Hello
I have been following these posts with interest and I can honestly say that I can see both sides of the argument that seems to have emerged out of the original post.
On the one had you cannot blame someone for meeting the demand for reproduction badges which obviously exists but on the other hand some attempt should really be made to mark reproduction items as "Repro".
I don't think it is sufficient to say, for example, that modern materials have been used because not all collectors (particularly new ones who are the life blood of this hobby) will realise what this means. Nor is it sufficient that a particular website displays these reproductions as copies or whatever.
The first sale of an item may well be as a legitimate reproduction but with some ageing (artificial or otherwise) the next sale could well be as "original wartime" and that is what seems to be happening. I wonder if the ebay dealer selling Christopher Lee's collection realises that most of the items are reproduction "he would never buy anything over £20 and almost all copies" - Hanbut in post 41! I wonder what his buyers will think!
In this day and age it surely cannot be beyond the bounds of possibility to clearly mark reproductions as such, whether they be cloth or metal. Yes, they might then be fixed to a material backing or similar but at least any potential buyer would be able to check at some point.
I mean no offence or disrespect to anyone on this forum, all far more experienced badge collectors than me, and I hope that none will be taken.
Regards
Roger
|