Thanks for the info on the other Ferro's, I plan to research these names, just for curiosity.
Re: "... and am I looking at it wrong. It looks like an ashtray to me,..... " It does to me also (and I'm holding it!). I thought the title was kind of funny - Title of this thread is exact title of Ebay listing. I'm not knocking the seller, I feel the price was fair and I like the piece.
It's just that many sellers seem to feel attributions are necessary in order to sell their glass on Ebay. This is the first piece I have purchased from Ebay (have sold many) and scrolling through some of the listings, I was shocked at statements being made. For example on listing for this bowl - Vittorio Ferro was 18 yrs old in 1950, when I questioned seller how an 18 year old could be a "Master" for Fratelli Toso, reply was along the lines of "well, the item is definitely Murano and it's old".
That's fine, but one shouldn't make attributions by pulling names out of a hat. I have spent many hours researching EAPG and know the difficulties involved. If I am 1% unsure, I will state I am unsure and either provide a best estimate in the listing or "Unknown maker".
The glass should speak for itself - a famous name never hurts, unless it is wrong. Whether deliberate or unintentional, wrong attributions tend to stick - what buyer wants to tell their peers their new 1500.00 Venini is actually not Venini?
Maybe I'm wrong, but I would feel better getting 50.00 for a piece with "Maker Unknown" stated vs 200.00 by falsely attributing the item, even if I knew I could get away with it. Where will all of this questionable info posted on auction sites end up? In a book?
My biggest frustration is that all of these layers of misinformation will never get peeled back, the original artist will likely never be credited, and 50 years from now anything unsigned will be attributed only to a handful of the top names.
Hopefully sites like this will continue to pass along accurate info - assuming younger people maintain an interest.