Kinderschar on the eStand

[Jo Rivett]

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=788668

Ooopsy Daisey Quite possibly not really real, but there you go.

[Christopher G.]

Hello,

I didn't realize that you had posted this thread on here and was wondering why you thought it was fake. I had posted it a while back if I am not mistaken and it got positive opinions.

Regards,
Chris G.

[Jo Rivett]

Hello,

I didn't realize that you had posted this thread on here and was wondering why you thought it was fake. I had posted it a while back if I am not mistaken and it got positive opinions.

Regards,
Chris G.

Hi Chris. I dont think its fake, i know it is.
You dont want the M1/ prefixed "one of these", you want either maker marked, unmarked, Ges.Gesch. only, or you want a nice transitional period style RZM mark and number, sans prefix.

I wouldn't rule out any M1/ prefixed "one of these" altogether, it`s just that until today, every one seen and shown with the M1/ prefix,is a terrible fake . That of course does not stop dealers touting them as original
Example one - a fake like yours
Example two - another fake like yours

[Gary Symonds]

Jo, let me get this straight. The RZM had jurisdiction over these Kinder badges, and like the Party badge there was a "transition" as shown in Ron R's badge, where there is a RZM mark, plus the maker code of 63, but no M/1.

But for some reason, after the transition the RZM, said "whoa" we are not going to allow these Party Organization badges be marked with the "M/1" designation. Why, "no" to the M/1 marking?

Are the Party badges the only one's allowed to have the M/1 designation?


Other than your opinion, why are these badges "horrible fakes?"

Frankly, the quality of the execution of these M/1 marked badges is better than the one that Ron R posted.

What is your historical evidence for your conclusion? Please cite what RZM regulation you are referring to.


Please explain.

[Jo Rivett]

Jo, let me get this straight. The RZM had jurisdiction over these Kinder badges, and like the Party badge there was a "transition" as shown in Ron R's badge, where there is a RZM mark, plus the maker code of 63, but no M/1.

But for some reason, after the transition the RZM, said "whoa" we are not going to allow these Party Organization badges be marked with the "M/1" designation. Why, "no" to the M/1 marking?

Are the Party badges the only one's allowed to have the M/1 designation?


Other than your opinion, why are these badges "horrible fakes?"

Frankly, the quality of the execution of these M/1 marked badges is better than the one that Ron R posted.

What is your historical evidence for your conclusion? Please cite what RZM regulation you are referring to.


Please explain.

Hi Gary

So sorry for the long break between post & reply, but i have only just now, managed to shake the bout of "Die Pest" that i picked up somewhere.. Here probably, but you never know.

No need to quote bits from your post, you are clearly hopelessly lost.

Nobody said anything about RZM regulations. (Except Gary Symonds) But let us suppose that this meddling Mr Jo Rivett does post a RZM announcement, or heavens forbid, "a rule" pertaining to this/these.
The sheep would switch to auto-bleat, and counter with: "Well Mr meddling Jo Rivett, rules were not always followed, rules were broken, announcements not always adhered to, so put that in your pipe and take a drag", and the sheep, would be right. Although i have no woolly coat, i too would indeed challenge anyone with the same, should they try and use "a rule" to sink my boat.

No Gary, Mr meddling Jo Rivett can sadly not click his fingers and - "it is so" - and for that, i am very thankful. My worse nightmare, would be to turn into an Angolia, a Christopher Ailsby or a Tom Wittmann. To have collectors, old & young, lapping up every finger click that Mr meddling Jo Rivett makes, without bothering to question, reason with or look beyond the "opinion" of Mr Jo Rivett.

I did tell you all, quite some time ago, how it works, but i guess it has not yet sunk in. Why that is, i wouldn't know and am not interesting in knowing either. I am also not interesting in listening to your waffle. (The above quote by you - is waffle) Or any waffle for that matter.

I know, that i dont need to tell a small badge enthusiast (who knows what they are doing) that these are fake, it is well known, and has been for donkeys years. But you are not a small badge collector, and it seems that you do want to know why, so i will give you one reason - of 10 - why it cannot be authentic.

The makers details, once looked at with an open eye, clearly show the "stick in the mud", the "modern American" tooling that created the: M1/63. Although this takes a chapter to explain properly, the crux is that the makers numbers are all in ARIAL ROUNDED font, all tips of the numbers are neat and round, the whole M1/63 is done by a machine, all done using the same "bit" and the whole code - M1/63 - is executed to the exact same depth on each number.

Imagine lowering an overhead drill, into a blank block of steel, drill in 1 mm, and then fix the depth. Then press "cut" and watch as the machine cuts out (or etches) the numbers M1/63 - PERFECTLY - each one exactly to the same depth.

This, what you are seeing here - M1/63 in Arial Rounded Font - perfectly shaped/engraved/etched/cut - is just not period. It is just not the way that details of this size were transfered onto the working die. BUT, Gary, it certainly is, exactly what we find on fakes and fantasy badges made by Americans from the 70`s

So although Mr meddling Jo Rivett is indeed the bringer of "the bad news", he is by no means the focal point here, or the finger clicker. I cannot influence how certain fakes were made, or how period badges were made. All i can do, is take an interest, and share the truth.

Gary, if you dont think i am telling the truth, then it is up to you, or others who wont swallow my explanation, to prove me wrong.

Cheers, Jo Rivett

ps: You cannot provoke further response from me with words alone, on matters such as these.

[burgerhaus]

Do original prefixed pieces exist then? That would be my only question. Happy Easter

[Gary Symonds]

Jo, correct me if I am wrong, but the "M" and the "1" in your picture response, appears to have "micro-patina." There appears to be horizonal scratches on both raised imprints.

The "63" in your post appears to have some wear, but I can't really tell.

Based on your claims in your book, re "micro-patina" being "not humanly possible" to "fake," please explain the scratches on the M 1/63?

[Jo Rivett]

Jo, correct me if I am wrong, but the "M" and the "1" in your picture response, appears to have "micro-patina." There appears to be horizonal scratches on both raised imprints.

The "63" in your post appears to have some wear, but I can't really tell.

Based on your claims in your book, re "micro-patina" being "not humanly possible" to "fake," please explain the scratches on the M 1/63?

Your "scratches", they are not scratches at all! They are simply a production error, and found on quite a few of these, modern, American-made, fake badges. Below, German War Booty`s ORIGINAL, next to my FAKE.



You have jumped the line, and selected the very last step, the very last test - Micro-Patina, and for some reason are of the opinion that if a badge shows a few scratches then it must be genuine.
Micro-Patina rounds everything off, the final step - not the ONLY step, or focal point.

Do you honestly believe that the fake badges i have from the 60`s through 80`s were never touched? never carted to shows, never rubbed to add a bit of wear? Of course they were, they all were - the Party Badge Book drums it home, HONEST Micro-Patina! Not just "lets find a scratch or two and clap our hands". The mentions are of Honest, Micro-Patina, are they not? Of course they are, and they are, for a reason as well.

You must go back to Jo`s Party Badge book - if indeed you even own this book - and you need to read it, slowly. Try and grasp what it is showing you in words and images, and THEN, we can get our "debate-on" - or not, because if you had read it, and understood it, your very silly question(s) above would not have been asked in the first place. The rest - i am just not interested in.

I wont ask you to stop wasting my time, because you wont, so i`ll say Goodbye instead

[CM Alexander]

Just to lighten the mood a bit...here is one that I just sold this past week. Transitional piece...

[Jo Rivett]

Your "scratches", they are not scratches at all! They are simply a production error, and found on quite a few of these, modern, American-made, fake badges.

Let me just support that "claim" with another, fake, American production enamel badge.

http://veteransfootlocker.com/cgi-bi..._Item.asp?1396

You will note the same tell-tale signs at 3, 5 and eleven o`clock.

[Gregorio Torres]

Thank you Jo. Sometimes I think you can say the same without being so "hurtfull", but really I like how you are, and you are making a big service to collectors like me. This is the reason why I have your book and I´m waiting for another one about TR enameled badges in general. Thank you for helping us.

[Top Buzzer]

Hi

I was really interested in this badge and I honestly thought it was original with my limited experience. It just shows how little I know.
Men like Jo really help out the collectors community. I love the way he delivers the bad news His help has saved me money.

Where can I buy your book Jo?


Regards

Mike

[Wim Vangossum]

I was really interested in this badge and I honestly thought it was original with my limited experience. It just shows how little I know.
Men like Jo really help out the collectors community. I love the way he delivers the bad news His help has saved me money.

Where can I buy your book Jo?


Regards

Mike

Here: http://www.bender-publishing.com/Books_1.html and on a few other websites