Ramon Saenz de Heredia
PS. I reiterate I am open to discuss the dealers to avoid list.I will
propose a few names on
Monday.
In Ancientartifacts@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Churley <churley482@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Ramon,
> I am not suggesting that Passage to Antiquity should go on the list
of dealers who sell fakes. But I am suggesting that if Ernie Krumbein
persists in refusing to even acknowledge that the jug may be more
restored that his COA described and in refusing to give me a refund
if that is indeed true, then he does not deserve to be on the List of
Good Dealers - a list he compiled himself! He deserves to be in
limbo, on neither list.
> Cheers, Stephen
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Ramon Jr <rsdeheredia@...>
> To: Ancientartifacts@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, June 6, 2008 8:34:10 AM
> Subject: [Ancientartifacts] Re: 'Good' Seller with poor COA. Fakes
v other errors.
>
>
> Correction. Please read unethical dealers.
> Ramon Saenz de Heredia
> In Ancientartifacts@ yahoogroups. com, "Ramon Jr"
<rsdeheredia@ ...>
> wrote:
> >
> > HI.
> > The dealers to avoid list includes sellers who sell
> > FAKES. And as I have posted often not the accidental fake.
> > If it included the latter you would find there two dealers
> > mentioned yesterday : Harlan J. Berk and Gorny and Mosch.
> > ( And many others.)
> > There is quite a distance between a forgery and a misdescription.
> > Be it of a restoration. And if fakes occasionally pass even
expert
> > dealers,why not a restoration. The question of refunds is
ethical,
> and
> > I am sure Ernie (he has the right to intervene) will refund.
> > If any one wants to open a list of ethical dealers ,OK with me.
> > I will participate. I would propose that to go into the list
> > you need a third strike.
> > Ramon Saenz de Heredia
> >
> > --- In Ancientartifacts@ yahoogroups. com, Melissa and Kelly
> > <v8vibr8a@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Well...
> > >
> > > As a newbie that is an absolute showstopper. Doesn't it just
make
> > you cast your mind back to where dealers that are on that avoid
> > dealers list are fighting for themselves and being shot down on
> this
> > group and yet one of the most knowledgeable (from this point of
> view)
> > is falling short of the mark.
> > >
> > > Shame on you Ernie. Do the right thing, there must be some sort
> of
> > compromise.
> > >
> > > Kelly Thomas
> > > New Zealand
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To: Ancientartifacts@ : churley482@: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 12:58:29 -
> > 0700Subject: Re: [Ancientartifacts] Re: 'Good' Seller with poor
COA
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > I can now report that the seller of the jug is none other than
> > Ernie Krumbein of Passage to Antiquity. The very person who has
> > compiled the 'List of Good Dealers' for this Group. How ironic!
In
> > light of what I have said already, and latest developments, I
would
> > like his company to be removed from the 'List of Good Dealers'.
Or
> > perhaps a new list should be compiled of "So-called good dealers
> with
> > meaningless COAs".
> > >
> > > I gave Ernie a number of options:
> > >
> > > (a) give me a full refund of $500 for the jug (as per his COA);
> > >
> > > (b) I try to sell the piece on eBay and if it sells he refunds
me
> > the balance up to $500;
> > >
> > > (c) he categorically refuses to give me a refund.
> > >
> > > Ernie has chosen (c) sadly. He has also refused to tell me
> whether
> > or not he believes the jug has more restoration than his COA
> states;
> > and he has refused Rolf's offer to look at the jug to give a
second
> > opinion on it.
> > >
> > > All Ernie says is that because I have "altered" the jug by
using
> a
> > tiny bit of acetone, he will not offer me a refund. He has not
> asked
> > to see a picture of the jug to see if it now looks different. And
> his
> > COA does not state that the slightest test on the piece will
> > invalidate the guarantee.
> > >
> > > I know very well that dealers do test pieces with acetone to
see
> > whether the surface is original or restored. I have done so with
> some
> > pieces I have bought from other delears - dealers who deserve to
be
> > on the 'List of Good Dealers' - and on the rare occasion that the
> > surface is not original I have obtained a full refund.
> > >
> > > So would the modifiers of the Group please accept this email as
> my
> > formal request to have Passage to Antiquity removed from
the "List
> of
> > Good Sellers".
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Stephen Churley
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----From: David K. <romulus2x@> To:
> > Ancientartifacts@ : Thursday, June 5, 2008 7:32:41 PMSubject:
> > [Ancientartifacts] Re: 'Good' Seller with poor COA
> > >
> > > Hi Stephen,Then you have a clear case of misdescribed goods. I
> hope
> > the seller honours their obligations. David K.--- In
> Ancientartifacts@
> > yahoogroups. com, Stephen Churley <churley482@ ...> wrote:>> Hi
> > David,> Thanks. In this case I don't think it would be fair to
> > stretch the word "around" too far because the area I am
questioning
> > is indeed the main body of the pot, not the areas immediately
> > adjacent to the junction of the handle and neck with the body. >
> > Cheers, Stephen> > > ----- Original Message ----> From: David K.
> > <romulus2x@ ..>> To: Ancientartifacts@ yahoogroups. com> Sent:
> > Thursday, June 5, 2008 6:58:05 PM> Subject: [Ancientartifacts]
> > Re: 'Good' Seller with poor COA> > > Hi Stephen,> Just a comment
on
> > the linguistics ....> If the COA had stated "the handle and neck
> have
> > been restored" the situation would be clear since those would be
> the
> > *only* areas to have been restored. But the wording "has been
> > restored *around* the handle and neck ..." is more ambiguous and
> > could be taken to mean not the handle and neck themselves but the
> > areas of the pot immediately adjacent to them, i.e. the body of
the
> > pot.> However, from what you say, it sounds as if the restoration
> > extends well away from just those areas - so the COA was wrong.>
In
> > any case, having said all that, if I was the dealer I would
simply
> > accept that the customer was not happy and refund.> David K.>
> > http://www.romulus2 .com/henjack/ >
> http://www.romulus2 .com/lamps/>
> > > > --- In Ancientartifacts@ yahoogroups. com, Stephen Churley
> > <churley482@ ..> wrote:> >> > Hi Ramon,> > The COA mentions that
> the
> > piece "has been restored around the handle and neck and is in
> > extremely good condition". But it appears there is also
restoration
> > to the main body of the pot as well. I have tested small areas of
> the
> > piece with acetone and the red surface (which is supposed to be
> > burnished) comes off easily from both the restored and unrestored
> > areas. I have other red burnished pieces of similar age and
culture
> > (4500 years old from the Middle East) which I have tested with
> > acetone and the burnish does not readily come off. > > I would
> rather
> > not circulate a picture at this stage because if I reveal too
much
> > about the piece members of the Group may be able to identify the
> > seller. I would prefer to keep the seller anonymous at this
stage.
> >
> > > Cheers, > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----> > From: Ramon
> Jr
> > rsdeheredia@ ...> > To: Ancientartifacts@ yahoogroups. com> >
Sent:
> > Thursday, June 5, 2008 4:21:42 PM> > Subject: [Ancientartifacts]
> > Re: 'Good' Seller with poor COA> > > > > > Is "extremely good"
the
> > only mention to condition?.> > Or does COA mention restorations,
as
> > you seem to imply.> > "I have discovered that the pot is more
> > restored that his COA > > described.." > > And to what degree.> >
A
> > pic in photos section would be nice.> > Ramon Saenz de Heredia>
> --
>
> > In Ancientartifacts@ yahoogroups. com, Stephen Churley > >
> > <churley482@ ...> wrote:> > >> > > Hi everyone,> > > I am having
a
> > problem with a piece of ancient pottery which I > > bought last
> year
> > from a dealer who is on the 'good' list and who is a > > regular
> > contributor to this Group. I will refrain from giving his > >
name
> > for the time being. > > > I have discovered that the pot is more
> > restored that his COA > > described. His COA has a 'Description'
> > section setting out the age > > and culture of the piece and also
> its
> > condition which is said to > > be 'extremely good'. The COA also
> > says:> > > "I guarantee that to the best of my knowledge and
belief
> > the above > > described antiquity is authentic and from the
period
> > given. Should > > this piece ever be shown to be other than as
> > described we will gladly > > refund the full purchase price."> >
>
> > The seller is refusing to refund my money on the grounds that the
>
> >
> > COA's description refers solely to authenticity not to condition.
> But
> > > > the 'Description' section does also refer to condition. > > >
> It
> > seems to me that condition cannot be dissociated from > >
> > authenticity here. If the seller had intended to do this he would
>
> >
> > have had a separate section in the COA entitled 'Condition'. > >
>
> > Either the COA is a serious document to be taken at face value or
>
> >
> > not. This seller appears to be dodging his responsibilities. > >
> >
> > I would value your opinions and advice. > > > Cheers, > > >
Stephen
> > Churley> > >> >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
> > > Find singles in your area with Match.
> > > http://a.ninemsn. com.au/b. aspx?URL= http%3A%2F% 2Fmatch%2Enz%
2Emsn%
> > 2Ecom%2Fchannel% 2Findex%2Easpx% 3Ftrackingid%
> > 3D1043416&_r= WL_EMAL_TAG& _m=EXT
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ancientartifacts/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ancientartifacts/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:Ancientartifacts-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:Ancientartifacts-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Ancientartifacts-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
