Featured Worthless Collectables

"I have a bad feeling about this..."

 

OK, if no one objects I’ll continue on this string with the item discussed earlier. Updates.

The item I found on eBay and was tempted to buy. To refresh memories............

"I found the dam thing in 10 seconds. In my own personal files. I sold a duplicate on eBay 4 years ago.( Correction. 3 years and 3 months ago.) His listing is auction. 3 days to go. Current price is $15. I had put mine up BIN only. Took 11 days to sell, at $425.00.
The reason I could not find it anywhere is because, close your eyes Komo, it is very rare and does exist in one book only where the average collector never thinks to look.

I ONLY bid through ESnipe. Helps a lot. Choose my price, set it and literally do not look until I'm advised whether or not I won. QUESTION, How much? If I win, it goes back on eBay."

No one here recommended a price. I did set a snipe of $141.99 with the intention of not keeping if I did win. Yes, it will go back on eBay with, perhaps an auction, but definitely with the usual sales pitch and see which way the market went since 7/12/12 when mine sold for $395 plus $10 S&H.

I did win it. There were 26 bids. Not 26 bidders.

You may recall I QUESTIONED the seller's veracity and, hoping to heck she is not a member here, I will add something else to this narrative. SHE HAD ANOTHER ITEM UP FOR SALE. A Westmoreland Dog covered dish. And I sniped that one, too.
1. Westmoreland first made that dog in the 1880s/90s. 2. DEFINITELY DISCONTINUED before 1920 and never reproduced. Why, we don’t know.
3. Westmoreland used inventory numbers on such pieces. As tops and/or bottoms wore down and new moulds were made the inventory numbers increased from 1 to 6. With this particular dog the seller claims that it has the number 1 under the lid AND a number 1 inside the base. THAT'S LIKE FINDING THE VERY FIRST Model T convertible. (Well, not price wise. )

I can’t wait to see these two pieces.

My computer is still acting up a bit. Sorry, but to see the swan and dog you will have to open eBay and search for 141819351842 and, separately 262126816380.

The only book in which this swan will be found is Victorian Glass by Ruth Webb Lee, “Specialties Of The 19th Century.” See number 6 on plate 109. On page 309 she describes it as “Seldom found these days.” and that was published in 1944. Made in 1891 by Challinor Taylor in Tarentum, PA. C-T made a later base very different and, frankly, more attractive. But this base is the original and much scarcer than with the replacement base.

 

I don't know how well you did, but something tells me you scored.

 

Hey, I don't mind RARE...when it really IS rare !!!

Nice find !

 

I wouldn't think a glued one would sell these days

 

Wow!

 

Not my speed but very nice!

 

Agreed, very nice, OldGuy!

Looks like the seller is doing very well, too.

 

glad you were able to win these OldGuy! Love that dog dish.

 

We're on the same page. I think.

 

Congrats on winning!

 

Rarely do I do this, but in this case thought prudent.

In description.

The lid and base are in overall good condition with the usual bubbles, straw marks.


Sent Date: Nov-07-15 08:07:24 PST

Dear mitzvahstone,

HI, I will be bidding on this, and would like to know more about its condition. How would you rate it overall? Hard to tell on some pictures. Any chips or cracks? What do you mean by "bubbles?"
******************************

The overall condition is very good. There are no chips cracks or bubbles on this piece.
Thanks
Susan
*******************************

Terry, what? where? are you referring to ?

I see none.​

 

It's a very poor picture but I don't think that is straw marks


"Please consider the pictures to be a part of the description."

 

Looks like a crack to me.... And dirty at that!

 

Thanks, Terry. The one on the neck and the one in front of the eye socket I have taken to be "stress lines." Often caused by aging, but actually more prevalent in the factory while congealing. There are similar on the edges of both lid and base. With heavy jarring they can develop into cracks, starting shallow and ending up separating. But those seem very low on the scale of concern.

King, you nailed the main problem. DIRT! If that dirt was not there the chances of even noticing them would be reduced to maybe 2%. A good soaking in a container large enough, with water and a couple of good denture cleaning tablets and that dirt will be bye-bye - gone. Anything a little nastier will be no problem for a tooth brush and whatever kind of cleaner. Vinegar or any kind of oil will remove glue and other gunk.

So far I have noticed ONE chip on the short side of the base. And, of course, the poor swan is blind. But that can be cured very quickly. Eyes on this type collectible are insignificant. Most likely because they are so often missing and regularly replaced with no affect on value. Popping in the dishwasher is NOT recommended for any type of opaque glass and is usually the culprit in eating eyes.
Challinor Taylor did include eyes when shipped, but many others, like Atterbury, included them in separate packages to the retailers and left choices to the buyer. So they are not a big deal. $15 - $20 to replace.

You did get me a bit concerned, Terry, on having missed something like an amateur gluing. But I'll accept that it's not there. A professional gluing would require a black light to find.
And "straw mark" is a euphemism for what would happen if straw (always used for factory packing) met up with a hot base and left an indentation on a smooth surface. That, of course, could never happen, but it is what it would look like if it ever did. Commonly found on the inside, bottom of the base.

To everyone else, thanks for the comments. It's going to be quite a while, but maybe they will be up for the gift giving season. There are other important changes possible to my current situation and possible I'll be incommunicado for a month or more. Or at least much less time to visit here. Nothing health threatening, so don't plan on getting rid of me too soon.

 

Straw marks have nothing to do with straw and never did.

They are chill marks from an underheated mold or insufficiently heated glass.

 

That's another way of saying it. The name "straw mark" was used because it resembles what would happen......................................

 

.

 

"straw marks" are typically shear marks, resulting from when the mass of glass was cut with shears resulting in the cooled line from the shears that often was not sufficiently reheated. The term 'straw mark' comes form the shear cut lines looking like a piece of straw and glass was often shipped in barrels and packed with straw...

 

Thanks, TallCakes. That does put a different perspective on it. Though a bit different from what I've heard, it certainly sounds logical.

I've always used "straw mark" to describe that thin, long indentation on the otherwise smooth bottom inside a base, with the thought that it could have other meanings.

Where "straw mark" originated I was told someone once remarked that it could have been from a piece of packing straw that fell into a base that had not fully cooled. Whether said tongue in cheek or not, it certainly has caught on and is understood by all glass collectors.

That is what I meant in my above Thursday at 3:43 PM post, second paragraph from the bottom. And Terry offered even another definition of straw mark. The list I am sure could expand even further. Perhaps one should make a formal list of such descriptions with all possible uses. And require every author, and more importantly, every on line seller, to adhere to the list.
Or do I actually recall someone having already done that?