Topic: Caithness Glass Ltd. Oban Paperweights Limited Edition

[Yvonne Moretti]

I have an Oban PW Limited Edition to Commemorate the wedding of HRH the Princess Anne to Capt. Mark Phillips on November 14, 1973; Edition Limited to 100; Paperweight No. 20; Designed by Colin Terris; Made by J. Allan, Caithness Glass Limited, Harrowhill, Wick. in original box with certificate of authenticity. Can anyone tell me its present day value. Cane signature

[Frank]

It is not listed in the Caithness catalogue (Charlton) but I am currently compiling an online catalogue of Caithness glass and would appreciate photographs of the weight, certificate and base please.

As an unlisted weight it might attract interest but the subject is not wildly popular. Other weights from that period fetch 15 to 50 pounds.

It was probably regarded as an engraving shop production rather than paperweight department as with other commemoratives of that period.

Online catalogue is at http://www.scotlandsglass.co.uk/cms/

[daveweight]

When Jack Allan left Perthshire he found employment at Oban Glass in Wick and one of his jobs was to design a paperweight to commemorate the wedding of Princess Anne to Mark Phillips. Here is a photograph of his rare OGJA signature cane = Oban Glass Jack Allan.
See my article in the 2005 PCA Bulletin
Dave

http://i6.tinypic.com/3z6idfl.jpg <--- Mod :  Link dead

[Wuff]

It is not listed in the Caithness catalogue (Charlton) .....

It is listed - on page 10 in 1974, rather than 1973.
Original price in 1974: £ 35
Estimate in 2004: £ 1000
A better investment than most other paperweights, I guess .

[KevinH]

Yes, Wuff is correct.

Trouble with the catalogue is that the weight is indexed only as "Crown" rather than "HRH ..." or "Royal ..." etc., as was usual for other Royal Commemoratives. This also applies to a similar Crown weight for a 1981 Charles & Diana Royal Wedding Collection issue, (but not made by Jack Allan).

Both Crown weights were listed in the first edition of the catalogue (1999). The details and suggested "values" in both editions are identical for the Jack Allan weight, suggesting no real increase over the 5 year period.

The figures for the 1981 C & D crown weight (fully subscribed edition of 250) were:
Original Issue Price £58.50 / US $295.00,
1999 Value £100.00 / US $295.00
[seems odd that it increased in £ but not in $  - maybe a typo or could it have been the effect of exchange rates?]
2004 Value £200.00 / US $400.00

So, the Ann & Mark weight seems to be the one to go for in terms of greater rarity and possibly better investment value. But I'd like to have it because of the provenanced connection to Jack Allan - of whom very little is recorded in the paperweight literature.

[Wuff]

[seems odd that it increased in £ but not in $  - maybe a typo or could it have been the effect of exchange rates?]

Must be exchange rates, as similar "symptoms" can be seen for many other weights. As an example, I just acquired the lovely "Spring Bouquet" designed by Allan Scott:
OIP 1986: £ 125 vs. $ 450
est. 2004: £ 125 vs. $ 250

Jack Allan - of whom very little is recorded in the paperweight literature.

My only Jack Allan weight with Caithness is 1974 "Flower in the Rain" - did he design any other weights for Caithness? Haven't found any yet - though I have to admit that I haven't "read" the entire Charlton catalogue carefully enough to be sure.

[Frank]

The value estimates in Charlton are by W K Cross, presumably based in Canada. While preparing for Scotlands Glass, I have noticed how the relationship between original issue price in pounds and dollars has varied over the years. If someone were to feed this into a spreadsheet it would be relatively easy to determine the exchange rates used by Caithness in setting prices for the US market. Useful? It could show if the issuing was done on monthly or bi-annual basis. Not a task for me though.

[chrisc]

My understanding is that the original issue prices in the UK and the US cannot simply be explained by the exchange rates.  A few years ago I saw Colin Terris and happened to ask him about it.  He confirmed that Caithness charge more in the US than the UK for the same weights and offered the additional costs of shipping and distribution as the reason.  While that is certainly part of the reason I'm not convinced it's the whole reason.  Unless the US equivalent of UK VAT is at a much higher rate than 17.5% then I think it is simply the case that Caithness feel they can charge more in the US and do so.

For instance based on the latest Charlton book, the typical price of new Caithness limited edition weights in 2003 was about 35% higher in the US (after allowing for the exchange rate) than in the UK.  With a typical price of £200 in the UK that meant the typical price was about £70 higher in the US.  And I don't think it costs £70 to ship a typical paperweight from the UK to the US.

[Frank]

There are additional costs of separate US marketing and printing to take into account, cross border prices are rarely just the shipping cost difference. Including the cost of additional staff based in the US.  But you are right to point out their are other influences on price differences, it would show up in any statistical analysis that was mapped against the exchange rates and of course any consumer tax variations.

[Wuff]

My understanding is that the original issue prices in the UK and the US cannot simply be explained by the exchange rates.

That wasn't the point, though .
Point was, that the relation £/$ changed with time - and this will be mainly influenced by exchange rates.

That exchange rates are insufficient to explain price differences in different countries, is a different matter: living in Switzerland, close to Austria and Germany, we see that each time we cross the border (which we do frequently).