[Viletone]

Dave,

Please re-read the posts before you comment. I'm not attacking or defending anyone here and I'm definently not related to either JP, Joachim, Uncle Tom Cobbley or anyone else on this forum as far as I'm aware.

Believe me, I enjoy this sort of debate and before I get accused of trolling which I'm sure I will sooner or later and no doubt the inevitable ban for being a trouble maker, lets look at things in perspective.

POW badges are common, both as collars and cap badges so many different dies exist. Prior to WW1 dies existed for this badge for the feathers - probably used for collars for countless other regiments and cap badges for others - a scroll and finally a crown for the overlay. WW1 ACD regulations stipulted that bimetal badges are to be made in a single metal but correct me if I'm wrong it doesn't say that they have to be as a single stamp. Obviously one company has produced a die to do that (Joachim's) but others have used their existing dies as the same stamp can be used for both g/m and nickel. Economies are supposed to be labour rather than metal saving and applying only a scroll and slider is less intensive than a slider, scroll and crown so a saving is made even here. After all, everyone seems to agree JP's two part badge is fine I'm supported on this point am I not?

So what's the problem? I've said I prefer Joachim's if it were down to me while pretty much everyones like's JP's. So what's wrong with the original badge apart from a few variations between it and JP's How many companies made POW badges, two at least Gaunt & Firmin so why should even their's be identical.

There rests my case for defending the original badge. Now tell me why it's a repro/copy/restrike (of what?) rather than asking what my problem is.