Craig Gottlieb-SA Birdshead Dagger

[Lufty.ju52]

Hello,
Well I for one am a "casual viewer" and find this statement extraordinary to say the least.

"I did NOT take photos of the restored dagger before and after. I'm sorry I did not, but such has never been a requirement before".

As a "high end dealer" you can't honestly believe that serious collectors would accept this?
Mark.

[Craig Gottlieb]

Actually, yes. Why would I decrease the value of a dagger by saying it was restored, if it hadn't? It seems a strange thing to have to "prove." This is akin to being required to PROVE that a dagger is a parts dagger, or that a medal has been refinished, or that a uniform is re-sewn. Generally, if someone advertises something as LESS valuable, or admits that it has been post-war "screwed with" it's an admission that does not require proving. If this is a new standard required by collectors, please let it be known by contacting all of the dealers - those who will admit a restoration - and tell them you want before and after pictures. By the way, JU-52: search "Gunter Frenzel" on WAF and you will see some neat video interviews I did.

[TxGauleiter]

OK Craig, I will humor you...

you didnt take pictures of the dagger before its alleged restoration.. but the dagger was referred to you by a picker, by your own admission... surely the original conversation went something like this:

Picker: "hey Craig, I know of a rare Birdshead dagger, its pretty beat up but comes straight from the vet. are you interested?"

Craig: "I might be, send me some pics so I can have a look"



or when you notified Jason about it, I am sure he wanted to see it too before going in on it...

this would have been pre-restoration..

how about those pictures?

[Craig Gottlieb]

You are still implying that I am a liar, am dishonestly withholding some sort of convicting photos, or whatever. If you're talking about the gold one, this was YEARS ago. Five years (don't call me a liar if it turns out to be 4 or 6). I don't save every email, do you? I don't align my life to anticipate things like this thread and people with a peculiar interest in the minutiae of my life. If you're talking about the silver one, same reasoning applies. We receive hundreds of emails a week, and photograph hundreds of products a quarter, and we do NOT save everything. I know, I know ... "How conveeeeeenient."

So now, I'm defending myself for not saving every email I ever get, and for not taking pre-restoration photos of an admittedly restored dagger with a decreased value as a result of my pre-harrassment admission. I should also take this opportunity to admit, in advance, that I do not contact the DOD to double-check the service records of every old man who claims to be a veteran.

[TxGauleiter]

You are still implying that I am a liar, am dishonestly withholding some sort of convicting photos, or whatever. If you're talking about the gold one, this was YEARS ago. Five years (don't call me a liar if it turns out to be 4 or 6). I don't save every email, do you? I don't align my life to anticipate things like this thread and people with a peculiar interest in the minutiae of my life. If you're talking about the silver one, same reasoning applies. We receive hundreds of emails a week, and photograph hundreds of products a quarter, and we do NOT save everything. I know, I know ... "How conveeeeeenient."

So now, I'm defending myself for not saving every email I ever get, and for not taking pre-restoration photos of an admittedly restored dagger with a decreased value as a result of my pre-harrassment admission. I should also take this opportunity to admit, in advance, that I do not contact the DOD to double-check the service records of every old man who claims to be a veteran.

I am implying that the facts and common sense dont add up. I am not using the word liar.

So, to be clear, (I want to make sure I am not missing anything).

There are no pictures of the dagger floating around. Even though it would seem prudent to have pictures of a $100k item prior to a restoration in the event of a dispute or bungled restoration, it didnt occur to you to take them. Furthermore, there are no pictures from the picker to you or from you to Burmeister from the time it originially surfaced. This seems hard to believe but I guess I have to take your word for it.

There is no name of a restoration company. According to you, they wish to stay anonymous for "obvious reasons". I cannot imagine why they would want to stay anonymous. I would think they would welcome the publicity for future opportunities. I could however see why YOU would want them to stay anonymous, but thats a different story. So not only are there no pictures of the dagger prior to its restoration, there is also no known restorer.

Next you tell us that there is a list of known recipients and factory photographs, yet you tell us to go and find them. You're the one making the claim, you are the one with the burden of proof, and you're the one asking $70k for a dagger that has been challenged quite scientifically. Now it is up to me to go chase down your "sources" and ask them if its real? I can assure you if I were facing the credibility problem you are now facing, I would have already tracked down the factory photos and factory recipient list myself!

so, this is what you are telling the community, and please correct me where I misunderstand:

-there are no pictures prior to its restoration
-there is no restorer
-there are no factory photos
-there is no factory recipient list

this is where we stand, 450 posts later?
oh, and the dagger has an asking price of $70k?

[TxGauleiter]

We receive hundreds of emails a week, and photograph hundreds of products a quarter, and we do NOT save everything.

well, this is not an ordinary wound badge, this is according to you a very exotic piece..

I just cannot believe that there are NO pictures of this piece prior to its alleged restoration.

[Frogprince]

This is just a passing comment before getting to my primary posting: The “silver” dagger not only has a blade with no discernible markings (did it ever have any to begin with(??). It’s silver, and made using a completely different set of crudely made molds. With a much less detailed caricature of a beak-less bird on the pommel. EOD.

Craig, When you start getting into the lists of “supporters”. That suggests to me that perhaps you are short on facts, and perhaps resorting to using the names of various folks in collecting in an effort to bolster your argument(s)? With a case in point here being the list from another discussion with some of the names redacted because they have not already been mentioned.

“.............. against the following people:

the recipient (deceased)
Tom Johnson
Jason Burmeister
Ron Weinand
Craig Gottlieb
redacted
redacted
redacted
redacted
redacted
.............”

But your “list” failed to mention one other name who from the documentation provided was a previous owner. With my point being that when all of the actual evidence was looked at (not opinions) it told a different story than the one that was being argued. Because (omitting those who are deceased) that long list of names posted above with all that collecting experience got it wrong. (Assuming of course that they had all of the evidence presented to them.)

The photo and list you mention was a repackaging of the photo and information in Jim Atwoods book. Which has already been discussed as being faked. So where is there any physical evidence that is actually proof of the matter? FP

[Craig Gottlieb]

My reason for bringing up other names is EXACTLY as you stated ... to show readers that Texas Gauleiter's implication that I am the sole drum-beater regarding the authenticity of this dagger type, is just plain wrong. Who is this guy anyway?

My reasons for not servicing your curiosity, Texas Gauleiter, are my own. I have stated that the dagger was restored, and I have stated that in my opinion, that it is unreasonable to expect me to save every single email I have received in the past 10 years. The restorer does not wish to be named. Enough: You don't like the dagger, don't buy it.

As for Frogprince, one of his years-old tactics when attacking me is to state as if opinion were fact. Case in point: that both of these daggers somehow "lack" in quality. He's never seen them in person, and unless he wishes to reveal his true identity, has little credibility to stand on. Reveal yourself, and then we'll talk.

Now, I can feed the egos of Gauleiter and Frogprince by "slinking away" from this thread again. Go ahead ... tell the viewers that I'm hiding because you are somehow victorious and I somehow know I'm wrong. However, rest assured, that I view "victory" for you as keeping me from my business and family, and I will not give you that privilege. I have stated my opinions, I believe them, and I am in good company.

[schönbeck]

Craig it's about the dagger NOT you.
Most high end items you show are filled with different kinds of films an fact.
I can't see why you didn't do this for this dagger.
If you have documents why don't you show them and silence all?

The dealers you mention are just dealers who probably have sold similar daggers and don't want them to go bad.

[tanker]

This could could be solved by ONE email from Craig! That email would contain:
-The restorer
-Pictures of before

As a "high end" dealer, I certainly WOULD save emails on such a rare and value dagger. If not for the restoring process but for the historical reference as it appears that very few exist. THAT WOUD ONLY BE GOOD BUSINESS SENSE.

Ron

[Frogprince]

............ As for Frogprince .......... He's never seen them in person, and unless he wishes to reveal his true identity, has little credibility to stand on. Reveal yourself, and then we'll talk.

Craig, How many “H” daggers were looked at “in hand”, and it was never figured out that they were rotary engraved? And I won’t even try to get into the other clues. With my point being that “in hand” can all too often be worthless if you don’t know what to look for.

And what is with this “true identity” thing of yours? I turned down your offer of a free lunch after that little “Segway” comment of yours. With not much of an effort to become “best buds” with you at the old GW - so why this burning desire to get to know me now?? FP

[Craig Gottlieb]

This discussion IS about me, not just the dagger. Just check out the previous 30 pages of posts, and you'll see what I mean. If you guys want to discuss this dagger type, or these two daggers, feel free. You may do so without me.

[tanker]

THEN END IT WITH THE ANSWERS TO THE SIMPLE QUESTIONS POSED! That should not be too diificult if everything is up and up. Ron

This discussion IS about me, not just the dagger. Just check out the previous 30 pages of posts, and you'll see what I mean. If you guys want to discuss this dagger type, or these two daggers, feel free. You may do so without me.

[Craig Gottlieb]

I did answer the questions, but that's not good enough for the Gauleiters of the world:

1) Photos ... I don't have any of the "before" on the Silver Birdshead. Sorry, I didn't anticipate having to prove that it was restored, since I was admitting something that negatively affected the value of the dagger that was not controversial when viewed by most experts ... until the Gottlieb-Haters got a hold of it.

2) Birdshead Period Documentation ... ask Tom Johnson. He's the one, if memory serves, who had the documentation. I, as well as most other people with actual physical experience with these daggers, consider their existence as proof of their existence. The quality, construction, plus the fit and finish, surpasses that seen of many period daggers. They're as quality-made as the SS Honor Dagger, for example. Call Bob McCarthy and ask him where he got the one he bought out of the woodwork. Call Ron Weinand and ask him about the one he knows about ... still in veteran hands.

3) Restoration Person ... I'm not telling who did the restoration, because some people prefer not to have their name mentioned on forums ... part of me doesn't blame them.

Any other questions you wish me to repeat the answers to?

[TxGauleiter]

I did answer the questions, but that's not good enough for the Gauleiters of the world:

1) Photos ... I don't have any of the "before" on the Silver Birdshead. Sorry, I didn't anticipate having to prove that it was restored, since I was admitting something that negatively affected the value of the dagger that was not controversial when viewed by most experts ... until the Gottlieb-Haters got a hold of it.

2) Birdshead Period Documentation ... ask Tom Johnson. He's the one, if memory serves, who had the documentation. I, as well as most other people with actual physical experience with these daggers, consider their existence as proof of their existence. The quality, construction, plus the fit and finish, surpasses that seen of many period daggers. They're as quality-made as the SS Honor Dagger, for example. Call Bob McCarthy and ask him where he got the one he bought out of the woodwork. Call Ron Weinand and ask him about the one he knows about ... still in veteran hands.

3) Restoration Person ... I'm not telling who did the restoration, because some people prefer not to have their name mentioned on forums ... part of me doesn't blame them.

Any other questions you wish me to repeat the answers to?

Does your partner in this dagger have pictures? It would be a REAL weird scenario if he too had no pictures of the dagger prior to its alleged "restoration."

If you happen to have lost the pics, thats one thing, (things happen, right?) but for your partner to also have no pictures, now THAT would be suspicious. Would you please have him forward you his pictures of the dagger prior to its restoration? After all, you never said you wouldnt share, you only said that you dont have any... Since I am trying to help find a solution to the "lost picture" dilemma, it occurred to me to have you request photos from your partner! As soon as you get those, you can share them..

The pictures would go a long way to answering questions and it would back up your story!

thanks Craig!