First "Honest" Sale Of A K&Q Ritterkreuz?

[Bob Hritz]

Hritz's Razor of Relative Value:

The price of an item is in exact inverse proportion to the length of the explanation.

[Brian S]

I was almost permanently kicked off the site for quoting an author who stated the dies were sold and repros were being made. I was warned that unless I had firsthand proof, photos, etc., I was not welcome to entertain such heresy.

[Leroy]

I am still confused about one thing. What is it about Dietrich's book in particular that would have changed anyone's views about this piece? It seems to have the flaws that Dietrich's book identifies as present on authentic K&Q RKs.

Trevor,
I was not trying to suggest that Dietrich's book, in any way, would specifically label this particular cross a fake. Instead, he raised the question very openly (on pages 205-6) of possible postwar assembly/production. He did not provide an answer (nor could he have ever been expected to), but instead merely laid out that there was a legitimate question regarding that possibilty. He also showed excellent photos of crosses which he felt were proven wartime pieces. When you see a long-time, and prominent, German dealer sell, as a reproduction from the 80's, a cross which initially appears to match what we understand to be the "latest war" version (post November, 1944) of a K&Q cross (with the flaws above the left hand upper beading), but which also has some lateral flaws on the left side of the bottom beading (see photo below) which do not appear on the crosses of that type illustrated as wartime in Dietrich's book, and which also has distortions to the front date which also do not appear in the book's photos of believed legitimate crosses of that type, the link, I believe, is made. The question is not laid at Dietrich's doorstep, but at Weitze's. What did he know, or what had he been told, that led him to believe (unless we should think this was just a very stupid mistake) that this cross was not wartime?

[Brian S]

Stefan's photos are good crisp photos. Weitze's photos are so crappy the cross does look like the postwar pressing.

[Darrell]

...........This is simply the case of Dietrich's book causing the market to fall apart for these, and dealers trying to dump them...which is a sad state of affairs........

I'm sure Dietrich would love to respond to this statement ....

[Leroy]

Dietrich did not make the market fall apart for K&Q crosses and should not be blamed because he memorialized in a book the existence of a legitimate question which has existed for some time in the collecting community. Nor can he be blamed for providing good quality photos of K&Q crosses which can be used for comparative purposes. Remember, he NEVER reached a definitive conclusion about this.

Either Weitze made a mistake (which I truly hope he did) which resulted in a super deal for a member here, OR he learned something about this cross which made him dump it. There is no "in-between".

[Don D.]

So, perhaps Weitze or Dietrich will chime in and settle this.

[Luftm40]

Dietrich did not make the market fall apart for K&Q crosses and should not be blamed because he memorialized in a book the existence of a legitimate question which has existed for some time in the collecting community. Nor can he be blamed for providing good quality photos of K&Q crosses which can be used for comparative purposes. Remember, he NEVER reached a definitive conclusion about this.

Either Weitze made a mistake (which I truly hope he did) which resulted in a super deal for a member here, OR he learned something about this cross which made him dump it. There is no "in-between".

I certainly didn't mean to "blame" Dietrich...but collectors have a herd mentality. If something is questioned...even legitimately...the herd will veer in a different direction. In this case, leaving dealers w/ high end merchandise that no one will touch. My "sad state of affairs" comment was directed more at the collecting community for not analyzing all of the input and coming to their own conclusion. Regarding Weitze...I get back to his asking price. Exorbitant for something that he truly thinks is fake...I think he was simply getting rid of an item w/ no chance for liability down the road

[Darrell]

I certainly didn't mean to "blame" Dietrich...but collectors have a herd mentality.....

Well, misstatements or misinterpretations like you initially made are exactly the same thing and can form fact in peoples minds as well. Statements like you made can be used to point fingers rather than people just plain reading what he said in his book more carefully.

[Leroy]

Regarding Weitze...I get back to his asking price. Exorbitant for something that he truly thinks is fake...I think he was simply getting rid of an item w/ no chance for liability down the road

That's a good point and it's the reason I speculated that perhaps the cross was postwar assembled using leftover original (but perhaps factory reject) parts obtained at the time of the K&Q sell-off of tools, dies, stock, etc.. (Rather like buying an MP 40 made up of totalling mismatching parts - more expensive than a complete fake, but way less expensive than one that was 100%.)

The "K&Q Question" (as Dietrich called it) is one that only Weitze can answer now. Was it just an honest mistake on his part, or did he learn something about what was done after the K&Q material was sold? Is it just the "tip of the iceberg" or is there really no iceberg at all?

Either way, Dietrich did not create the iceberg. He just warned that there could be one out there.

[Dietrich Maerz]

I certainly didn't mean to "blame" Dietrich...but collectors have a herd mentality. If something is questioned...even legitimately...the herd will veer in a different direction. In this case, leaving dealers w/ high end merchandise that no one will touch. My "sad state of affairs" comment was directed more at the collecting community for not analyzing all of the input and coming to their own conclusion. Regarding Weitze...I get back to his asking price. Exorbitant for something that he truly thinks is fake...I think he was simply getting rid of an item w/ no chance for liability down the road

I do not feel blamed at all. If someone would blame me for reporting true, honest and factual observations in connection with anything in my book, then I will take that as a compliment. In every book I wrote (together or alone), I held not back any observation nor will I ever do so. I am also very proud that after nearly four years no fake has been found in any of my books. This is a time frame where other books already were outdated and found full of mistakes, wrong assumptions and plain BS.

I can't help the collector's herd mentality. If there was any damage done to the K&Q it was done by Niemann. He had the bad habit to put a brand new K&Q to every group missing a cross. The collectors did not object to groups in which K&Q were awarded in 1941 and the soldier died in Russian captivity. Plenty of examples! I was banned from his site because of my book and mainly because very early on some K&Q came back to him. Well, if you have a lifetime warranty that is what happens. Now we know more about the timeline and the maker and a lot of people found out they are sitting on a K&Q group which cannot be real. Instead of blaming the dealer for putting a real cross to a group, they blame the cross.

I personally would feel very bad, if I would know something and would not report it. I also would feel very bad, if I would make things up in my books (something that other authors have done on a regular base).

I can say with 100% confidence that K&Q crosses were awarded during the war. Regarding this cross I will not make any statement before I have not had it in my hand. If I never get it in my hands, I will never make a statement. Some things cannot be judged by pictures alone.

Dietrich

[mametz]

After four pages about this cross i am none the wiser, why would
Weitze ask 850 Euros for a repro. May be he is not sure and is
edging his bets that it might be real, who is going to pay that
kind of money for a batterd repro
Regards
Mametz

[Leroy]

Is it possible to see a really good close-up photo of the date '1939'?

[Luftm40]

Well, misstatements or misinterpretations like you initially made are exactly the same thing and can form fact in peoples minds as well. Statements like you made can be used to point fingers rather than people just plain reading what he said in his book more carefully.

It is also idiotic to take verbatim what ANYONE writes in ANY book. Personal experience and analysis count as well, and collectors should seek to form their own opinions based on all of the information available to them.

[Darrell]

It is also idiotic to take verbatim what ANYONE writes in ANY book. Personal experience and analysis count as well, and collectors should seek to form their own opinions based on all of the information available to them.

Yes, but it's not what only what someone writes in a book ... but what they DON'T write that's just as important. Seems like many around here (yourself included) either misread or go by what others THINK he wrote ...

Read twice, criticize once ....