Ewbank's 007 auction.
DrNoPlaques
SwabyPosts: 242MI6 Agent
Just in case some of you hadn't seen it...........
I don't know if this is the right place to put it so..............apologies if not.
Comments
Register with Ewbanks directly and save the fee charged by thesaleroom
Thanks, but as they can't get the facts right about 1001 even when informed of them, I'll give it a miss but cheers for the advice. Appreciated.
It's the sellers responsibility to ensure the listing details are correct, Ewbanks cannot change a listing on the advice of a 3rd party, but they will check with the seller and if your evidence is strong enough they may decide to withdraw the lot to allow further investigation..
There are over 220 lots and I'm sure 99.9% of them are factually correct.
Well, considering they are showing one of my plaques in the listing (although not for sale) I'd like to think they'd be decent enough to reply to my query if not my correct facts but probably not. Even if "public domain" surely it just causes confusion.
They haven't replied to my contact either "Lot# 1041 James Bond You Only Live Twice (1967) A prop rubber gun believed to have been used on the film starring Sean Connery". which appears to be a deformed Browning? possibly a High Power? when the pistol in the sequence at Kobe Docks is a hammerless 1903 Colt and the stunt pistol clearly has what is left of a hammer! The listing has been amended to state that the pistol in the sequence is in fact a 1903 Colt. A little trick that I use in my research is if you cannot clearly see the weapon in hand? look to see what shadow it is casting. This works like a magnifying glass and in this case the cast shadow is clearly that of a hammerless pistol. Trying to accredit this prop to the late Sir Thomas Sean Connery is in my opinion complete BS! (perhaps BS is too strong but this does happen more often than you might think?)
In the auction notes it states the 'vendors' (assuming that means owner(s)) friend worked on the movie and gave the prop gun to the vendors late husband who was a Bond fan. Now, in your post you say 'Trying to accredit this prop to the late Sir Thomas Sean Connery is in my opinion complete BS!'. Are you therefore saying the vendor is lying about the gun and that it never came from the movie? I would have thought the auction house would have checked the authenticity of the prop by checking on the name of the friend who gave the prop gun to the vendors husband. Surely there must be a record of the friend working on the movie which would corroborate the vendors version of events.
If you believe the accreditation is wrong then surely the auction house have a duty to remove the prop from auction.
You'd have thought so, yes, but from what I've seen so far the Auction houses don't check much (as I've had "issues" with the Dr No plaques so I know).
Even if they did find proof that they worked on the movie it doesn't really mean that much. There was a Playboy bunny selling chips that stated about them being a bunny and they sold chips alluding that they were from when they were there (and that they'd owned them since then) but they'd bought them on ebay and hadn't had them since the 70s (as they said) so..................
As to the one I mentioned earlier, it's really easy to confirm that the information they have provided is incorrect plus by using a photo of an item that I still own it makes it totally wrong and probably misleading too
Considering that Sotherby's (allegedly) sold many fake posters recently..............
I made four videos about auction houses and COAs on my Bond Fan Events YouTube Channel, with this sort of thing in mind. Most, not all, auction houses don't want to know if an item is bogus (and have no James Bond specialist in house to verify Bond lots regardless).
It comes down (for both auction house and buyers) to the same things it does for anyone from any outlet, how does the provenance (history story) sound? Can you screen match the item? Was the collector reputable? Even there, a collector can be mistaken.
It does matter to me if someone says they worked on a film, especially if they have evidence of their work.
That all sounds fair enough, Matt, although I would have thought that their reputation counted for something.
In my case it is because they are showing the £500 (0007) that still belongs to me for no apparent reason as it is not for sale in the listing so are they allowed to?
I see they changed the raised serials to stamped at least so they did take something from my emails I suppose.
I may well ring them in the next day or so to ask why they are showing my plaque on the listing.
Hope life treats you well.
I have now had a reply from Ewbanks:
I will bow to your knowledge on this. Are you confident this gun would not have been used in the Bond production? Even if it was not on screen?
In my opinion the prop is incorrect in construction for a 1960s prop. I believe it was cast off a Browning Hi-Power, even allowing for deformity the grips appear to be Browning. This is what I have told the auction house. What they choose to do with this information? however most auction houses use the phrase "according to the vendor!" and on this occasion it looks like the prop will be removed from the listings? Credit where it is due for Ewbanks, most auction houses do not even bother to reply when you inform them something is incorrect such as a very well known US based auction house who listed an 8mm Umarex PPK blank fire pistol and accredited it to Roger Moore's Bond when the item in question did not exist in reality until Pierce Brosnan's tenure and it wasn't Pierce's either!
Remember back in 2018 a PPK surfaced on the auction block which claimed to be the pistol seen in M's office in 1962's Dr.No. Its back story was that Bernard Lee brought his own PPK pistol to set for the sequence. Perhaps he did? however it was sure as hell not the Walther pistol which appeared on screen!
Congratulations.
I also had a reply although it mentioned condition (which I didn't) and didn't address the photo that I'd prefer them not to use (of the £500 that I still have in my possession) so, will keep trying.
Well, they have stated that the plaque is not for sale but won't change the photo so probably the best I'll get.
I see the lot was withdrawn.
I was watching the live auction and noticed it was bypassed completely. Considering what has been written about the prop gun and my subsequent post about provenance and then another member responding that auction houses do not do much checking, I noticed in the auction there was a lot of memorabilia that had autographs on them. Thus, if an auction house does not do much checking as has been suggested, how does a listing that has an autograph/signature on it be authenticated? If the seller has a document that states the autograph/signature is genuine, does the auction house just take the sellers word or are they obligated to check if the autograph/signature is genuine?
I mean the thing is, people who bought signed stuff in that auction might want to proudly show it off to the Bond community and could find themselves in a situation where fellow Bond collector(s) could say 'that signature is not genuine'. Then what happens? Does the buyer take the the Bond fan/collectors word and take the item back to the auction house claiming they were sold a fake item?