Fake dagger authenticated by Wittmann.

[kersten]

It looks to me like Wittman spent less than 1 hour on that COA - which turned out to be worthless - I agree a COA - especially from Wittman - is a waste of money

[Frogprince]

Fred,

The " Non related to this dagger (link) " is related to this dagger and the thread in reality. You can post any piece of paper you like of course whether it be Birds head or Schnaufer. The question is the allegation made on the C.O.A's as being written on this Damascus artificial piece as being done for monetary gain. With that you open up an issue of character and to be frank a time consuming endeavor here to format and collate all the data to present. The Schnaufer and several others will be bought into play but it takes time. The quality of work and price tag? you cannot base the quality of work on length or view if the content is wrong or motivated by means that are less than scholarly. In short, this is a can of worms and takes time and while I am on it and trying to structure it in a manner that works, I am also hungry and need to grill some chicken. We can kill each other later and have plenty of time for that.

If they both charged Rob NL $500.00 for the COA’s, by definition I think that it establishes that money was involved that was given to both COA writers. And Mr. Stephens said that he had no knowledge of Mr. Wittman’s COA at the time he wrote his. So your point here is just what? Now if you are going to character that’s another matter, and I do get the “drift” of the CG dagger COA being included in this thread, and the SA dagger that was mentioned.

What you said earlier was:

“Now he does not appear to have issue with Wittmann's paper on the Schnaufer dagger marketed through Weitze and accompanying the piece in his sale ad. So what makes that paper different than this paper?. The Schanufer dagger was much more money than this piece and the only statement that could possibly offset the monetary aspect against the statement of the buyer that he will not sell a fake is the fact that he spent approx. 90k to go to court with a dagger that is worth a fraction. No one liked the Schnaufer dagger, not many like it now, but its got Wittmann paper now and does not seem to be a problem there.”

So why the double-talk (?) that it’s somehow unreasonable asking for the Wittmann COA's upfront to see what they got for $500.00 (or whatever)? With only the silver “SA Birdshead” dagger thrown in for good measure, trying to limit the scope of the discussion because I’ve got some better things to do myself. FP

[J. Wraith]

If they both charged Rob NL $500.00 for the COA’s, by definition I think that it establishes that money was involved that was given to both COA writers. And Mr. Stephens said that he had no knowledge of Mr. Wittman’s COA at the time he wrote his. So your point here is just what? Now if you are going to character that’s another matter, and I do get the “drift” of the CG dagger COA being included in this thread, and the SA dagger that was mentioned.

What you said earlier was:


So why the double-talk (?) that it’s somehow unreasonable asking for the Wittmann COA's upfront to see what they got for $500.00 (or whatever)? With only the silver “SA Birdshead” dagger thrown in for good measure, trying to limit the scope of the discussion because I’ve got some better things to do myself. FP

No double talk Fred, no one liked the Schnaufer piece and not many like it now. Pretty simple and straight forward. If you want the paper up then by all means put it up if it's available. A C.O.A is a signature and opinion which carries an element of expertise by association. Whether it's pretty or long or short or written in detail or not is really not how they are applied. If it had a hologram would it be worth more?. No, of course not. I am not a coa guy and I do not like them and unless the signature is of consequence I do not buy them nor lay a tremendous amount of faith in them. There are only a very few exceptions in this regard. The thread itself is a character attack which means that is the question sitting on top of two opposing opinions is character, therefore character is in play and character is where we will go. It does require thought and time however to stay within the lines and to retrace the arguments and facts as they have played out in the past, I don't see a reason to rush nor fight and let it roll and we can take our time.

P.S while certificates are not for me, I am not generally a collector that needs them. Should I decide to step outside my comfort zone I might seek an opinion, but rarely a COA. Hi end collectors who's tastes fall into an area such as this are probably more in need of such a document that I ever will be. There is always risk with high ticket daggers, if it's not the dagger itself it can lie in the wolf packs that lay in wait on Internet forums looking to destroy items that may in fact be perfectly legitimate. It is the hobby and has played out that way in a multitude of threads and discussions. There is risk associated with being a high end buyer, those risks should be assessed and the buyer should be held responsible for his decisions within reason. This is not a reasonable thread, nor is the buyers approach anything close to reasonable.

[Frogprince]

No double talk Fred, no one like the Scnaufer piece and not many like it now. Pretty simple and straight forward. If you want the paper up then by all means put it up if it's available. A C.O.A is a signature and opinion which carries an element of expertise by association. Whether it's pretty or long or short or written in detail or not is really not how they are applied. If it had a hologram would it be worth more?. No, of course not. I am not a coa guy and I Do not like them and unless the signature is of consequence I do not buy them nor lay a tremendous amount of faith in them. There are only a very few exceptions in is regard. The thread itself is a character attack which means that is the question sitting on top of two opposing opinions, therefore character is in play and character is where we will go. It does require thought and time however to stay within the lines and to retrace the arguments and facts as they have played out in the past, I don't see a reason to rush nor fight and let it roll and we can take our time.

It sounded like a fairly reasonable response up to this point:

“If you want the paper up then by all means put it up if it's available.”

I don’t have it. Whereas you had an inside track with information that IMO had to come from Mr. Wittmann before he made it public. So I think that as we speak I’m in touch with someone who might get a response from him, because most businessmen keep records of what they get paid for. It also begs the question IMO of why did Mr. Wittmann write a COA if no one liked the Schnaufer dagger?? That said, there’s no hurry. FP

[J. Wraith]

It sounded like a fairly reasonable response up to this point:

“If you want the paper up then by all means put it up if it's available.”

I don’t have it. Whereas you had an inside track with information that IMO had to come from Mr. Wittmann before he made it public. So I think that as we speak I’m in touch with someone who might get a response from him, because most businessmen keep records of what they get paid for. It also begs the question IMO of why did Mr. Wittmann write a COA if no one liked the Schnaufer dagger?? That said, there’s no hurry. FP

If I had such an inside track I Obviously would not have tripped early in the thread on the Schnaufer dagger and did not know the piece was papered until I bought it up and was pointed to the paper. What I had was several months of the background and issues per scattered sources and a heads up that this thread was coming from the buyer in the boards. All I did was move to get in front of it before everyone got run over. So, I think you might have gotten the wrong impression there and once i saw the paper I reached for the phone to seek clarification. Apparently he likes the dagger but again, these pieces tend to draw in the opinions. If there were any conspiracy there however we would not be here as it's the same buyer and neither dagger was purchased from the man who signed the paper.

[Willi Z.]

Ok, after 15 pages and 214 posts I think this thread has run its course. And everything that can be said has been said about this matter.

An administrator can open it up again if some feel that strongly about it.