Hi, I'm back.
In my earlier response, I missed the word "not" as in it should have been "does not
look like Monart".
Anyway, here's a temporary page I have put together showing various views of what I was tryng to say (but of course with my customary ifs and buts):http://www.btinternet.com/~kevh.glass/MessageBoard/Weights.htm
I think it is interesting to compare the orange colours and also the way the white stripes in the bowl have a similar apparent "edging" as seen in my weight with the "grey" stripes.
I have commented in my page about the problems with colour comparisons of web-based photos (see also our discussions in another thread in this Board - wherever it is). However, to my eyes, the working and colouring of the white in the bowl seems to be very much like that in my weights - even with the variations in hue.
The fact that the bowl has a rough ground pontil area does cause doubt over a usual Monart and maybe even Vasart attribution. But with the paperweights, there are a range of finishes to the pontil area from rough ground to perfectly smooth.
I have the feeling that the bowl could well be a Vasart piece from the 1946 to 1955 period but with a finish to the pontil area that is more consistent with the paperweights than the other items.
I would not normally say this in a public Message Board, but if the bowl is for sale, I would like first refusal. It would fit very well with my planned talk at the "Perth Event".
If it is not for sale, is there a chance that I could check it out in person? My email address is shown in my profile on this Board.