DougB exposes "Champagne Rune" SS Decal Fraud and Adds a Coffin Nail to XRFacts
- Thread starter Hambone
- Start date
That is what I believe as well.
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=771431
Not a peep of discussion at WAF. I sense also a bit of hostility for DougB from the WAFmods. I guess they are irritated that there are alternative sources for information. Censoring and banning him isn't going to shut him up as it would have years ago as he has his own site now
I wonder how WAF is going to cover this story. Perhaps like XRFacts, when Willi Zahn proclaimed that "this is being handled privately"; move along unwashed masses, nothing to see. 
I agree, it's incredible. IMHO, it points to either something stinking amongst the "experts" or gross negligence of a high order, i.e., too arrogant and ignorant to know what they don't know. This is also what happens when alternative opinions are suppressed by censorship and the installation of a small cabal of "experts" who lord over a hobby. As an aside, I remember years back Mrfarb calling me with questions on K98ks. I now call him for that information
There is money to be made off of "expertise" and information, and back in the day this was hoarded by a few. BTW, how long has magnification been available on this planet? A quick google says the first microscope was invented in 1595.
M45
Well-known member
I agree, it's incredible. IMHO, it points to either something stinking amongst the "experts" or gross negligence of a high order, i.e., too arrogant and ignorant to know what they don't know. This is also what happens when alternative opinions are suppressed by censorship and the installation of a small cabal of "experts" who lord over a hobby. As an aside, I remember years back Mrfarb calling me with questions on K98ks. I now call him for that information
BTW, how long has magnification been available on this planet? A quick google says the first microscope was invented in 1595.
Lippershey: "I say old chap, that flat painted-on appearance points to the bloody 'champagne-rune' decal, I'm afraid !"
http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/optics/timeline/people/lippershey.html
Attachments
M45
Well-known member
I think it shows the danger in depending on only one group to do the research. C-SS was always a one-sided affair until recently. It was always just one band wagon rolling down the street driven by one author and a few collecting buddies beckoning others to jump on. It shows how collectors can be strongly swayed by published works, big names and COAs.
Lot# research looks at the issue from a different angle entirely, and that's how C-SS is being unmasked, IMO. Before this, we only had the word of SS collectors and authors telling us what was authentic.
And since they were 'in the know', they were able to silence the critics with the power of the pen (published works, COA's), the procurement of C-SS from vets (an obviously "inerrant" method) and many years of experience collecting SS helmets (looking down their noses at those critics who have never even held an original SS helmet).
And by censoring, abusing and banning all serious opposition, they alone were left on the stage to champion "The Great Champagne Rune Fraud".
Lot# research looks at the issue from a different angle entirely, and that's how C-SS is being unmasked, IMO. Before this, we only had the word of SS collectors and authors telling us what was authentic.
And since they were 'in the know', they were able to silence the critics with the power of the pen (published works, COA's), the procurement of C-SS from vets (an obviously "inerrant" method) and many years of experience collecting SS helmets (looking down their noses at those critics who have never even held an original SS helmet).
And by censoring, abusing and banning all serious opposition, they alone were left on the stage to champion "The Great Champagne Rune Fraud".
This. It will be interesting to watch how WAF deals with this information. I believe it rather shocking and disgusting that it isn't THE main topic of their helmet forum.
Edit: BTW, I don't think it excessive to state that this is one of the biggest revelations in helmet collecting in the last 25 years, at least. The only other big informational event would be the advent of lot number research.
Last edited:
Bugme
Well-known member
Without a doubt, this will shake the helmet collecting community. It should be interesting to see how many people flock to Kelly Hicks table at the SOS in a few months. The unintended consequences of this is that it will shatter the faith of a great many collectors and they could give up collecting after realizing the amount of money they tossed down to buy a fake helmet. This should be a fun and informative historical hobby, but, this revelation will likely alienate and discourage a great many collectors.
tjg79
Senior Member
These C SS lids were likely first legitimized in SS Helmets: A Collector's Guide by Kelly Hicks published in 1993. Hicks was a lid seller/dealer before he was a lid book author. The lid seller/dealer and lid book author combination is a symbiotic relationship. Add SS lid authenticator to the resume, and C SS lid owner, promoter, and C SS lid authenticator as well, you get a class of fake with the persistence of a cockroach.
Once these C SS lids were featured in a published reference, and collectors were paying a premium for them, many with a Hicks COA, they became entrenched in the hobby. When a collecting community relies on the research of only a few authors, then errors can take time to correct. Now, it takes extraordinary evidence and facts to eradicate the original error.
If there was only one main lid forum, I don't think it would have happened, because a lot of lid collectors behave like sheeple. We can thank the mods at WAF for causing other lid forums to spring up.
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=106977
Once these C SS lids were featured in a published reference, and collectors were paying a premium for them, many with a Hicks COA, they became entrenched in the hobby. When a collecting community relies on the research of only a few authors, then errors can take time to correct. Now, it takes extraordinary evidence and facts to eradicate the original error.
If there was only one main lid forum, I don't think it would have happened, because a lot of lid collectors behave like sheeple. We can thank the mods at WAF for causing other lid forums to spring up.
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=106977
Last edited:
M45
Well-known member
Good point. Losses could tally up to as much as $7k per C-SS lid. And I was in a bad mood when I lost $100 to that Pawel fraudster.
To kill an error is as good a service as, and sometimes even better than, the establishing of a new truth or fact.
Charles Darwin
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/c/charlesdar388849.html#QbxamgCizIehAJoB.99
armenjs
Senior Member
Is this something close or a turd- sure been dick with. he is asking 800.00
http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?416960-WTS-german-ss-helmet
Armen
You're right Bugme. Again, I find it astonishing that this isn't front and center THE topic of discussion at WAF. If the "Champagne Rune" is exposed as a fraud by DougB, and from what I know of DougB, I have little doubt that it will be, then the big question is this: who was/is doing it? Who are they in league with and acting through? How many people are doing it? How similar are the templates and technique used? If this was such a big secret, such that Kelly Hicks himself claimed these were original "decals" and issued COAs proclaiming that, then wouldn't only a small number of people would know of this manner of fakery? I bet if you caught that guy or small group and he/they were under threat of prosecution, they would squeal like pigs on who else knew 
tjg79
Senior Member
Considering what Doug B is alleging, that the C SS decal isn't even a decal and is a post-war fabrication, it seems odd that Hicks would be preparing a "lengthy essay" to rebut the allegations in defense of the C SS lid's legitimacy. What are Hicks' motivations? Why doesn't he wait for Doug B's report and evaluate his findings objectively? It seems that two former XRFacts cofounders, Hicks and May, have no interest in original research that conflicts with their claims.
It appears to me that Hicks must argue and show the legitimacy of these "Champagne rune decals" or he is going to be paying off on a large number of COAs he issued warrantying these as legitimate. If DougB shows these fake, as he's said, and the holders of these COAs come for indemnity, then Hicks will have three choices:
1) Lawyer up and defend against honoring his own COAs through his own expert testimony.
2) Man up and honor his COAs and indemnify those relying upon them from loss, either by providing helmets in kind and/or monetary remuneration.
3) Run or declare bankruptcy.
There are some interesting legal issues, such as, are the COAs for the original purchaser or do they follow the helmet, i.e., they are "bearer paper"? How much is the indemnity amount? Is it the price Hicks charged with the original sale? Is it the amount that the second or third purchaser paid?
Thanks for writing that out hambone, I was wondering about the legal basis of these CoAs and what options he has.
I do not own any helmets, but I am starting to see CoAs in the pp and ppk game.
How did one aquire a Hicks coa? Pay a couple hundred and send photos to him? What do they actually say on them?
I do not own any helmets, but I am starting to see CoAs in the pp and ppk game.
How did one aquire a Hicks coa? Pay a couple hundred and send photos to him? What do they actually say on them?
KSH67
Senior Member
This is a hugely informative discussion. I have never purchased high price dealer helmets because I have always had a distrust for them based on some other experiences I have had. All this info points to these being fave. I have also wondered, given the large number of supposed original champagne decaled helmets compared to other types wouldn't you have expected to find original non-applied examples if they were real? I believe there are unapplied examples of the others in existence. Given the percentage of these there should be a bunch of unapplied in existence.
tjg79
Senior Member
Well, that's sort of my point. Hicks, the great SS lid authenticator, doesn't appear to be interested in truth. His primary interest seems to be his financial liability and if it's a choice between truth and liability, liability wins. So, why would anyone pay to have Hicks authenticate their lid? Also, Hicks appears to be the most prolific promoter of these C SS lids. If Doug B can show that none of these C SS decals have a celluloid base and that all are template "spray jobs," I would think Hicks' reputation as a lid authenticator would take a hit. Add the XRFacts fiasco to the rap sheet and I'm starting to see a pattern. These C SS lids likely had a preferred market entry conduit after they were born. I wonder where that entry conduit exists.
M45
Well-known member
http://www.oakleafmilitaria.com/144hel2.html
144HEL2 - Waffen SS M42 single decal combat helmet by NS. This helmet features a near mint runic shield on a semi-rough field gray textured finish. The exterior displays light age and storage wear. The interior displays a mint leather liner size stamped 58 ( medium). The rear apron is lightly stamped with the batch number that is not clearly legible . An excellent example of an SS M42. $6500
That SS decal is interesting. Of course it does not belong on an NS shell, but it looks as if the border was painted separately and is coming off, revealing the bright silver background.
I believe I see silver peeking through the damaged spots on the SS runes. This indicates that the silver shield was painted first, then the SS runes and black border on top of that. Then it appears as if the entire insignia was hit with something to tone it all down. The original bright silver showing also in the damaged border areas. Helmet appears to be unissued, a red flag in itself for SS helmets.
The champagne color of C-SS was likely due to the material used to subdue the artwork.
A slight tilt backward like some original ET SS helmets have; a nice touch.
144HEL2 - Waffen SS M42 single decal combat helmet by NS. This helmet features a near mint runic shield on a semi-rough field gray textured finish. The exterior displays light age and storage wear. The interior displays a mint leather liner size stamped 58 ( medium). The rear apron is lightly stamped with the batch number that is not clearly legible . An excellent example of an SS M42. $6500
That SS decal is interesting. Of course it does not belong on an NS shell, but it looks as if the border was painted separately and is coming off, revealing the bright silver background.
I believe I see silver peeking through the damaged spots on the SS runes. This indicates that the silver shield was painted first, then the SS runes and black border on top of that. Then it appears as if the entire insignia was hit with something to tone it all down. The original bright silver showing also in the damaged border areas. Helmet appears to be unissued, a red flag in itself for SS helmets.
The champagne color of C-SS was likely due to the material used to subdue the artwork.
A slight tilt backward like some original ET SS helmets have; a nice touch.
Attachments
Last edited:
That's where the rubber hits the road so to speak. That is where litigation, subpoenas, etc. could get interesting. Better yet would be a criminal investigation. Civil penalties are simply money; criminal penalties usually involve loss of liberty, i.e., confinement in jail or prison. Whomever is doing the spray on Champagne rune lids would certainly sing like a bird when caught. My bet is Bill Maertz could enlighten on this subject. He was very active in SS helmet "restoration" when these popped up on the scene. WAF can be officially written off as a legitimate helmet forum if they don't have a complete and open discussion of this. Perhaps WAF will be Hicks' stage for his "Champagne Runes are Real" show. It would be like Hillary Clinton being "interviewed" on MSNBC.