Jump to content


Photo

K.G. Luke hallmark


  • Please log in to reply
79 replies to this topic

#1 John Cooper

John Cooper
  • Members
    • Member ID: 227
  • 3,063 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 12 July 2009 - 07:24 PM

Ok all I want to open this conversation up and focus on the recent conversation about what is the correct K.G. Luke hallmark(s). What i would like is for folks to post wings from their collection or other supporting information that can be verified i.e. sales ad or toehr information on K.G. Luke so some light can be shed on the current feeling that there are many fakes being produced.

Please do you best to provide the facts as you know them and provide what supporting information you can to prove your point(s)

Thanks
John

The following images are from other posts on this forum and have not be questioned. (I have noted the poster)

Posted by Gary Cain
Posted Image

Posted by Jules118
Posted Image

#2 USMC RAIDER COLLECTOR

USMC RAIDER COLLECTOR
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,249
  • 430 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:southeast

Posted 21 July 2009 - 09:26 AM

Thanks for posting. Would like to see some K.G. Luke hallmarks posted as found on USMC EGA's ...

#3 teufelhunde.ret

teufelhunde.ret

    MODERATOR

  • Moderators
    • Member ID: 376
  • 21,533 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:EGA Headquarters

Posted 21 July 2009 - 09:32 AM

Thanks for posting. Would like to see some K.G. Luke hallmarks posted as found on USMC EGA's ...


http://www.usmilitar...?showtopic=3808
and
http://www.usmilitar...showtopic=25322
s/f Darrell

#4 John Cooper

John Cooper
  • Members
    • Member ID: 227
  • 3,063 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 25 July 2009 - 12:53 PM

I decided to ask several folks about this thread and it would appear the jury is still out. Most folks are not 100% sure either way since there does not seem to be any hard evidence.

The one interesting peice of info I did read in an email was that one fellow collector at a recent show saw several (5 or 6) K.G. Luke Glider wings available all marked with the same hallmark as in post 2.

So the mystery continues.

John

#5 JonG

JonG
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,583
  • 735 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 July 2009 - 10:43 AM

Maybe looking at other Nations pieces can help the discussion. Here's a couple of pieces found on other websites. KG Luke also minted medals for the 1956 Olympic Games in Melbourne.

KG Luke

And another 2nd Piece

Edited by JonG, 28 July 2009 - 10:53 AM.


#6 Aussie-Wings

Aussie-Wings
  • Members
    • Member ID: 4,136
  • 145 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 28 July 2009 - 12:18 PM

Maybe looking at other Nations pieces can help the discussion. Here's a couple of pieces found on other websites. KG Luke also minted medals for the 1956 Olympic Games in Melbourne.

KG Luke

And another 2nd Piece



Hi Guys,
If the forum is happy to post some non-US items, I have some RAAF wings from the 1950's by K.G.Luke and some other Aust army related badges. I will photograph and post when I get home.

Cheers,
AW.

#7 Gary Cain

Gary Cain
  • Members
    • Member ID: 96
  • 1,651 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Carson City Nevada

Posted 28 July 2009 - 01:50 PM

Hi AW.

I for one would like to see them. All they can do is help to see what K.G. Luke did in fact use.

Cheers
Gary



Hi Guys,
If the forum is happy to post some non-US items, I have some RAAF wings from the 1950's by K.G.Luke and some other Aust army related badges. I will photograph and post when I get home.

Cheers,
AW.



#8 John Cooper

John Cooper
  • Members
    • Member ID: 227
  • 3,063 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 28 July 2009 - 03:14 PM

Hi Guys,
If the forum is happy to post some non-US items, I have some RAAF wings from the 1950's by K.G.Luke and some other Aust army related badges. I will photograph and post when I get home.

Cheers,
AW.


I think for the sake of learing about KG Luke posting just the hallmarks of other badges to see if there is a specific sytle they used would be helpful.

John

#9 Aussie-Wings

Aussie-Wings
  • Members
    • Member ID: 4,136
  • 145 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:52 AM

Hi Guys,
If the forum is happy to post some non-US items, I have some RAAF wings from the 1950's by K.G.Luke and some other Aust army related badges. I will photograph and post when I get home.

Cheers,
AW.


First picture is the back of an 1950's RAAF Navigators Wing.

Nav_Wing__Large_.JPG

#10 Aussie-Wings

Aussie-Wings
  • Members
    • Member ID: 4,136
  • 145 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:55 AM

Second is RAAF Airman's Badge (1940's - 1950's)

LAC_Badge__Large_.JPG

#11 Aussie-Wings

Aussie-Wings
  • Members
    • Member ID: 4,136
  • 145 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 29 July 2009 - 12:58 AM

Third is a WW2 Australian Army Rising Sun Badge.

Aust_Army__Large_.JPG

#12 pfrost

pfrost
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,519
  • 4,100 posts

Posted 29 July 2009 - 08:09 AM

What I find the most striking in wing hallmarks #2 and #3 is the large size and "obviousness" of the hallmarks compared the the rest of the vintage items.

A couple of points about that.

1. Almost none of the other hallmarks include the words AUSTRALIA or spell out Melbourne. Most just use the abbr. MELB. The 2 "questionable" wings almost go out of their way to draw attention that these are foreign made wings.

2. The hallmarks on the two suspect wings have HUGE hallmarks compared to the other wings. It is almost as they don't want you to miss it AT ALL.

This brings up the question as to why? Almost on one would ever see the back and I doubt that at the time anyone would really care that much.
Also, except for Luxenberg (who weren't actually making wings), the hallmark on most other wings and insignia are rather small. Since Luxenberg was a retail store, they had their logo on lots of items (hats, insignia, uniforms), so them having a big logo added to the wings kind of makes some sense.

Fnally, having watched some of the auctions, I am starting to see what I believe to be a general drop in the prices of these wings. It is almost as if the market has corrected on these and is finding some fault. IFF they are fakes, then it would have likely served the maker to have been more circumspect in offering these up for sale. But, IFF they are fake, I also assume that greed and the lure of fast and easy money took over and if selling 5 or 10 a year for 300-600$ was good, then selling 15-30 a year at 150-300$ was better?

My buddy says that these wings are showing up a militaria and gun shows in largish quantities as well. Frequently in the cases of those dealers with a less than savory reputation.

For me, the jury is still out, but no way would I drop any significant money on one of these wings now. :thumbdown:

Patrick

Edited by pfrost, 29 July 2009 - 08:12 AM.


#13 Gary Cain

Gary Cain
  • Members
    • Member ID: 96
  • 1,651 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Carson City Nevada

Posted 29 July 2009 - 03:13 PM

I have zero doubt that these are fakes of recent manufacture. I have numerous other pieces of insignia (RN, RAAF, Australian Army, etc.) and sports pins made by K.G. Luke and not one of them has the suspect makers mark. Not one. There is no need to go through histrionics and logic constructs. These are fake. K.G. Luke has never (and I very rarely use that term) ever used a similar hallmark on any of their products at any time in their history.

#14 pfrost

pfrost
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,519
  • 4,100 posts

Posted 29 July 2009 - 03:40 PM

"There is no need to go through histrionics and logic constructs. These are fake. K.G. Luke has never (and I very rarely use that term) ever used a similar hallmark on any of their products at any time in their history."

Happily, we don't need no more of those silly logical arguments or resort to histrionics 'cause Gary says it is so ;) Thanks Gary! :thumbsup:

While I agree with you that they are more than likely fakes, the point is not simply to say "I know its so, because I don't have anything like this in my collection". What is fun (or logical or especially compelling) about that? I suspect that there are lots of things you have neither encountered nor owned (INCLUDING every example of every thing ever made by KG Luke), but the lack of such does not preclude its existence.

Those of us with less than supernatural appreciation of all things KG Luke have to muddle through somehow, sometimes by employing logic, sometimes by utilizing histrionics--although nobody in this conversation seemed especially excited--and sometimes by relying on the opinion of those who know more than we do. I am sure you know much more about KG Luke than I do (I may have one or two bits of insignia here or there, and what you say about the methods of hallmarking is consistent with my observations), but one can hope that at least those of us who do try to employ some sort of logical framework of collecting can also contribute to the conversation in a meaningful way, no?

Patrick

Edited by pfrost, 29 July 2009 - 03:58 PM.


#15 John Cooper

John Cooper
  • Members
    • Member ID: 227
  • 3,063 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 29 July 2009 - 04:12 PM

This is an interesting thread... I wish I could be sure one way or the other on this. All I do know is that the one posted (#1) which came from Gary is an exact match to one biographical wing I know of and another from Wings & Things so I am confident of these.

As for the other two I am on the fence. The second wing which Jules posted is very simialr in construction to all the Angus & Cootes that have appeared in recent years... in fact two more are available as I write this plus the fact of the several glider wings although I am still waiting for more info.

Now as for the large hallmark (just to take the other side for a moment) why would a faker not just reproduce one like a known good example vs. making up a whole new mark?

John

#16 Gary Cain

Gary Cain
  • Members
    • Member ID: 96
  • 1,651 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Carson City Nevada

Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:27 PM

Hi Patrick,

It's not because I don't have any in my collection. It's because no one has ever seen a similar hallmark from K.G. Luke until about a year ago, when all of a sudden these start showing up. And not just in a single or a couple of places. They are all over the place. Logic says that when you have an organization as well documented production wise as Luke is, and you have well documented hallmarks from US, Commonwealth, Dutch, Sporting, Law Enforcement insignia and collectors pins, for over a span of 65+ years, you kind of get the idea of what they used. This is not subject to fanciful arguments for or against. This is a simple fact.

I agree that in the 25 or so years that I have been collecting Commonwealth made US insignia I have not seen everything, but, and this is a real big but, no else has ever seen a similar hallmark, till just recently. Also, in the hallmarks that have been presented that we know to be original, they all follow a basic pattern. Whether it was made prior to WWII or in the 1950's the elements that make up the hallmark are the same. They may have used a Melb. on one or a full Melbourne on another but the fonts are the same as is the size. Till now.

Occams Razor is appropriate in this instance. A logical review of the evidence presented with this hallmark should very quickly tell you it is not real. And it shouldn't take more than a few seconds to do it. You are allways welcome (as is anybody else for that matter) to engage in a debate on a wing and it's originality and you are very knowledgeable, but in this case I percieve a continuing argument for the sake of argument. You have not come up with a single reason why a company would make a complete new die for a hallmark that bears not one single iota of resemblence to all the other hallmarks that that company has used. You have not been able to produce any other piece of insignia with this halmark, of any kind. Just this single Glider Pilots wing and its host of brothers.

I am trying to save people from wasting a lot of money on crap. By engaging in a discussion with zero evidence to support your views you give some minor creedence to the fake and that will cause someone to waste their money because there is a chance that it may be real ( according to you).The reason why the prices on these are plummeting is people are beginning to figure out that they are not real. I have seen one real K.G. Luke Glider Pilot wing and it resides in a very large collection. It has impeccable provenance and I offered 1000 bucks for it 15 years ago and was refused. It does not have this hallmark.

Logical arguments require evidence. To date none has been presented to support this hallmark. In fact every piece of evidence has very clearly exposed this for the fake it is. Every single one. Argue all you wish but before you do please present a real piece of evidence, not a thought experiment, those are very useful in theoretical physics but not in the applied world.


Cheers
Gary


"There is no need to go through histrionics and logic constructs. These are fake. K.G. Luke has never (and I very rarely use that term) ever used a similar hallmark on any of their products at any time in their history."

Happily, we don't need no more of those silly logical arguments or resort to histrionics 'cause Gary says it is so ;) Thanks Gary! :thumbsup:

While I agree with you that they are more than likely fakes, the point is not simply to say "I know its so, because I don't have anything like this in my collection". What is fun (or logical or especially compelling) about that? I suspect that there are lots of things you have neither encountered nor owned (INCLUDING every example of every thing ever made by KG Luke), but the lack of such does not preclude its existence.

Those of us with less than supernatural appreciation of all things KG Luke have to muddle through somehow, sometimes by employing logic, sometimes by utilizing histrionics--although nobody in this conversation seemed especially excited--and sometimes by relying on the opinion of those who know more than we do. I am sure you know much more about KG Luke than I do (I may have one or two bits of insignia here or there, and what you say about the methods of hallmarking is consistent with my observations), but one can hope that at least those of us who do try to employ some sort of logical framework of collecting can also contribute to the conversation in a meaningful way, no?

Patrick



#17 Gary Cain

Gary Cain
  • Members
    • Member ID: 96
  • 1,651 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Carson City Nevada

Posted 29 July 2009 - 11:38 PM

Hi John,

Because it is easier to do so. To accurately reproduce the small font (especially the receding legs of the "E") of a original Luke hallmark is very difficult. That's why they made it so much larger. Also most people have never seen a real one so why bother trying so hard. How many people do you think actually read what we say? In the overall collecting community it is less than 1% That leaves 99% of the collecting suckers out there who will buy anything, provided it's cheap enough. Real Luke wings are very uncommon. I have seen one real glider wing in 25 years. Speaking of Angus and Coote I have about 25 pieces from them and guess what none of their hallmarks look like the recent flood on ebay and at the shows. Those are very clearly laser cut and this is no doubt from the same group.

In geology we have a principle called uniformitarianism and it basically says that the past is the key to the future. And it applies here as well. What a company did back then they are going to do today and they will not change very much if at all because it is easier and cheaper for them to do it that way. Also there is a concept of Cachet, this is their look and they want to cultivate that look. Look at all the major jewellers, do you notice much of a change in their hallmarks through the years? Look at a piece of BB&B from 1900 and look at one from today, they are very similar. There is a reason for that.

Cheers
Gary


This is an interesting thread... I wish I could be sure one way or the other on this. All I do know is that the one posted (#1) which came from Gary is an exact match to one biographical wing I know of and another from Wings & Things so I am confident of these.

As for the other two I am on the fence. The second wing which Jules posted is very simialr in construction to all the Angus & Cootes that have appeared in recent years... in fact two more are available as I write this plus the fact of the several glider wings although I am still waiting for more info.

Now as for the large hallmark (just to take the other side for a moment) why would a faker not just reproduce one like a known good example vs. making up a whole new mark?

John



#18 pfrost

pfrost
  • Members
    • Member ID: 1,519
  • 4,100 posts

Posted 30 July 2009 - 08:02 AM

In geology we have a principle called uniformitarianism and it basically says that the past is the key to the future. And it applies here as well. What a company did back then they are going to do today and they will not change very much if at all because it is easier and cheaper for them to do it that way. Also there is a concept of Cachet, this is their look and they want to cultivate that look. Look at all the major jewellers, do you notice much of a change in their hallmarks through the years? Look at a piece of BB&B from 1900 and look at one from today, they are very similar. There is a reason for that.

Cheers
Gary


In biomedical research, we have a principle called institutional bias, in which previously held assumptions or beliefs are assumed to be facts. While in fact, there is nothing to say that what a company did at one point in its past is necessarily a predictor of what they will do in the future. Many companies changed their hallmarks and basic wing designs multiple times during the course of their history (and not infrequently concurrently!). While it is true, many companies maintained a similar pattern throughout (as you correctly pointed out), other companies (such as NS Meyers, Gemsco, AE Co, H&H/Imperial, LGB, etc) incorporated multiple changes during their history. That is the danger of institutional bias, because you have already, a priori, decided that the pattern of similar historical hallmarking exhibited by BB&B, for example, is more valid in predicting whether or not the KG Luke hallmarks are fake, than say the evolving historical pattern of hallmarking exhibited by NS Meyers or Gemsco, for example. You then use your bias to support your hypothesis in a circular manner. In fact, since KG Luke as a company is totally independent from both BB&B and NS Meyers, I would argue that neither pattern of historical hallmarking by BB&B or NSM is predictive of how the KG Luke company did in fact hallmark their wings.

Again, I think you are correct, that these wings and hallmarks are likely bogus.

Patrick

#19 teufelhunde.ret

teufelhunde.ret

    MODERATOR

  • Moderators
    • Member ID: 376
  • 21,533 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:EGA Headquarters

Posted 30 July 2009 - 08:34 AM

GREAT THREAD GUYS, good give & take! John, this is worthy of being pinned when over... s/f Darrell

#20 John Cooper

John Cooper
  • Members
    • Member ID: 227
  • 3,063 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 30 July 2009 - 03:26 PM

Patrick & Gary both of you have made valid points about the hallmarks and supported them. In my mind you are both correct however it can also be said that if you look at the time frame these wings are likely supposed to have been produced I would not expect to see a large change in the way the wing is made or hallmarked.

John

Edited by John Cooper, 30 July 2009 - 03:31 PM.


#21 Gary Cain

Gary Cain
  • Members
    • Member ID: 96
  • 1,651 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Carson City Nevada

Posted 30 July 2009 - 03:50 PM

Hi Patrick,

Institutional Bias exists in all sciences. I believe we are talking about Institutional Identity here however. Millions of dollars have been spent in hallmark and brand infringement court cases. The reason is because a company wants it's customers to know that they are buying their product and not some fraudulent knockoff. Ebay was recently slapped with a 65 million dollar fine for not adequately protecting brand name companies from having their name cheapened by pirated products. Companies protect their brands very strongly because that hallmark represents them and their company ideals, philosophy et al.

The business world rewards continuity as I think you will agree. That continuity is represented by the hallmarks. They do indeed sometimes change but never in such a manner that the customer can't instantly identify the company. They allways maintain a common design element that is readily recognizable across all the years that the company has existed. It is done for a reason.


Cheers
Gary





In biomedical research, we have a principle called institutional bias, in which previously held assumptions or beliefs are assumed to be facts. While in fact, there is nothing to say that what a company did at one point in its past is necessarily a predictor of what they will do in the future. Many companies changed their hallmarks and basic wing designs multiple times during the course of their history (and not infrequently concurrently!). While it is true, many companies maintained a similar pattern throughout (as you correctly pointed out), other companies (such as NS Meyers, Gemsco, AE Co, H&H/Imperial, LGB, etc) incorporated multiple changes during their history. That is the danger of institutional bias, because you have already, a priori, decided that the pattern of similar historical hallmarking exhibited by BB&B, for example, is more valid in predicting whether or not the KG Luke hallmarks are fake, than say the evolving historical pattern of hallmarking exhibited by NS Meyers or Gemsco, for example. You then use your bias to support your hypothesis in a circular manner. In fact, since KG Luke as a company is totally independent from both BB&B and NS Meyers, I would argue that neither pattern of historical hallmarking by BB&B or NSM is predictive of how the KG Luke company did in fact hallmark their wings.

Again, I think you are correct, that these wings and hallmarks are likely bogus.

Patrick



#22 John Cooper

John Cooper
  • Members
    • Member ID: 227
  • 3,063 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SF Bay Area

Posted 31 July 2009 - 04:52 PM

Here is an update on the hallmark posted in the 3rd image I was waiting for. It appears that the five Glider Pilot wings were available at one of the two followig shows last May.

Allentown, PA gun show
Meadowlands Military Collectors show

Did anyone else happen to be at these shows?

John

#23 JLENG

JLENG
  • Members
    • Member ID: 589
  • 161 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 August 2009 - 08:14 PM

Hi Everyone, I have been watching this post with quite an interest since I have recently aquired a bombardier wing with the "third" hallmark. I would like to make my case on the possibility of this being a correct hallmark for the period in question.

I obtained this wing with a two in gunner wing from a seller on eBay who sells mostly instruments. I searched his feedback and did not see any other militaria bought or sold recently. I contacted the seller asking where he had obtained the wings. He responded that they had belonged to his father, a ball turret gunner during the war, and did not know where he had gotten them. He also wondered why they sold for more than other similar wings listed on eBay. I would like to think I am a pretty good judge of character, and I believe his response is genuine.

The wing is a two piece, die struck, sterling bombardiers wing. It is hallmarked sterling and with the KG Luke hallmark in question. The wing shows "wear and tear" I believe would be hard to reproduce (my opinion). Now everyone grab their wing collecting bible "More Silver Wings Pinks and Greens" and turn to page 134. The TO wing at the top of the page is identical to this wing with the exception that the middle portion of the wing has been cut out and a "T" applied in its place. The wing in my possesion has the bomb and target applied to an observer wing identical to the TO wing shown in the book leading me to believe that they were probalby made from a modified KG Luke observer wing.

As to the lower realized prices on recent auctions, could supply and demand be causing the lower prices? When I first started buying on ebay back in the days of 56k modems Josten Command pilot wings sold for $350+ and now you can get them for less than $200 at times. I lost what I would consider to be very high bids on other wings that are now somewhat common and sell for much less. I attend the local show here in Minneapolis twice a year and cannot remember seeing a KG Luke wing at any of the shows either. Maybe its a regional thing.

John

kg_front__Medium_.jpg
kg_back__Medium_.jpg
kg_side__Medium_.jpg
kg_sterling__Medium_.jpg

#24 Gary Cain

Gary Cain
  • Members
    • Member ID: 96
  • 1,651 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Carson City Nevada

Posted 02 August 2009 - 08:43 PM

Hi John,

All I can say is read the preceding posts again. Also to the best of my knowledge Luke did not make two piece wings. It was a very common practice with American makers using a basic Observers wing and then soldering whatever front piece on it to make the wing they desired. I have not seen that on any biographical Luke wing I have ever seen. Nor have I seen it on Angus & Coote, nor Rood, nor Wallace Bishop.



Cheers
Gary


Hi Everyone, I have been watching this post with quite an interest since I have recently aquired a bombardier wing with the "third" hallmark. I would like to make my case on the possibility of this being a correct hallmark for the period in question.

I obtained this wing with a two in gunner wing from a seller on eBay who sells mostly instruments. I searched his feedback and did not see any other militaria bought or sold recently. I contacted the seller asking where he had obtained the wings. He responded that they had belonged to his father, a ball turret gunner during the war, and did not know where he had gotten them. He also wondered why they sold for more than other similar wings listed on eBay. I would like to think I am a pretty good judge of character, and I believe his response is genuine.

The wing is a two piece, die struck, sterling bombardiers wing. It is hallmarked sterling and with the KG Luke hallmark in question. The wing shows "wear and tear" I believe would be hard to reproduce (my opinion). Now everyone grab their wing collecting bible "More Silver Wings Pinks and Greens" and turn to page 134. The TO wing at the top of the page is identical to this wing with the exception that the middle portion of the wing has been cut out and a "T" applied in its place. The wing in my possesion has the bomb and target applied to an observer wing identical to the TO wing shown in the book leading me to believe that they were probalby made from a modified KG Luke observer wing.

As to the lower realized prices on recent auctions, could supply and demand be causing the lower prices? When I first started buying on ebay back in the days of 56k modems Josten Command pilot wings sold for $350+ and now you can get them for less than $200 at times. I lost what I would consider to be very high bids on other wings that are now somewhat common and sell for much less. I attend the local show here in Minneapolis twice a year and cannot remember seeing a KG Luke wing at any of the shows either. Maybe its a regional thing.

John

kg_front__Medium_.jpg
kg_back__Medium_.jpg
kg_side__Medium_.jpg
kg_sterling__Medium_.jpg



#25 Mr-X

Mr-X
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,389
  • 4,640 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Central Highland's of Victoria, Australia - Uc Dai Loi

Posted 02 August 2009 - 11:32 PM

What I find the most striking in wing hallmarks #2 and #3 is the large size and "obviousness" of the hallmarks compared the the rest of the vintage items.

A couple of points about that.

1. Almost none of the other hallmarks include the words AUSTRALIA or spell out Melbourne. Most just use the abbr. MELB. The 2 "questionable" wings almost go out of their way to draw attention that these are foreign made wings.

Patrick



Hallmark from the back of a 100 percent legit vet acquired EGA.

Note the use of the full word "MELBOURNE".

http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh145/leighm25a/EGAcloseup.jpg

Edited by Mr-X, 09 August 2009 - 04:48 AM.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users