Topic: Whitefriars trial weight PR400 (Actually a PR402 non-trial)

[daveweight]

Opps - guess what I forgot to do !!
Dave

[tropdevin]

***

Hi Dave

I was told that the 'first' quality pieces sold in the shop were stock that had not been taken by the retailers in previous years - so there would be no real conflict.

Here is another example of the design - without facets.

Alan

[boxed]

Thanks for the added info dave 
joe

[Tony G]

Hi Joe,
            your paperweight is a PR402 which was a production item and not a trial.

 I think the auction house are being disingenuous here!!! Or do I mean, they are lying!

The reason I say that, is that I contacted them about this very example and gave them a full explanation of the "S" on the base and its model number.  They acknowledged my comments and accepted my reasoning. To later call it a "5" is very naughty.

There were a lot of this model PR402 that carried an "S" on the base. That suggests that either they were difficult to make (I can't see why this should be the case), or an inexperienced person made them ( also no evidence) or finally that they indeed had a lot left over from a production run. In my view, after having looked at several of these, I think this last explanation is the most likely and that your example is perfectly good quality sold off through the staff shop!!

Good luck with it and enjoy it,

Regards,  Tony

[boxed]

Hi tony
thanks for clearing this up i suppose auction houses are a little bit naughty with discriptions
Thanks for the info i can use if i come across another similar piece
all my best
joe

[johnphilip]

Joe i also told them it was an s , i have even had s weights with a sticker stuck poorly  over the S , one like yours without the S  sold for over £400 a couple of years back .

[paperweights]

Naughty or not, I think there is another explanation.  I've found that auction houses are very cautious on accepting new information from potential bidders.  They are not experts and have to use considerable discretion as to whether or not to pass on information not published in the original listing.  The danger is obvious, someone may be attempting to influence the bids.  At best, I would expect the auctioneer to announce that the listing may be in error and the bidders who are uncertain should not bid. 

I remember one particular auction (in the US) which advertised a New England Carpet Glass Company Ground paperweight.  I went to the auction, viewed a Murano carpet ground (not NEGC), and informed the auctioneer who acknowledged that several others had already shared that information.  During the auction, the auctioneer stated that the attribution was in question and that if you were uncertain what you are bidding on, please don't bid.  The paperweight in question sold for about $1,000 US.  Doubting my own judgement, I was in line behind the winning bidder and asked to examine the paperweight again when he was checking out.  It was still a Murano.  He noted that I had purchased a Baccarat closepack signed 1849 (no B) and informed me that it was a fake date.  I chose not to correct him.