Das Schwarze Korps Plaque in Craig Gottliebs auction

[Jon Fish]

These allach plaques have always drawn me. What an iconic design !
I've never seen one in such a cool looking case,has anyone else? I remember about 7/8 years ago bidding on one at Hermann Historica that eventually sold for around 5000 I think.... this one is looking super value right now and if I still collected SS I would be all over it !
Anyone here have one already?

http://www.cgmauctions.com/detail.as...sentation-Case

[Richard]

Jon, one went unsold on the estand for a while until reduced to an amount that finally drew a buyer. I think it sold for somewhere around $1000 or so.
Richard V

[DRP58]

Opinion

Hello Everyone,

I'm writing to inform you that the 1937 Das Schwarze Korps plaque that Craig Gottlieb has in his running auction is most likely a reproduction. Although we don't see many reproductions with Allach Porcelain, this particular item has certain aspects to it that certainly triggers a red flag.

As Craig has mentioned in his description of the Plaque, I did see it at the recent SOS and I thought it did look good, although it did have some very tiny chips to a few of the lower letters. I mentioned that it was in an incorrect box for this type Plaque but it did fit the box nicely. However, I didn't remove the plaque from the box nor did I take any measurements of the Plaque. By eye, the Plaque appeared to be correct and was smaller than the 1939 Das Schwarze Korps Plaque, which it should be. It wasn't until I noticed the measurements and photos in the description for the Plaque that three discrepancy's became a concern.

The first being the Plaque measurements.The measurements should be approximately 9.25" x 6.25", not the 8" x 5.5" that is stated in the auction. Although one can not claim reproduction by measurements alone, especially pertaining to Allach, but these differences in measurements are truly way above the norm indicating that this Plaque was probably made using an original Plaque as a mold. The shrinkage indicates a typical 10-15% reduction in size when clay is baked, making it the size of 8" x 5.5".

The second is the thickness of the Plaque. The Plaque also appears to be too thin, enabling one to see impressions of the front detailing slightly coming through on the back side, which does not occur on this type Plaque.

The third discrepancy is that the hole on the back side of the Plaque appears to be shallow as well as having solid sides, not the hollow appearance that is always seen. By this I mean, the Plaque is made from a two piece mold with clay being poured into the mold while the mold is closed. The mold makes this hole because for lack of a better word a small funnel is located there enabling the clay to be poured in. As the clay starts to harden, some of the liquid clay is poured out from this hole (funnel) leaving an area around the inner hole hollow. This hollow area can measure anywhere between approximately 4 to 8 cm in depth from all around the hole, making this Plaque area appear to be two pieces or hollow when in actuality it is only one solid Plaque with a small area of clay poured away from this hole. Most people think this hole was made purposely for hanging the Plaque, which it was not

I spoke to Craig about these concerns because my name is associated with the Plaque and I want people to know of it's potential problems and that my initial observation of stating the Plaque looks good was incorrect upon my further observation of the photos and dimensions. Craig and I were suppose to speak over the weekend but Craig hasn't responded to my two emails, asking him if a decision to remove the plaque would be made. I'm sure Craig is busy dealing with the Auction but with only 5 + days remaining in this Auction, I have taken it upon myself to mention my follow up observations to everyone concerning on bidding for this plaque. It may be mute point because Craig may be in the process of removing the Plaque but the reasons for removal should be known.

Dennis R. Porell
AllachPorcelain.com

[maestro]

thanks Dennis

[Thorsten B.]

Dennis,

That´s interesting - Craig sent me pics of the piece as well, not as detailed as in the auction and no measurements.
From the first glance I also thought it was good - case is for sure not original but as you said.

Incorrect measurements regarding Allach clay pieces to such extent leads to no other conclusion - the piece cannot be original.

[Niblet]

Dennis
thanks for the info!

[Craig Gottlieb]

Just got alerted to this thread. Dennis and I did speak last week about this piece at length on Friday. When Dennis saw it at SOS in hand, he and I both agreed it was original due to the detail, material, and construction. It's why I took it on consignment. But in truty, neither of us had handy our measurements of other originals. I think the best thing to do on this issue, since there really is no way to know without a side-by-side comparison, is to post this thread in the auction description, and let the bidders know about the controversy. Or, just remove it. I'm not exactly sure what to do, as the purpose of the auction is to give customers "worry free" shopping. With Dennis having mixed feelings on it, no matter if it IS real, the market value is certainly greatly diminished. And yes, I've been working all weekend up in LA on another project, so I'm just now back in the saddle. Not to worry - I'll chat with Dennis today, and resolve the issue by day's end. This is EXACTLY the kind of "public work" that can make this auction process truly great.

[Jon Fish]

Just got alerted to this thread. Dennis and I did speak last week about this piece at length on Friday. When Dennis saw it at SOS in hand, he and I both agreed it was original due to the detail, material, and construction. It's why I took it on consignment. But in truty, neither of us had handy our measurements of other originals. I think the best thing to do on this issue, since there really is no way to know without a side-by-side comparison, is to post this thread in the auction description, and let the bidders know about the controversy. Or, just remove it. I'm not exactly sure what to do, as the purpose of the auction is to give customers "worry free" shopping. With Dennis having mixed feelings on it, no matter if it IS real, the market value is certainly greatly diminished. And yes, I've been working all weekend up in LA on another project, so I'm just now back in the saddle. Not to worry - I'll chat with Dennis today, and resolve the issue by day's end. This is EXACTLY the kind of "public work" that can make this auction process truly great.

Craig, I think that maybe given the opinion from a respected Allach collector/dealer you might need to bow to his knowledge on these pieces and unfortunatly remove the item. However this may well save you a headache later on so its not all doom and gloom.
However thinking out loud would they have come in slightly different sizes maybe depending on date/run of manufacture and if these have been faked I would have thought the market be dripping with them and thats not the case. Has anyone seen one exactly the same as the one in your auction?

[ErichS]

Here are some photos to compare of an originals reverse. Photos credit, Dennis Porell.

[Craig Gottlieb]

Thanks so much for the photos. Jon - you may be right. I have to talk to Dennis first, but it may be best to remove it. I'll decide later on today. My only hesitance to do so is if it's truly a one-of-a-kind presentation piece or something. I just can't figure out why someone would go through all of this trouble, and not make more than one. Has anybody EVER seen one in this size? Also, if Dennis and I hadn't thought it was real at the show, it'd be gone by now. I just don't want to screw over the consignor, in case it IS real.

I do have to be realistic though, that if Dennis doesn't like it, it's value is greatly diminished. After all, he has more experience with Allach than any of us combined. Although he's not on a "board of experts" for my auction (I don't have one), it's his opinion that carries the most weight in this matter, and he's on the "board of experts" in my brain!

[Craig Gottlieb]

Until I can talk to Dennis, I've modified the listing, and will be contacting the bidders to explain the situation, and allow them to retract their bids. Ultimately, it may come off of the auction site, but for the moment, everyone involved will be fully informed of the situation.

http://www.cgmauctions.com/detail.asp?id=246

[Craig Gottlieb]

I did send the email out, but so far, we've gotten only one retraction. I'll keep everyone informed, and haven't had a chance to speak to Dennis yet.

[inimicus]

congrats craig for your responses and exemplary comportmant here.

[Craig Gottlieb]

Thank you - I have to keep this auction squeaky clean. I don't want to pollute it with a negative incident, or it will make it harder for the project to succeed. And if it does succeed, everybody wins.

[Craig Gottlieb]

Second and third bids retracted. One bidder is left, so it looks like the question "to remove or not remove" is becoming more and more moot. I was leaning toward removal but wanted to talk to Dennis first. I've tried to reach him over the past couple of days, but he must be away from the computer, so it looks like this is going the way it would have gone anyway. He did have time to start another "alert" thread, which I can understand fully, given that he had physically inspected this item and blessed it as good (as had I). Just goes to show that anybody can make a mistake including "the experts." A valuable lesson indeed. I'm glad this happened before the auction ended and the item was delivered to a customer! It'll likely disappear by end-of-day.