SS Honour Ring for discussion - named to 'Hahn'.

**big ned** · 10-19-2012, 04:05 PM

by mclenrd

The original rings I've seen during my comparison research have similar scratches... here is one on CGs site with a DB COA.... that DB misidentifies.
http://www.craiggottlieb.com/engine/...rman+Militaria

Attachment 411904

The other convincing element to me with my ring is the seam behind the head. I have yet to seen this on any copies.
Attachment 411905

Before all this, I contacted my old, long time friend Bill Shea (The Ruptured Duck) here in Massachusetts and he also commented on the seam... he thought it looked good too and he gave me DB's contact info. I need to take better photos. My iPhone4s isn't doing it justice.

That's the same link I posted several pages back.

This is all by the by now, as it appears that the ring has been sold to a collector who already owns 3 originals and is a moderator on WAF, is that correct? Surely he knows an original when he sees one, and perhaps that is why the thread you posted on the forum that HE moderates was s*** canned so that he alone could benefit by acquiring the ring from you at a pretty good price without anyone else getting in his way?

Or maybe not. I would appreciate a candid reply if that's alright with you Matt.

Regards, Ned.

**Espenlaub Militaria** · 10-19-2012 04:05 PM

We also buy and trade your items and full collections!

**Wagriff** · 10-19-2012, 04:13 PM

Almost all of the fakes now have the seam behind the skull. The fakers are now well aware of this crucial point. As for the Mod on the other site buying this ring, it only makes my point all the more solid-that even Experts can no longer tell authenticity on these latest pre-aged rings. And, despite what Adrian here said, I'll repeat-No One is unquestionable.

**mclenrd** · 10-19-2012, 04:45 PM

I really don't want to beat this into the ground and I have a feel its beginning to "bore" some folks. Nonetheless, all these developments are interesting. I'm only happy to share my findings/experience. I'll post DB's "COfakeA" after I get CG's 2nd opinion (which I'll share here as well).

@ Ned, I'm nothing but candid. So much so, it gets me into trouble at times but I digress. Your understanding is correct and that would seem like that is the case.

@Wagriff... Agreed! No one is unquestionable. I'm considered an expert on all things Pink Floyd the world over. I do not consider myself (i tend to be very modest) as such but others do, therefor I must be. There have been times when I've been wrong, of course. Nobody is perfect and I never forget that.

**big ned** · 10-19-2012, 05:10 PM

"@ Ned, I'm nothing but candid. So much so, it gets me into trouble at times but I digress. Your understanding is correct and that would seem like that is the case."

Thankyou. Yet another example of malfeasance being commited by a member of the WAF regulators, and not for the first time as I'm sure some other members here already know.

I don't know how these people can live in their own skin sometimes.

Perhaps it's better to draw a line under this discussion as there is not much more worth adding to it under these circumstances IMO.

**mclenrd** · 10-19-2012, 05:16 PM

this happens a lot?

**big ned** · 10-19-2012, 05:31 PM

by mclenrd

this happens a lot?

It has happened before. Without going into detail, a senior regulator there got an RK that was perfectly good to be derided as a fake by some of his 'disciples'. He then purchased it at a knockdown price. This actually happened. I'm done here.