Royal esquires ???

[Geeselad]

3 hours ago, Amsterdam Russ said:

Haha - as you say, never too old to learn something new. The term 'new old stock' of course I knew, but don't recall seeing it in abbreviated form (NOS). Or maybe the old brain cells are letting me down. Now I must go and take the laundry out of the oven.  

I know it from oldskool BMX sites, where it's over used to the point of ridiculous. Not heard it used in records context much. If you think record prices are silly, you better check out that kids bike in you shed it could be a ' survivor' they pay very well for rust!

[Greedy]

20 hours ago, Benji said:

Royal Esquires one of the worst deals I ever made. Was offered a copy @500, bought it straight away thinking I got a real bargain. 4 weeks later the NOS copies flooded the market. Eventually turned out seller (well known DJ) knew about the NOS copies and tried to get rid of his copy before price would fall. Not mad about this but it still leaves a sour taste in the mouth.

I also remember a very well known record dealer having one for sale.  I want to say $1000 and I was so tempted and literally a week or so later got one for £40 . I always thought that it was one of the sons of the label owner who sold them , but a long time ago so if I'm wrong, sorry 

[Solidsoul]

2 hours ago, Greedy Mick said:

 . I always thought that it was one of the sons of the label owner who sold them , but a long time ago so if I'm wrong, sorry 

Was that the seller who called himself "Pay my way through college" or something like that?

[Dave Pinch]

55 minutes ago, Solidsoul said:

Was that the seller who called himself "Pay my way through college" or something like that?

he was in hamtramck.... one of the sellers who sold clara hardy.. nothing to do with the royal esquires

Edited July 11, 2022 by Dave Pinch

[Merve]

Looks like the feeding frenzy may have slowed. One finishes today on ebay starting at $289 with no takers yet 

[Flanny]

Sunny side up old early doors Orwell spin from the 90.s appeared on one of our Anniversary cd.s I comped before sweet soul was trendy and in vogue 

[Tricky]

1 hour ago, Flanny said:

Sunny side up old early doors Orwell spin from the 90.s appeared on one of our Anniversary cd.s I comped before sweet soul was trendy and in vogue 

Its about time people realised that lots of us collected and played all of our A/B sides.This includes many now jumped on the Low Rider bandwagon sounds.It does get my goat that sweet and deep is a genre now swept under the carpet for convenience of the latest trend.I get that more people are becoming interested in slower soul and that is great but it becomes somewhat patronising when every sweet and deep record is now Low Rider.

The West Coast scene taught us a lot but you can bet your bottom dollar they heard sounds from us and especially the Japs.

 

Rant Over!

[Tlscapital]

Every scene "helped" another to discover sounds or records. For the best as for the worst at times. Like that since the seventies with many "bridges" across borders even. With folks attending different scenes. Through record collectors, dee-jays and dealers 'swaping' sounds going for flip sides. Pushing up the prices and setting new "trends" on the different scenes for weird mixtures...

But hopefully those artists or wannabees in America didn't aim to target them later 'euro' scenes back then. That happened with the beach scene in the N.C. to musical disaster IMO. Wigan... And to the Jamaican music once produced in the UK for the UK market. With few exceptions I know. The same for modern soul in the UK. I now open my umbrella awaiting the storm in replies

Edited July 12, 2022 by Tlscapital

[Tlscapital]

2 hours ago, Merve said:

Looks like the feeding frenzy may have slowed. One finishes today on ebay starting at $289 with no takers yet 

One for sale on discogs for $850 only. Those on eBay must have been bargains ! LOL

[Blackpoolsoul]

17 hours ago, Tlscapital said:

One for sale on discogs for $850 only. Those on eBay must have been bargains ! LOL

Discogs seller is "trying it on" me thinks

 

 

Edited July 13, 2022 by Blackpoolsoul

[Mike]

2 minutes ago, Blackpoolsoul said:

Discogs seller is "trying it on", 11 sold from the Uk

I know (boring boring) but here is Discogs sales history

 

 

 

 

ok enough of this

just post a link to the page and a summary in future

 

[Mike]

On 08/07/2022 at 09:42, Blackpoolsoul said:

This is the sales history on Discogs and includes the sellers country prices on the right

 

you already posted this a few days ago!

 

[Billy Jo Jim Bob]

3 hours ago, Tricky said:

Its about time people realised that lots of us collected and played all of our A/B sides.This includes many now jumped on the Low Rider bandwagon sounds.It does get my goat that sweet and deep is a genre now swept under the carpet for convenience of the latest trend.I get that more people are becoming interested in slower soul and that is great but it becomes somewhat patronising when every sweet and deep record is now Low Rider.

The West Coast scene taught us a lot but you can bet your bottom dollar they heard sounds from us and especially the Japs.

 

Rant Over!

Nice rant Trev

I used to trawl the 'crap' boxes that some dealers used to have way back (25 years ago+), where they put all the slow stuff (deep, sweet, group) that they thought couldn't or wouldn't sell. I could pick some of it up for as little as 50p. 

After collecting lots of this stuff, I got to know via ebay some collectors stateside and started to sell or trade this stuff back to them, for northern / crossover stuff. There were tons of records they didn't know, but they were after a certain sound at the time. 

Some of the stuff being bandied around now as low rider does not match what they were looking for at that time, but I noticed like the UK soul scene tastes change, the desire for new sounds and exclusivity seems to have broadened the scope of their collecting.

ATB

Andy

[Amsterdam Russ]

10 hours ago, Merve said:

Looks like the feeding frenzy may have slowed. One finishes today on ebay starting at $289 with no takers yet 

Think again…

https://www.ebay.com/itm/354151146242?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=B0oQf8MgR7-&sssrc=2047675&ssuid=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

 

 

 

Edited July 12, 2022 by Amsterdam Russ
Url

[Sebastian]

11 hours ago, Amsterdam Russ said:

Think again…

https://www.ebay.com/itm/354151146242?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=B0oQf8MgR7-&sssrc=2047675&ssuid=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

 

 

 

Indeed. Three copies have sold on ebay during the past 10 days for $382, $460 and $385.

[connie 52]

got mine for 30 quid , from a guy in Vegas he had a 50 box and taking offers 

 

[Merve]

10 hours ago, Sebastian said:

Indeed. Three copies have sold on ebay during the past 10 days for $382, $460 and $385.

They all look very 'new'......Just my suspicious mind ?

[Tlscapital]

2 minutes ago, Merve said:

They all look very 'new'......Just my suspicious mind ?

NOS

[Tlscapital]

52 minutes ago, Merve said:

They all look very 'new'......Just my suspicious mind ?

Some Royal Esquire copies from that lot I got had a thin black pen mark (V or X) to 'point' the suggested play side if my memory serves me right 'ain't gonna run...'. But I've kept a 'virgin' label one so can't prove that now...

Remenissing  the same reaction back in the early nineghties with loads of NOS 1967-1970 UK Pama popping up for peanuts with fellow collectors doubting their 'original' factor for them being so Mint and not picking them up.

Not weary only happy I was to pick them and sharing them. Goes without saying that I got the same thrill when this batch came out. For me and for the friends who now also own a beloved copy without breaking the bank.

Edited July 13, 2022 by Tlscapital

[Merve]

11 hours ago, Tlscapital said:

Some Royal Esquire copies from that lot I got had a thin black pen mark (V or X) to 'point' the suggested play side if my memory serves me right 'ain't gonna run...'. But I've kept a 'virgin' label one so can't prove that now...

Remenissing  the same reaction back in the early nineghties with loads of NOS 1967-1970 UK Pama popping up for peanuts with fellow collectors doubting their 'original' factor for them being so Mint and not picking them up.

Not weary only happy I was to pick them and sharing them. Goes without saying that I got the same thrill when this batch came out. For me and for the friends who now also own a beloved copy without breaking the bank.

Hope you are right. After all I own one of the later finds. It would be nice to be able to put one of the original finds next to one that's come onto the market in the last few years to have a look though. After all, if you're clever enough to counterfeit a record in the first place its not going to be beyond your wit to put a marker pen X on a few for authenticity. Not for one moment saying I have any evidence to suggest that they are boots, it's just that they look very new - none with faded labels etc. 

 

[Dave Pinch]

11 minutes ago, Merve said:

Hope you are right. After all I own one of the later finds. It would be nice to be able to put one of the original finds next to one that's come onto the market in the last few years to have a look though. After all, if you're clever enough to counterfeit a record in the first place its not going to be beyond your wit to put a marker pen X on a few for authenticity. Not for one moment saying I have any evidence to suggest that they are boots, it's just that they look very new - none with faded labels etc. 

 

every chance of stock  being found of any record.. counterfeiting is rife.. but they`ve never got it 100% right yet

 

[Merve]

4 minutes ago, Dave Pinch said:

every chance of stock  being found of any record.. counterfeiting is rife.. but they`ve never got it 100% right yet

 

I agree Dave. That's the reason I'd like to see an original 70s find next to one of the newer finds to put my suspicious mind back to sleep. 

[Tlscapital]

1 hour ago, Merve said:

Hope you are right. After all I own one of the later finds. It would be nice to be able to put one of the original finds next to one that's come onto the market in the last few years to have a look though. After all, if you're clever enough to counterfeit a record in the first place its not going to be beyond your wit to put a marker pen X on a few for authenticity. Not for one moment saying I have any evidence to suggest that they are boots, it's just that they look very new - none with faded labels etc.

In some cases it can prove revealing to compare one next to another one to check for subtle differences. Now that doesn't yet imply that one is either a counterfeit or a later issue. On the other hand to make a very convincing repro is always a lot of work and barely never cheating the eye of some of well the trained collectors.

Those who will go for the fake "label wear" or writings to make it look like it had a previous life will go further than a mere 'XOL' IME. That is more significant of some promoter's evening fast pre-marking expecting to handle the copies for promotion. Many Mint '66-'69 promo Gamble copies found NOS had a similar 'V' marking...

Edited July 14, 2022 by Tlscapital

[Chalky]

1 hour ago, Dave Pinch said:

every chance of stock  being found of any record.. counterfeiting is rife.. but they`ve never got it 100% right yet

 

They never will either.  Everything is different, paper, inks, vinyl, printing methods etc etc…..

They might get close but something will give it away. 

13 hours ago, Merve said:

They all look very 'new'......Just my suspicious mind ?

If they are unopened stock they will look like new just like when the lot from the owners estate was found.  Everyone was saying all the releases were fake then.  Every chance they sat on a box or two waiting for the price to rise.

Edited July 14, 2022 by Chalky

[Merve]

3 minutes ago, Chalky said:

They never will either.  Everything is different, paper, inks, vinyl, printing methods etc etc…..

They might get close but something will give it away. 

If they are unopened stock they will look like new just like when the lot from the owners estate was found.  Everyone was saying all the releases were fake then.  Every chance they sat on a box or two waiting for the price to rise.

Yes I agree that the they could well be legitimate finds.  However as Mal C alluded to earlier in this thread if the original plates and master tapes are still in circulation it's a possibility that they could be very good counterfeits... the key word being possibility NOT probability here  !

As a mate said to me, how on earth do we know the counterfeiters haven't been successful?? We obviously all think that they are originals

[Chalky]

7 minutes ago, Merve said:

Yes I agree that the they could well be legitimate finds.  However as Mal C alluded to earlier in this thread if the original plates and master tapes are still in circulation it's a possibility that they could be very good counterfeits... the key word being possibility NOT probability here  !

As a mate said to me, how on earth do we know the counterfeiters haven't been successful?? We obviously all think that they are originals

Even if they are they only last so long before new ones need making.  But taking all assumptions into account, you have to assume they also have old stock of labels which i doubt very much.

[Merve]

8 minutes ago, Chalky said:

Even if they are they only last so long before new ones need making.  But taking all assumptions into account, you have to assume they also have old stock of labels which i doubt very much.

That's the very reason I'd like to see one of the original 70s finds next to a recent find - to compare the labels. 

In my main box I'm of the opinion that all the records are originals.  However, if one of the fellas mentioned above in the thread pulled out my Royal Esquires and said " we pressed these in 2003 and drip fed the market " would I be surprised? No.

Disappointed yes, but not surprised. 

The same applies to many other records we all treasure. Just because we haven't identified them as boots it doesn't mean that there's a slim chance the counterfeiters have got one over us.

[Mick Holdsworth]

Here's a 300DPI scan of a non-haul copy. I've scanned both sides. As you can see, It is quite worn, but plays okay on AGR, and a little more crackly on OLUTB side.

When the price of the Brooklynborn / Vashta ? haul had bottomed at £30/£40, I bought this of eBay for about $15-20 from a seller in Ohio who was just selling old things, not many records, but a wide range of "stuff". Maybe a house clearance, don't know.

After it arrived, I compared it with a mint haul copy (I had a fair few at the time), and apart from the obvious wear  and colour fading of the labels, I felt it was IDENTICAL, but maybe someone could to put up a High res copy of a mint one to compare.

Cheers
Mick

 

[Steviehay]

Here is one of the 2 I have which was a 70s Nos the other is more or less the same as micks 

[Tlscapital]

Wow that is truly a rare find ! A 'poor' condition copy. LOL. I dig your dedication in pursuit of the thruth on here.

Another scanner will give another tint of 'blue' FWIW but I'll see if I manage pull out my copy and post on here.

[Merve]

Hope this works ! I'm not so hot on modern technology !

 

Edited July 14, 2022 by Merve
It didnt work !!!!

[Merve]

[Tlscapital]

3 shades of blue

[Steviehay]

as taken in Australia 

[Merve]

49 minutes ago, Mick Holdsworth said:

Here's a 300DPI scan of a non-haul copy. I've scanned both sides. As you can see, It is quite worn, but plays okay on AGR, and a little more crackly on OLUTB side.

When the price of the Brooklynborn / Vashta ? haul had bottomed at £30/£40, I bought this of eBay for about $15-20 from a seller in Ohio who was just selling old things, not many records, but a wide range of "stuff". Maybe a house clearance, don't know.

After it arrived, I compared it with a mint haul copy (I had a fair few at the time), and apart from the obvious wear  and colour fading of the labels, I felt it was IDENTICAL, but maybe someone could to put up a High res copy of a mint one to compare.

Cheers
Mick

 

Where yours has the ring wear, it corresponds with a slight dish toward the middle ? If so, the same as mine. The scratched details on the run out are between 9 o'clock & 11 o'clock on the A.G.R. side  & 1 o'clock to 3 o'clock on the O.L.U.T.B. side . On the O.L.U.T.B. side  the A after the record number has been scratched out & replaced by B on mine

22 minutes ago, Steviehay said:

as taken in Australia 

Hi Stevie is yours the same as the description I gave to Ted regarding run out details & slight dish to the centre?

[Dave Pinch]

4 hours ago, Merve said:

Yes I agree that the they could well be legitimate finds.  However as Mal C alluded to earlier in this thread if the original plates and master tapes are still in circulation it's a possibility that they could be very good counterfeits... the key word being possibility NOT probability here  !

As a mate said to me, how on earth do we know the counterfeiters haven't been successful?? We obviously all think that they are originals

they found the original plate for the four voices but did press with gold labels.. the actual vinyl looks nothing like tho.. very thin 90s style

[Mick Holdsworth]

5 minutes ago, Merve said:

Where yours has the ring wear, it corresponds with a slight dish toward the middle ? If so, the same as mine. The scratched details on the run out are between 9 o'clock & 11 o'clock on the A.G.R. side  & 1 o'clock to 3 o'clock on the O.L.U.T.B. side . On the O.L.U.T.B. side  the A after the record number has been scratched out & replaced by B on mine

Hi Stevie is yours the same as the description I gave to Ted regarding run out details & slight dish to the centre?

Yes to all the above points. All this I checked at the time, the pressing marks, the runout, where the runout starts and finishes, amount of revoulutions from start to finish of the runouts. They are identical both sides.

At least the A side was identical to the A side, and the B side was identical to the B side.

HOWEVER, I found a difference in the allignment of the A and B plates.

As we speak, I am trying to photo or video the differences, but I can't get my camera to see the runout details. I wish I could scan / photograph as clear as the above two mint ones from Merve and Stevie, but I just can't.

I'll try and describe it.

If I use "Ain't Gonna Run" as a datum, allign the 69001A at the bottom (6 o'clock). The allignment of the label is unimportant, it is the vinyl i need to focus on.

Next, I flip it on it's north/south axis to see the B side, "Our Love", like you were turning a piece of paper over (easy to do if it was rectangular, less so with a circle). I place mine in a cover with the middle cut away, to expose all the vinyl details, so flipping becomes easy, and I can't be distracted by the label.

Having flipped it accurately, to see the "Our Love" side, on MY copy, the 69001 is at about 2 o'clock (followed by the scrached out "A", and then the "B"

When I had some mint ones, I did this and found the mint were all alligned differently to this worn copy. The mint ones I had were alligned the same as each other, but uniformly different to this worn copy.

Of course, this means nothing, just that two, or more machines were set up to press the record. Also, I was only able to compare it against the few mint ones I had. I bet a good portion of the mint copies are different to mine, but equally a good portion are the same. Again, probably meaningless as any record on the planet that was pressed up in any quantity using more that one machine would have different allignments. There could very well be three or four allignment variations of this record, depends on how many were pressed.

I feel confident that the mint haul from the 2000's are absolutely genuine, just kept in damn good storage facilities.

Cheers
Mick

 

 

[Merve]

27 minutes ago, Mick Holdsworth said:

Yes to all the above points. All this I checked at the time, the pressing marks, the runout, where the runout starts and finishes, amount of revoulutions from start to finish of the runouts. They are identical both sides.

At least the A side was identical to the A side, and the B side was identical to the B side.

HOWEVER, I found a difference in the allignment of the A and B plates.

As we speak, I am trying to photo or video the differences, but I can't get my camera to see the runout details. I wish I could scan / photograph as clear as the above two mint ones from Merve and Stevie, but I just can't.

I'll try and describe it.

If I use "Ain't Gonna Run" as a datum, allign the 69001A at the bottom (6 o'clock). The allignment of the label is unimportant, it is the vinyl i need to focus on.

Next, I flip it on it's north/south axis to see the B side, "Our Love", like you were turning a piece of paper over (easy to do if it was rectangular, less so with a circle). I place mine in a cover with the middle cut away, to expose all the vinyl details, so flipping becomes easy, and I can't be distracted by the label.

Having flipped it accurately, to see the "Our Love" side, on MY copy, the 69001 is at about 2 o'clock (followed by the scrached out "A", and then the "B"

When I had some mint ones, I did this and found the mint were all alligned differently to this worn copy. The mint ones I had were alligned the same as each other, but uniformly different to this worn copy.

Of course, this means nothing, just that two, or more machines were set up to press the record. Also, I was only able to compare it against the few mint ones I had. I bet a good portion of the mint copies are different to mine, but equally a good portion are the same. Again, probably meaningless as any record on the planet that was pressed up in any quantity using more that one machine would have different allignments. There could very well be three or four allignment variations of this record, depends on how many were pressed.

I feel confident that the mint haul from the 2000's are absolutely genuine, just kept in damn good storage facilities.

Cheers
Mick

 

 

Thanks Mick. Will have a look later and report 

[Benji]

If they had really made counterfeits of the Royal Esquires wouldn't it have been a pretty stupid idea to flood the market with them and see the price going down dramatically?

 

 

[Modularman]

Careful lads, the admin soul police don't like a "bootleg detective/policeman act", apparently. 

See the now locked Little John thread! 

[Chalky]

Something that has been stored away in a box for 50 years will look different in colour to something that hasn't, even if well looked after. 

[Merve]

19 hours ago, Mick Holdsworth said:

Yes to all the above points. All this I checked at the time, the pressing marks, the runout, where the runout starts and finishes, amount of revoulutions from start to finish of the runouts. They are identical both sides.

At least the A side was identical to the A side, and the B side was identical to the B side.

HOWEVER, I found a difference in the allignment of the A and B plates.

As we speak, I am trying to photo or video the differences, but I can't get my camera to see the runout details. I wish I could scan / photograph as clear as the above two mint ones from Merve and Stevie, but I just can't.

I'll try and describe it.

If I use "Ain't Gonna Run" as a datum, allign the 69001A at the bottom (6 o'clock). The allignment of the label is unimportant, it is the vinyl i need to focus on.

Next, I flip it on it's north/south axis to see the B side, "Our Love", like you were turning a piece of paper over (easy to do if it was rectangular, less so with a circle). I place mine in a cover with the middle cut away, to expose all the vinyl details, so flipping becomes easy, and I can't be distracted by the label.

Having flipped it accurately, to see the "Our Love" side, on MY copy, the 69001 is at about 2 o'clock (followed by the scrached out "A", and then the "B"

When I had some mint ones, I did this and found the mint were all alligned differently to this worn copy. The mint ones I had were alligned the same as each other, but uniformly different to this worn copy.

Of course, this means nothing, just that two, or more machines were set up to press the record. Also, I was only able to compare it against the few mint ones I had. I bet a good portion of the mint copies are different to mine, but equally a good portion are the same. Again, probably meaningless as any record on the planet that was pressed up in any quantity using more that one machine would have different allignments. There could very well be three or four allignment variations of this record, depends on how many were pressed.

I feel confident that the mint haul from the 2000's are absolutely genuine, just kept in damn good storage facilities.

Cheers
Mick

 

 

Hi Mick 

Just carried out the check you suggested. When I flipped to the Our Love side the 69001 with the scratched out A and then the replacement B is at 5 o'clock rather than 2 o'clock as on your copy. 

So, same plates but different press, which unfortunately doesn't rule out the (unlikely) possibility that my minter is a very clever counterfeit. 

As for the label's if they kept the plates why wouldn't they keep the left over labels? My uncle worked for Watneys in 1966 and had a whole shoe box full of left over World Cup  Willie pale ale bottle labels,it's the same principle - people keep useless stuff. 

I would conclude that the later finds could be dodgy, but it's far more likely that they legitimate.......do you want to swop your vg- copy for my ex+ 

[Steviehay]

21 hours ago, Merve said:

Where yours has the ring wear, it corresponds with a slight dish toward the middle ? If so, the same as mine. The scratched details on the run out are between 9 o'clock & 11 o'clock on the A.G.R. side  & 1 o'clock to 3 o'clock on the O.L.U.T.B. side . On the O.L.U.T.B. side  the A after the record number has been scratched out & replaced by B on mine

Hi Stevie is yours the same as the description I gave to Ted regarding run out details & slight dish to the centre?

not scratched out

[Mick Holdsworth]

27 minutes ago, Merve said:

Hi Mick 

Just carried out the check you suggested. When I flipped to the Our Love side the 69001 with the scratched out A and then the replacement B is at 5 o'clock rather than 2 o'clock as on your copy. 

So, same plates but different press, which unfortunately doesn't rule out the (unlikely) possibility that my minter is a very clever counterfeit. 

As for the label's if they kept the plates why wouldn't they keep the left over labels? My uncle worked for Watneys in 1966 and had a whole shoe box full of left over World Cup  Willie pale ale bottle labels,it's the same principle - people keep useless stuff. 

I would conclude that the later finds could be dodgy, but it's far more likely that they legitimate.......do you want to swop your vg- copy for my ex+ 

That's great, I couldn't remember the positioning, just that there was a difference. Thank you for going to the trouble,

I toyed with which copy to keep when I was down to my last mint copy. and decided to keep the rough one, as it was nice and old like me, and stood out from the rest, unlike me.

Think I'll keep it, but thanks for the offer.

 

[Mick Holdsworth]

22 minutes ago, Steviehay said:

not scratched out

Hi Steve, just had a look at your image of "Our Love". The A is scratched out (this is the B side. on your image at 8 o'clock)
Took me a while to spot it though.

 

[Merve]

13 minutes ago, Mick Holdsworth said:

Hi Steve, just had a look at your image of "Our Love". The A is scratched out (this is the B side. on your image at 8 o'clock)
Took me a while to spot it though.

 

In a different position to mine though in comparison to the label. Also, just noticed on mine there is a very faint matrix stamp before the main markings followed by a tiny scratched in1335A. So small I can't work out whether its stamped or scratched. 

Edited July 15, 2022 by Merve

[Steviehay]

blind as a bat sorry

 

[Mal C]

4 hours ago, Merve said:

In a different position to mine though in comparison to the label. Also, just noticed on mine there is a very faint matrix stamp before the main markings followed by a tiny scratched in1335A. So small I can't work out whether its stamped or scratched. 

stampers wear out Im told,  so probably a stamp at the end of that run, always a bit fainter...

[Solidsoul]

6 hours ago, Mick Holdsworth said:

That's great, I couldn't remember the positioning, just that there was a difference. Thank you for going to the trouble,

I toyed with which copy to keep when I was down to my last mint copy. and decided to keep the rough one, as it was nice and old like me, and stood out from the rest, unlike me.

Think I'll keep it, but thanks for the offer.

 

My copy has what looks like, two stamped number one's on both sides runout's. Like a number 11. They remind me of the MGM bed stamp arrows.

Is that on all copies?

[Merve]

10 minutes ago, Solidsoul said:

My copy has what looks like, two stamped number one's on both sides runout's. Like a number 11. They remind me of the MGM bed stamp arrows.

Is that on all copies?

Blimey you're got good eyes  ! Very faint at 7 o'clock on the AGR side and 11 o'clock on the OLUTB side on mine but barely noticable.  Does yours have the other details like mine?