Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. > Bohemia, Czechoslovakia, Czech Republic, Austria
Not everyones cup of tea! - Halama
Della:
Ooh, :o :o amazing, Frank.........I wish ::)
http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,3559.0.html this is where we discussed ours.
Sklounion:
FH has been very fortunate.
He managed to recoup all the family's assets, historical moulds etc, after 1990. So who is to say not original, after all they have stayed in production throughout the Communist period, and whether signed or not, one can hardly say "not right", the original family are back in possession, the designs are those commissioned by family members. It is splitting hairs, in order to justify secondary market prices, that fuels controversy over fake, repro or re-issue.
If all the Whitefriars moulds were with the Powells, or Hogans, or whoever designed them, there would probably be less fuss from collectors, if family members started producing items from those moulds, than there has been about Jonathan Anderson production of "bricklayers".
Value is relative.... some Sklo Union collectors would be horrified to know how long some of their treasures were in production, and two frequently sought-after Vizner items survived in full production for at least 24 years....
Should glass carry warnings stating " the value of your investments can go up and down" just as the FSA advertise in the UK???
Regards,
Marcus
Frank:
--- Quote from: Le Casson on April 05, 2007, 10:29:16 PM ---Should glass carry warnings stating " the value of your investments can go up and down"
--- End quote ---
No. But it is unscrupulous sellers taking modern production and selling it as old that create the problem, combined with manufacturers who should, in this information age, provide such information on-line.
Anyway, what I am interested in is getting this colour version of the box at around 20-40 euros. I know they have been in continuous production for n years but so what. Where is the production data.
In any case, volume of production means absolutely nothing, it is the number of collectors that sets the prices. There are unique one offs that rarely get into treble figures and bits of Lalique produced in 6 figure volumes that fech several hundred.
One of our brethren actually considered this box as the worst piece of glass in their collection... which is how I acquired it - sure it is no design masterpiece but as a lover of more primitive figurative art it is right up my street. I suppose it could also be seen as a symbol of the aesthetic of silicon body sculpture.
Sklounion:
--- Quote ---Where is the production data.
--- End quote ---
Always more important to keep accurate records, on who is doing what, where and when, in totalitarian states.
When it comes to production matters, you can have some idea, of exports etc, but little idea of how much was produced of particular patterns on particular days. (unlike Whitefriars it seems).
What makes any assessment of Czech production very difficult, is that there now exists a law, passed after the communist collapse, which means political papers, company documents etc, can be held, with no public access (for fifty years and can be re-newed), and which makes the thirty-year rule on access to UK Cabinet papers seem lax.
This is why information regarding a company like Kralik, whose papers still exist, cannot be accessed by anyone, despite the company finally folding in 1943.
I'm not convinced by the
--- Quote ---sellers taking modern production and selling it as old
--- End quote ---
argument.
Whether a Vizner vase dates from the first days production and any others date between start, and finish of production, it is still the same product. Who can say that the modern product (say 1995 production) is not the same as the old product (1961), and why does it matter?
Why manufacturers should provide info, and who for, is also a complex issue. Obviously commercial issues are a factor, but to expect manufacturers to supply info, merely to assist the policing of a secondary market-place, suggests a level of corporate responsibility, that arguably is un-necessary, and paternalistic in the extreme.
Regards,
Marcus
Frank:
--- Quote from: Le Casson on April 06, 2007, 01:08:34 PM ---Who can say that the modern product (say 1995 production) is not the same as the old product (1961), and why does it matter?
--- End quote ---
That is a habit of the collecting community and heightened by the collecting of production goods while still being produced and over a long period of time. In one hundred years the difference in time will be virtually irrelevant (more likely concerned if the factory is under or above sea level :) ) . On the other hand disinformation by dealers taking current production and convincing the world it is 50+ years old in order to sell it above the retail price. I recently watched a lampwork set that is currently made and sold in the UK for £12 fetch over 90 pounds on eBay. The seller had a substantial collection including a few genuinely old items and pushed it as his childhood collection from the 1960's. He was clearly believed.
--- Quote from: Le Casson on April 06, 2007, 01:08:34 PM ---Why manufacturers should provide info, and who for, is also a complex issue. Obviously commercial issues are a factor, but to expect manufacturers to supply info, merely to assist the policing of a secondary market-place, suggests a level of corporate responsibility, that arguably is un-necessary, and paternalistic in the extreme.
--- End quote ---
Actually, I said
--- Quote ---combined with manufacturers who should, in this information age, provide such information on-line
--- End quote ---
the empasis intended on the information age element. I consider any business that does not put its entire production on-line to be seriously stupid - the web being the fastest growing sales channel as well as crime channel. That most tend to delete their deleted product lines is ridiculous as storage costs are irrelevant but there are, I agree, many and complex arguments about that.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version