Thanks for that, Allan. Good to see you dropping in!
I am guessing from what Allan says that this is one of the later Fleur weights, probably a second, having no etching but an unpolished base, and that someone added the 'sig' later. (Karel, CIIG is what it looks like CG for Caithness Glass and II for a second quality weight.)
Now what puzzles me, as it so often does, is just why
is this weight a second?
In what way does it fall below the standards set by Caithness? I ask because MY weight, which I pictured in my previous reply, is NOT a second! Even though it has a slight slipping of something in the centre of the flower, which one might think would cause it to be rejected, it is fully etched on the base with Caithness Scotland, its name, and an inscribed number. Yet Karel's apparent 'second' appears perfect to me! There's obviously something
which didn't come out as the Caithness designers intended it to, but goodness knows what, is all I can say!