Originally Posted by
mmahany
Here is my personal perspective on everything so far:
mmahany,
Thanks for the detailed response! I do detect a slight air of defensiveness on your part though, in your response. It was certainly not my intent to threaten, disparage, or whatever, you or any other poster in anyway and make you feel defensive in anyway. For that I apologize.
My points for posting in this thread....
1) To bring to the forefront that box and papers may add value to certain pens but not to certain others , and that box and papers are not a 100% way to authenticate a pen..
2) I then saw an opportunity to hopefully guide a discussion into some pen history, minutia, nuance of pen collecting and using, and also to possible help people "eye" and carefully dissect an item on Ebay, that might just slip through the cracks, based on poor photographs or poor description. Hence my post then on my particular pen. I even explained a bit later that my purpose was to stir up discussion about the nuance of my pen. I have apparently failed in that regard, as I only got a couple of responses, (sloegin, and CS388). I even admit I got hari to respond to also help stir on the discussion of my particular pen.
These forums use to be a spot for thoughtful discussion on fountain pen use, history, collecting, repair, etc..... FPN's MB forum has deteriorated into a forum of threads, 90% of which have to do with if a pen is fake or not, and if its not a fake, did I get a good deal on it and/or what I can sell it for. You are new here in FP GEEKs, and fairly new (2011?) in FPN so you may not recall/remember/particpated in, but back in the day, we would discuss a pen's history, who has what pen and why you like it or use it, what one's collecting focus is and why, etc. There aren't that many threads like that anymore over there in FPN, so I was hoping to pump some life into this forum in that discussion direction. But apparently that will not be the case. Really, my point was NOT truly what the $$ value was on a particular pen, but to focus on a pen that LOOKED like the run of the mill #146, but in reality wasn't just run of the mill and had some history to it. However in the realm of pen value, mmahany, you seem to be very shrewd and smart and I applaud you for that. You go guy! Who of us isn't out there looking for a deal!?
Finally, just to complete my little "game" concerning my pen, for anyone who is interested. My pen appears to be a first year edition of the reissue of the #146 in MB's line up. The 146 was reintroduced in 1973/74, split ebonite feeds made their appearance around 1975. So a #146 with and 18c monotone gold nib, and
SOLID ebonite feed was made in 1973/-1974 and was then only "made" for 1, or at the most 2 years, hence making them less less common, and dare I say rare. My point about asking people what "particular feed was on their #146" of this era was to point out to them was that they probably had a split ebonite feed, and make them think a little bit and say "hmmmm, never really see the solid ebonite feeds on these pens" ( that was the nuance I was hoping people would pick up on, and the one that you, mmahany, have even failed to recognize in your post above , as you keep pointing out simple ebonite feed, making no distinction between solid or split and their time relation in the history of the #146).
That is all, feel free to discuss....
Rick
Re: How not to sell a Montblanc on eBay
Reply With Quote
How stupid can one get?
I cannot believe there are people biding on that pen. As they say, there's a sucker born every minute and two to take him...
Bookmarks