bad but there can be no way of proving it (and let's face it, if there is a way to prove something, there is a way), then I implore you (whoever) to rest comfortable with your opinion, but don't expect everyone else to share it.
My personal opinion here is: I don't know. I'm sorry if that is not enough for anyone who might be convinced in one direction or another, but that's the best I can do.
Thank you.