Announcement

**Andreas Klein** · 01-30-2015, 03:54 AM

.... and W&L listed as a major customer in Adolf Scholze's wartime accounting books.

As you can see on the picture they used ledger code "81" "Diverse" for Wächtler&Lange. In german accounting standards this is done for minor customers to whom you have only little business.

**Leroy** · 01-30-2015, 05:57 AM

Coming back one more time to the possible relationship between Deumer and Schickle, after I got home last night from work I was able to confirm by photo comparison that the Schickle/Godet set shown and discussed in the last issue of International Militaria Collector was, in fact, the same set being sold by Regimentals several years ago, shown here: http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...ht=Regimentals
The reverse of the Oakleaves on the Regimentals set has a very distinctive pattern of toning and "dots", shown below, which matches perfectly the set in the magazine (the lighting used in photography sometimes makes it difficult to initially realize you are looking at the same object).

The possible connection to Deumer is that when Regimentals had the set, it was part of a larger grouping of material from an RAF sergeant, all obtained in Ludenscheid right after the end of the war.

Attached Files

regimentals1.jpg (18.9 KB, 169 views)

**Norm F** · 01-30-2015, 08:12 AM

Originally posted by Andreas Klein View Post

As you can see on the picture they used ledger code "81" "Diverse" for Wächtler&Lange. In german accounting standards this is done for minor customers to whom you have only little business.

1253.40 and 2249.80 Marks for two entries on W&L there does not sound like a "little business", and that's just what we know from one page. But we digress from the topic of the thread (whatever that was

).

Best regards,
---Norm

**Andreas Klein** · 01-30-2015, 08:26 AM

Originally posted by Norm F View Post

1253.40 and 2249.80 Marks for two entries on W&L there does not sound like a "little business", and that's just what we know from one page. But we digress from the topic of the thread (whatever that was

).

Best regards,
---Norm

In germany we call such entries "peanuts" but that's not the case and it doesn't tell you how often, how much and for what reason they worked together. If there had been a strong connection between them you won't find it on ledger 81.

Anyway we had been in Gablonz too and i've seen several accounting books of the war too. Beside awards alot of the Gablonz based makers produced normal army stuff too, so you can't say if the invoices to Wächtler really belonged to something award related. Remember that Wächtler was a normal metal working firm too.

Perhaps Gablonz supplied Wächtler with setups or tools and got some unfinished badges from them as example?

If you say that a Schwein badge isn't a Schwein one and a Wächtler badge isn't produced by Wächtler anymore because it was found in an area of another maker how about the cross of Lüdenscheid?

Following your arguments it can't be a Zimmermann anymore or?

**Thomas Durante** · 01-30-2015, 08:27 AM

Originally posted by Norm F View Post

1253.40 and 2249.80 Marks for two entries on W&L there does not sound like a "little business", and that's just what we know from one page. But we digress from the topic of the thread (whatever that was

).

Best regards,
---Norm

Not to mention 11,604 Marks for Schwerin/Berlin; 6,128 Marks for Aktiengesemsch/Dresden and 5,995 Marks for Ankerglas/Bernsdorf, all of which are also marked "81" for "little business". And that is only 1 page we know of from this ledger as Norm says.

Tom

**Dietrich Maerz** · 01-30-2015, 08:33 AM

Ledger "81", as indicated in the upper right corner, is a accounts receivable account. It lists all receipts from customers. In todays ledger (Industriekontenrahmen) this account no longer has that number.

@Leroy: Yes, it is the same cross. The combination came from England.

**Andreas Klein** · 01-30-2015, 08:34 AM

Originally posted by Thomas Durante View Post

Not to mention 11,604 Marks for Schwerin/Berlin; 6,128 Marks for Aktiengesemsch/Dresden and 5,995 Marks for Ankerglas/Bernsdorf, all of which are also marked "81" for "little business". And that is only 1 page we know of from this ledger as Norm says.

Tom

... do you a favour and do some research what "Ankerglas, Bernstdorf" or "Aktiengemeinschaft Glasindustrie, Dresden"produced and than ask you if ledger 81 really supports an award making connection from Scholze to the mentioned firms named in the ledger.

**Thomas Durante** · 01-30-2015, 08:39 AM

No one is suggesting maker connections to these firms Andreas, it only proves they bought something from Adolf Scholze. Who knows what it was, but it doesn't matter to this discussion. What does matter is that it shows these firms spent alot of money with Adolf Scholze and disproves your theory that 81 was for "little business". Clearly it wasn't little business at all

Tom

**Andreas Klein** · 01-30-2015, 08:48 AM

Originally posted by Thomas Durante View Post

No one is suggesting maker connections to these firms Andreas, it only proves they bought something from Adolf Scholze. Who knows what it was, but it doesn't matter to this discussion. What does matter is that it shows these firms spent alot of money with Adolf Scholze and disproves your theory that 81 was for "little business". Clearly it wasn't little business at all

Tom

For sure i won't discuss with you german accounting standards and when you use the ledger "various" and when not or what alot of money was....

And it does matter because you an Norm are saying that it was Scholze who produced Schwerin and Wächtler badges without having any hint what they sold to them.

**Thomas Durante** · 01-30-2015, 08:55 AM

Originally posted by Andreas Klein View Post

For sure i won't discuss with you german accounting standards and when you use the ledger "various" and when not or what alot of money was....

And it does matter because you an Norm are saying that it was Scholze who produced Schwerin and Wächtler badges without having any hint what they sold to them.

Fine with me Andreas, but that "various" ledger adds up to more than 155,000 Marks, no "little business" by anyone's standards, be them German or American

Please read what I write, no one is saying Scholze produced Wachtler badges. I only said that it was possible given the reverse hardware setup. It couldn't have been more clear.

Tom

**Dietrich Maerz** · 01-30-2015, 08:58 AM

Originally posted by Andreas Klein View Post

For sure i won't discuss with you german accounting standards and when you use the ledger "various" and when not or what alot of money was....

Now you aroused the Betriebswirt in me. Please show me the ledger listing. This account looks really not like "peanuts" with open receivables of 155,083.- RM.
(As a comparison: a Tank IV was RM 103,462 w/o gun)

**Andreas Klein** · 01-30-2015, 09:04 AM

Let me quote Norm:

The Schwerin marked 2nd pattern U-Boat clasp was made in Gablonz by Adolf Scholze for supply to Schwerin.

... to me this is a clear statment.

Anyway here is a part of the balance sheet of another well known Gablonz based awards maker and simply read what they list as produced goods.

Beside 30.000 wound badges alot of normal army and civil stuff, so no one can say for sure what kind of connection Scholze had to the firms on ladger 81.

Attached Files

2015-01-30.jpg (75.4 KB, 143 views)

**Andreas Klein** · 01-30-2015, 09:13 AM

Originally posted by Dietrich Maerz View Post

Now you aroused the Betriebswirt in me. Please show me the ledger listing. This account looks really not like "peanuts" with open receivables of 155,083.- RM.
(As a comparison: a Tank IV was RM 103,462 w/o gun)

I'm quite sure that you know as Betriebswirt how you run a accounts payable department especially if you talk about the money for a Tank IV

and peanuts depends on the total. If you earn the money for 100 Tank IV than 1 Tank IV is a peanut.

Anyway Dietrich, can you tell me what Scholze did for or sell to Wächtler/Schwerin based on this ledger?

Is an invoice of 11,604 Marks for Schwerin/Berlin enough to say:

The Schwerin marked 2nd pattern U-Boat clasp was made in Gablonz by Adolf Scholze for supply to Schwerin.

... taking into account that they made the same amount of money with firms "Ankerglas" and "Aktiengemeinschaft Glasindustrie" which are for sure no award makers.

**Dietrich Maerz** · 01-30-2015, 09:27 AM

No, I can't tell what they sold and I do not care either.
My comment was only regarding the ledger number and the "peanuts". I don't think it is an account "Diverse", I am sure it is the overall accounts receivable account. But it really doesn't matter.

But back to the topic at hand: How do you know that your post-war B-Type was made by S&L? It has no marking at all I guess. If so "it is only guesswork", or not?

**Andreas Klein** · 01-30-2015, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by Dietrich Maerz View Post

But back to the topic at hand: How do you know that your post-war B-Type was made by S&L? It has no marking at all I guess. If so "it is only guesswork", or not?

I don't know who made the cross and i never said so.

It was labeled by Mr. Nimmergut in a coa as typical S&L early war (before LDO) cross and when i took it to S&L they told me that this was their wartime production and the postwar frosting problem.

But all this is pure wording ...

I only really know the soldier from whom i got it, why he bought it, what he did in the war and why he never weared the cross after it was bought. I crosscheck it's ribbon and - surprise, surprise - could verify with documents from the Bundesarchiv that it was done in a color and way of the early days as it was forbidden after the PKZ started to regulate the market.

And i only know that i trust the soldier similiar as you trust the US soldiers who swear that their souvenirs where wartime made stuff brought home from Klessheim.

Ps:
Please accept that i don't comment on your nice "post-war" B-Type sidekick

Announcement

Deumer catalog RK

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Users Viewing this Thread