Another Gau Treffen Tinnie

[dolchmann07]

Hello All,
I bought this from a very reputable seller and author in november of 2009.
and now it seems like I am understanding its status is questionable.
Can anybody verify this for me. I really enjoy my SA pieces and this would be a great loss, let alone losing faith in the person who sold it.
Thanks to all those who can help me come to a conclusion to this issue.
Jack Neeley

[Richard]

The detail is very lacking and soft and the S of SA is not directly over the R in Treffen, which I have understood is problematic. I would not be very comfortable with this badge.
Richard V

[David North]

Dear Jack

I think that the "jury is still out" on this one.

Having said that, there is perhaps a growing consensus that the badge that you have shown may be a fake. As far as the suspect detail is concerned, the two main points would appear to be (1) raised lettering with the style of font and (2), the S not aligning with the R.

Not definitive, although now a badge which is highly suspect.

Attached is a photo merge of your badge and one that I hold. The one that I have shown is generally regarded as original.

Regards,

David

[Coburg]

Here is my original for comparison

jim

[dolchmann07]

S-A Treffen

Yes, David, Tieste shows the one I have in its book as the pictured one and in the description says 1. Raised 2. Deepens, translated as being 2 versions of this badge. But I looked in several reference books and they all looked like mine. The detail is not really my main concern, and the detail in spots on the recessed lettered piece (of yours) in places is soft also. But it is soft on mine in area's too.
I wish Ron Weinand or Robin would chime in on this, I bought this from a well known person who is a member of this site, and given his track record, I know he would not of sold this, with any ill intention.
David, do you think this is one of those pieces that I will never get a difinitive answer ?
Thanks,
Jack

[dolchmann07]

S-A Treffen,

David, I would like to see the backside of yours it looks different than Coburgs.
Thanks
Jack

[Chris Lee]

Badge

Yes, David, Tieste shows the one I have in its book as the pictured one and in the description says 1. Raised 2. Deepens, translated as being 2 versions of this badge. But I looked in several reference books and they all looked like mine. The detail is not really my main concern, and the detail in spots on the recessed lettered piece (of yours) in places is soft also. But it is soft on mine in area's too.
I wish Ron Weinand or Robin would chime in on this, I bought this from a well known person who is a member of this site, and given his track record, I know he would not of sold this, with any ill intention.
David, do you think this is one of those pieces that I will never get a difinitive answer ?
Thanks,
Jack

Jack,
I too had one just like yours. I bought mine from a very well known and highly respected dealer/collector here in the midwest. He assured me it was 100% original. I`ve never gotten a definitive answer so until I hear 100%otherwise, I`m going with what he said.

[dolchmann07]

SA Treffen

Chris and David, It is not like they did not make them for more than one year, isn't this the one that they only made so many of and then they had so many requests for more that they were made and sold for 2 or 3 years after the 1931 event ? I think the one that Coburg showed is even more round than Davids and Davids looks like the base metal is different.
David, I am just having a discussion here and hope no offense is taken, by you. Your tinnies are the main reason I stay on this forum. Your SA tinnie collection is second to none and everytime I think I have see the last, you pull off another great piece.
I am just trying to find out many opinions on this piece and I am in agreement with Chris, although in the back of my mind .....
I will not disclose the person I bought it from, out of respect for the seller. I have not sent him a message and still feel I have no more knowledge than when I bought it. Even if I did have a definite answer, I still would not post the sellers name. This is in response to a PM.
Thanks and I hope to hear from a few more people,
Jack Neeley

[ErichS]

Jack,

Sorry but I'm not a fan of your badge either. The only one that I would have in my collection is the ones posted by David and James. So far, the only ist style badge that we have period photographic proof of.

[David North]

Dear Jack

As requested, here is an image to the reverse of my badge, although I do not think that it will be of any help in relation to this discussion.

I really cannot add much more to what I previously rattled on about, although I am still keeping an open mind rather than damning your badge outright. As mentioned, it may be a fake, although this version of the badge is and whether rightly or wrongly, now viewed with a high degree of suspicion.

The badge per se is I think quite rare, although there would appear to be plenty of examples similar to yours Jack which are currently for sale on various dealers websites. Conversely, the examples that both Jim and I have shown are seldom seen within the market.

Eric quite rightly mentioned that up until now, we have no period images of your style of badge actually in wear. This does not mean that the badge never existed, however both Eric and I are in simpatico in suggesting that for the moment at least, we would be a tad uncomfortable by having this style of badge within our collection.

There is though one important and dare I say blindingly obvious question that remains unanswered. If someone is going to all the trouble of faking a very distinct and quite rare badge, why produce an example which is so clearly different from an "original". It is not rocket science to recognise the differences (an understatement) and the chaps producing the so called copies may just have well incorporated the word Fälschung within the design.

As mentioned before Jack, the "jury is still out" on this one.

Regards,

David

[David North]

Reverse

[dolchmann07]

SA Treffen

David, Is it just a optical illusion that Coburg's version seems a little rounder than yours, and I do agree it has nothing to do with my version.
I made the statement that in my mind, it will always be questionable, and for the same reasons as you stated, it will not go in the junk pile. Maybe new data will show up. I also have a solid back with a RZM so I know they produced them for a few years after the event ??
I thank you for your help, and let you know that I really enjoy your SA tinnie postings.
Jack Neeley

[David North]

Dear Jack

I think that you may find this past thread extremely interesting:-

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/FORU...t=Braunschweig

It is a clear example that there are two schools of thoughts on this badge and more importantly, no one has conclusively proven that the badge in question is a fake. I am sceptical on a purely subjective basis and for the moment at least, this type of badge is not in my collection. If I held this badge and which had a good source, I would do exactly the same as you Jack - wait for more information to surface, rather than dismissing it now.

Thankyou for your kind words in relation to my past posting of SA meeting and event badges.

Regards,

David

[ErichS]

My badge to add to this thread of accepted examples.

[dolchmann07]

SA Treffen

To all that have posted to this link, does this version not prove that the demand was greater than the earlier supply. I have seen some one post around 25 - 30 different vesions and makers of the tinnie with the ship on it and the eagle at the top. (Seafahrt ?) Or is the one I am posting now considered a fake too ? It seems like the event happened and they did not have near enough pins, so no telling how many makers made them. "I am not trying to justify the fact that I own the one first posted" But it seems like I am hearing 2 different things here. To me logic says that they held the event and did not have enough pins and re-made and sold them for a few years afte the 1931 event. So is this solid back a fake too ?
Thanks,
Jack Neeley