01-11-2010, 06:30 AM
<!--quoteo(post=345732:date=Jan 10 2010, 10:13 PM:name=john p)<div class=\'quotetop\'>QUOTE (john p @ Jan 10 2010, 10:13 PM) <a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=345732\"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class=\'quotemain\'><!--quotecI agree there is not much work involved in looking at a prop and printing a COA. On the other hand, COA's are generally used to value screen used props, and they are only really necessary if one is interested in selling (after all, us collectors clearly don't need a COA in order to appreciate the prop). In that case, having the Lou Carlucci name go with the prop could dramatically increase its market value, so I imagine Lou feels he should be compensated for this--not for the work involved, but for the value his COA adds.If I were keeping the prop for myself I'd tell him to blow me. If I were going to sell it, I'd probably pay him for the COA.And why on earth would anyone want to modify or restore this prop?! You can buy replicas people! The whole appeal of the screen used prop is its history--including defects it may have acquired...<!--QuoteEnd</div><!--QuoteEEndI couldn't have said that better if I'd actually tried. You hit the "restoration" issue right on the head, too.Why the hell would you want to restore a <b>SOLID METAL</b> ANOES 1 HERO GLOVE, anyway? Restoration is completely unnecessary and would mean possibly removing the patina or screen-matchable damage/details, as well as a separation or partial destruction of its original, screen-used pieces in place of what will essentially be "soldered-on replicas" that will surely devalue the piece....Both options should be illegal, as far as I'm concerned. Just keep it away from excessive moisture and you should be good to go!Cheers,Ryan