Re: [Ancientartifacts] Re: Cypriot jug

Hi everyone again,

 

I am surprised what you say about using acetone on pottery. I know of  highly respectable dealers, members of the ADA, who do test pieces with acetone and who will take back pieces tested with acetone if the buyer is not happy.

 

Anyone would think that I have the immersed the jug in a vat of acetone and completely changed its appearance. I have used a tiny amount on the end of a Q-tip in a few areas.

 

It's also worth remembering that an amateur collector cannot be expected to have access to the other sophisticated testing methods that have been mentioned.

 

There used to be a time when the "buyer was always right". If the buyer wasn't happy with his or her purchase for a particular reason, the professional dealer would do the honourable thing and give a refund. 

 

As to Ernie's attempt to defame me by suggesting I have an "ulterior motive", Rolf can confirm that I emailed him on Monday when I purchased his Cypriot jug to say that I intended to sell Ernie's jug on eBay.

 

Cheers,

Stephen Churley

----- Original Message ----
From: letitflyantiques1 <sgminor@mindspring.com>
To: Ancientartifacts@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, June 7, 2008 1:03:48 AM
Subject: [Ancientartifacts] Re: Cypriot jug

Hello,

I don't know anything about the current condition of the jug but I
tend to agree with Ernie that it is always understood that an item
needs to be returned in the exact condition it was sold. I offer a
money back guarantee but I would not accept a piece that has been
altered.
Is there no non-destructive test, like UV, that could have been used?

Steve

--- In Ancientartifacts@ yahoogroups. com, <Passtoant@. ..> wrote:
>
> Hello all.
> For some strange reason I have received no postings regarding the
subject item.
> Stephen Chruley is partly correct in what I have seen.
> The jug has been restored as stated in my CoA. However, I hold that
the jug was altered by his application of acetone and is not in the
same condition as when it was shipped to him. I also believe he has
an ulterior motive in demanding a refund.
> When the jug was delivered to him he advised me in an
email ......"The piece arrived today and I am very pleased with it. I
have been wanting one of these for some time and they don't often
appear on the market. Although the handle has been re-attached and
there is some restoration to the rim, I think it's a pretty good
example for the price. The burnished red colour is lovely.
> And there were no Customs charges or VAT!
> Thanks again and best wishes."
>
> I hold that Mr. Churley found a jug in better condition that he
wanted more then the one in which he expressed so much pleasure and
now wants a refund. I will not give him one. And, the jug was
in "extremely good condition."
>
> I made no claims that the CoA referred solely to the authenticity
and not to condition. I did state that the jug had been restored.
>
> Mr. Chruley is correct in that condition cannot be dissociated from
authenticity and that is the reason that both are addressed in my
CoA's.
>
> Thank you
> Tim, can you explain whey I am not receiving posts?
> Ernie Krumbein
>

__._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___