Topic: IS THIS GALLE REAL OR FAKE?

[flying free]

I would have been looking for a base with a round polished pontil mark on it I suppose.  I can't see why there wouldn't be one, but I wouldn't definitely know and I am certainly no expert lol. And that alone wouldn't determine whether or not it was real I guess.

With regards the cost of appraisal.  In order to gain the knowledge to appraise something, you have to spend lots of time and money on acquiring that knowledge.
If I was asking for an appraisal, I would expect it for insurance and therefore would expect a written appraisal as well which presumably he would give.

I presume this is all offered in the price therefore I wouldn't see that as unacceptable. 

However I guess if it turns out the vase is fake, then that would be another $125 the vase has cost you.  But if it costs a Galle price in the first place then the appraisal should help you get your money back if it is a fake, and should help you sell it or insure it if it is a genuine piece.


These two sites might help you try and work it out a bit more - and Tiny Esveld has written a book on this issue I think, so that might be worth acquiring.
http://www.tinyesveld.com/p/education/right-or-wrong-lessons-in-glass
http://www.realorrepro.com/article/New-cameo-glass-in-old-designs

Keith thanks for the pics

m

[flying free]

I've just had a search around this board using the search tab above left and there are quite a few pieces on here that are fake.  Mike Moir who is a member of the board has given some invaluable information on them.
He sells fabulous Galle pieces amongst many other beautiful pieces

 It might be worth using the search and having a read to see what you can find out.
Mike can also be contacted via his website here - I don't know whether he does appraisals or not though - I didn't check the site but there may be information on that on the site.
http://www.manddmoir.com/

Hope this helps
m

[Anne Tique]

I was going to suggest Tiny Esveld aswell, i've contacted her before and there wasn't a charge...got a very nice and quick reply...

[brunoknowsnothing]

thank you ohio... there is an large antique show at the end of this month in nyc.. i might take a ride down. thank you again guys!

[Ohio]

Best of success Bruno, I hope you are successful one way or another (yes or no).

[Ohio]

We do not know exactly what transpired between the OP & the individual contacted, however I was under the impression that the OP simply wished to know if the Galle piece was a fake or genuine Galle which in my opinion (since I have done more than a few appraisals) is not an appraisal, it’s a straight forward question. If it’s a fake the OP would waste $125 &  since the contacted individual evidently stated that no further photos were necessary then one must assume an answer was readily at hand, either yes or no. Now if it was yes then obviously that is where the requested $125 for a written appraisal (if the OP wished to do so) with a determined market value stated comes into play & certainly no problem exists, however according to the OP the contacted individual would go no further with a yes or no as to the legitimacy of the piece unless the fee was paid so what you are dealing with is payment for attribution not an appraisal. I will not waste any words stating what I think of that except to say nowhere would the word appraisal be used.

On the largest of U.S. Boards we dealt with this although it was quite some time ago...individual(s) signing up on the board as members then privately emailing board posters offering the attribution for a fee & this particular situation reminds me of that situation. 

[flying free]

No, I can't agree Ken.
The fee asked for was an appraisal fee.  Therefore it is reasonable to assume an appraisal would have been given.  I would assume an appraisal would be a written appraisal to be used however best but i haven't checked the sources site to see what an appraisal would constitute.  I would assume more than a simple yes or no?
m

[Ohio]

Well then M I guess we have to simply agree to disagree. To me it was a simple question, is this a fake or is it real. The offer for a written appraisal should be tendered based if its real although granted it could be offered even if its a fake if the requested party agrees.

Lets deal with a hypothetical...a site has an entire section based on fakes plus a blog on fakes pertaining to brand X yet when it comes to a simple straight forward question asked is this a real or a fake brand X? Well now lets see...it will cost you $X for you to find out if its real or not. Thats pay for attribution plain & simple & there most certainly is a difference. If its yes its legit then the offer for a written appraisal with market value could be tendered to the party requesting the information & (again) it could even be offered in a its a fake scenerio as in... however if you are interested in an appraisal for your fake I will offer to do an appraisal...its up to you.

What has been posted if it is accurate is not an appraisal at least not the way we do business over here. To me the simple yes or no answer in the beginning takes precedence as in real or fake & then the word appraisal (or offer of same) comes into play.

On second thought this could be the chicken or the egg deal.

[flying free]

ok I'm not a horrible person lol, I freely give away any information I have on here. 
But you know sometimes, when it's high values at stake, the knowledge accumulated is very costly.  I only do this as a hobby and for love but even my meagre selection of books has probably cost me the best part of $1500.  And that's never mind the time I put into reading them.  And I don't visit museums or own enormous amounts of high end glass to accumulate knowledge, and that all costs .
Therefore I can understand someone not wanting to 'give it away' freely.  That person is trying to sell his stock.  Why should he give a potential competitor information I suppose?

Equally I also understand the importance of marketing and good word of mouth sometimes one good deed can turn into a gigantic sale I'm sure.

I'm not really disagreeing with the heart of your message.  But perhaps there is also another side to things as wel?, there's a balance, he probably gets contacted weekly if not daily, asking if the owner's piece is real or fake if you see what I mean.

m

[Ohio]

M I believe you have hit the nail on the head. I read your post & my dim light bulb lit that the individual in question may well be using the $125 fee as a deterrent. After all much of the the info how to recognize fake versus genuine is readily available on the site (lessons) plus the blog if one takes the time to read it. However it is human nature to skip this step & email the author & there are two ways (at least) to stop this practice...eliminate the site info on fake versus genuine altogether or set (for lack of a better term) a personal confirmation fee.

I can honestly relate to this. In 1999 I & a fellow Ohioian along with a gentleman from Florida published a small website dealing with Erickson Glass (Bremen, Ohio 1943-1961) because 75% of Erickson being offered for sale (and selling) on eBay was not Erickson, it was primarily Murano. Back them anything with bubbles was touted as Erickson art glass. It was a seven page site with 122 color photos of different forms & the colors produced by Erickson. We purposely did not provide any contact info, no names & no emails, however within 45 days two of us began receiving "is this Erickson" emails with photos & it grew to the point that they were numbering 20+ emails daily. This went on for a month even after I added "The authors of this site will not answer unsolicited emails for identification purposes. Please carefully read the information provided on this site to make a determination of what is or what is not Erickson".

It did not slow the emails so after another three weeks, following a short discussion with the other two authors I deep-sixed the site altogether along with my Yahoo email account. 

Why I did not consider this before your latest comment...well at times I suffer a  disorder called tunnel vision.  Ken