Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's

Forum rules
THIS AREA IS FOR INVESTIGATION OF LURES AND TACKLE BY FELLOW MEMBERS IF YOU INDEED THINK A PARTICULAR PIECE IS A FAKE THEN POST A PICTURE OF THE ITEM ABSOLUTELY NO LINKS MAY BE MADE OR PERSONAL DETAILS GIVEN OUT WE ARE NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF MAKING "POLICING" JUDGEMENTS BUT RATHER A INFORMED DECISION FROM THE MAJORITY OF MEMBERS ABOUT ITS TRUE IDENTITY OR ORIGINS
User avatar
fishaholiclures
Master
Master
Posts: 2833
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 5:37 pm
Location: Brisbane, QUeensland

Re: Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's

Post by fishaholiclures » Wed Jul 22, 2009 6:50 am

Barra King,
A lot of Peter's lures were finished by the people mentioned over the years they were produced. As I said does it relly make a difference, who can tell between on finished by Peter and one finished by ...say John Gower when they were in partnership???

Laurie,
I can understand the feelings here, but these lures came onto the market with good intent I believe, just due to some unfortunate circumstances.
Unfortunately some people have been led to believe there is a massive conspiracy going on that is being manipulated by members here and others in the lure collectiong fraternity.

I KNOW there is a group out there that IS making allegations, however misguided they are and seem intent on causing as much trouble as they can. I for 1 am not happy and will endeavour to find the facts and make the people responsible known to the Lure Collecting Family

Brad
I know what I know, the rest is simply details
acta non verba

barra king
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 201
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:40 pm

Re: Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's

Post by barra king » Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:06 am

Brad,
thats your opinion mate and i respect it..I give up!! -bangdesk

Rellik-doc-rob
Guru
Guru
Posts: 811
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 7:46 pm

Re: Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's

Post by Rellik-doc-rob » Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:30 am

fishaholiclures wrote:
barra king wrote:My little bit..Its like saying,would you buy a Rolls Royce that was manufacturered 100% by Rolls Royce , or one that was finished by Mr X for the same money? Would Mr X's Rolls still be worth as much as the one fully built by Rolls Royce ?,and can Mr X place a Rolls Royce badge on his vehicle and still call it a Rolls Royce ? I DONT THINK SO.
Barra King,
what you say is true to a point, but in the case of Peter's lures, does it make a difference if John Bennett, Trevor McFeeters, Rob Gaden, Jamie Flett, Brett Campbell, John Gower or Tubs Gainey did some of the finishing work???
I hope not otherwise some people around will think less of thier treasured Newell collections. I think more emphasis could be placed on Peters fostering of some of this country's better lure artisians than just focussing on the fact that Peter Newell made this lure or that lure. Peters true legacy lives on in his proteges and the lures they themselves produce.

Brad
Brad, regardless of what you think or have been told in the past, i never worked for Peter or ever finished any of his lures. In our many years as freinds , he taught me plenty of things , but he made his and i made mine. Trevor on the otherhand did work for peter for around 18 months. John bennett also never worked for Peter. Jamie Flett never worked for Peter either.
I agree with what alot of peoples comments on this issue, but unfortunately cannot agree with yours , but in saying that , maybe when you shed light on the other information that you have on this topic i will see it a different way.
At the moment i agree with Laurie, Baz and others..........an original is exactly that !!!! I would be really surprised and disappointed if any of my freinds had the lack of respect to gather any of my unfinished work and finish it themselves , them sell as original. This is the point that is at issue here ( or thats the way i interpret it ).
Knowing the process stages involved with making timber lures, i totally agree that they are many abnormalities that deserve answers, especially for those that have bought and paid good money for some of the said products. Unfortunately for them....there will always be some doubt in their minds as to the authenticity of their purchases.
As a side-note to this issue, it is good to see that Mully has re-read the post and realised that nobody was pointing the finger at him , and just trying to inform him of the wrong-doing ( alleged) of others. The warning was to keep credibility to this site.
I will also state that Fizza is a personal and respected freind of mine , and very loyal. I know he has been banned from the site , and this is unfortunate as well. His knowledge on lures and lure-history is vast , and his dismisal from the site is a private matter between him and Mully. But his knowledge will be missed. I believe he had all good intention when trying to warn members of the alleged fakes.
Rob
Rellik-Doc-Rob...

The Harder I work, the luckier I get...

barra king
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 201
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:40 pm

Re: Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's

Post by barra king » Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:39 am

Rob,
Very well said...100% agree with you.. thumbsupsmilie thumbsupsmilie thumbsupsmilie

User avatar
samurai
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 170
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 11:38 pm
Location: Tewantin QLD

Re: Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's

Post by samurai » Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:54 am

Answer me this, when I was the owner of JaySea lures I painted lures for a couple of backyard lure carvers, let's call them joe blogs lures. My question is this, are they now not original Joe Blogs lures because I painted them? let's go one step further, what about a lure made by Lively Lures and painted by Lively for another brand, let's say Eddys lure would they be a original Eddys or a Lively.

Cheers Samurai
Life is what happens while your busy making other plans.

OLDMAN
Master
Master
Posts: 1073
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:11 pm
Location: Coffs Harbour

Re: Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's

Post by OLDMAN » Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:24 am

Samurai
I believe them to be original..
Because that was how they were ORIGINALLY built for the owner or by the owner.
Laurie

Mully
Master
Master
Posts: 5955
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:19 pm
Location: On The Mighty Murray, South Australia
Mood:
Contact:

Re: Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's

Post by Mully » Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:23 am

the credibility of the site has nothing to do with it sorry Rob but im not the lure police the site is set up for collectors to enjoy if you want to remove the credibility due to this section which i thought was a good idea to help members not buy crap then ill remove it and we can get back to just talking about our collections.
My credibility has been tested by many banned members to them salutee ive nothing to hide as always Ive said im here to have fun and enjoy the company of like minded lovers of the lure collecting fraternity Fizza was never banned for personal reasons he chose to leave by removing all of his photos and then after a call to him about it calling me a liar about a bloody stupid fish i caught on a camp trip back in may and wanting nothing to do with me or the site.He then signs up with a fake account and posts in direct violation of the sign up agreement yet again.I did remove my comments as i misread thats for certain not because i was threatened to be sued by Fizza, just to clear things up for all.

Mully
Master
Master
Posts: 5955
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:19 pm
Location: On The Mighty Murray, South Australia
Mood:
Contact:

Re: Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's

Post by Mully » Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:41 am

THIS TOPIC IS LOCKED UNTIL A RESOLUTION IS HOPEFULLY FOUND FINGER POINTING WILL NOT WORK WE NEED FACTS GUYS AND HOPEFULLY WILL BE OPENED ONCE CONCRETE EVIDENCE IS FOUND....THIS IS INTENDED FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL

User avatar
fishaholiclures
Master
Master
Posts: 2833
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 5:37 pm
Location: Brisbane, QUeensland

Re: Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's

Post by fishaholiclures » Sat Aug 08, 2009 7:58 pm

You may have noticed I have been a tad quiet on the boards of late.
This is due to some exhaustive investigation into the lures in question.
This is the situation as I have been able to put it together.

I chose the (unlawful) posting by a former member to answer the questions he posed as he seemed to be the 'source' of the questions asked outside this forum.
Re: Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's
by lawsy on Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:05 pm

A lot of questions need to be asked about the authenticity of these lures.
Peter Newell gave a good ‘Friend’ a bucket full of white undercoated lures complete with bibs and screw eyes just before xmas last year.

Many more questions need to be asked of the people selling these lures who are supposedly “doing it hard” when they purchase large numbers of lures from the United States.

The vendor of these lures is not the person who lawsy refers to, but actually his son who is listing the lures for the ‘Friend’ who lacks computer access. This was done to separate these lures from the ones being sold by the ‘supposed’ seller who does sell the occasional Newell lure himself.
The person actually ‘doing it hard’ is the ‘Friend’ of Peter Newells who, as has been pointed out is well known & respected lure maker in his own right.


Why would Peter Newell put eyes on undercoated lures

Kathy Newell is sure the ‘Friend’ has painted the eyes on them but said if anyone was to be able to do it to Peters satisfaction it would be the ‘Friend’ who actually did a lot of the eyes on Newell lures prior to Peter’s passing.

Why sign an undercoated lure in the first place and why, then sand it back and resign it
If they were all undercoated who sanded them back to raw

The clear coated timber ones and any other painted lures are from the ‘Friend’s’ own collection of lures that Peter has given him over time
Kathy had signed the undercoated lures because they were made by Peters hand and were painted by Peter. The clear coat was applied after the eyes were painted as was done on all Newell lures.


Who put the clearcoat on the unfinished lures SEE ABOVE

Who put the hook-hangers & screw eyes in the undercoated lures SEE ABOVE

Why are they shiny and new. Should have undercoat all over them SEE ABOVE
Who put the shiny new bibs into these lures. They too would have paint on them during the undercoating proccess. SEE ABOVE

Peter Newell never put eyes on until the painting was finished ,Who did put the eyes on.
SEE ABOVE

Does this mean that the person who paid $900 + for a kadaicha recently bought a Hi-bred " Fake"

NO!!! All Kadiatcha’s are hand carved, Peter never made a mandrel for them to be made on a lathe.


This forum talked about a fake signature for 3 weeks on a Newell lure, yet they push this forgery under the carpet

THIS FORUM CANNOT POLICE LURE SALES ON OTHER SITES

Ask yourselves these questions and then ask those who have lied through there noses defending the people selling these lures. Are they also involved and how stupid do they think others are.
My investigation has found no evidence of this claim

I believe there is a conspiracy here and more than one person is involved.
My investigation has found no evidence of this claim

To those who bought any of the lures, rest assured you are now the owner of a ‘GENUINE’ Newell lure and more so if you have one of the undercoated lures, which could be some of the last lures Peter made before he passed away, and unique in their own right.

There have also been some rumours around regarding the removal of Peters lathe to produce ‘fakes’, these rumours are unfounded. Kathy Newell has made it quite clear that Peter’s workshop has not been touched since he passed away and the mandrels Peter used for turning some of his lure models, are being kept in trust for Peter’s grandchildren.


Brad
I know what I know, the rest is simply details
acta non verba

two-bob

Re: Latest batch of 'pristine' Newell's

Post by two-bob » Sat Aug 08, 2009 8:14 pm

Thanks for putting that information together.

Post Reply

Return to “WHAT`S A FAIR PRICE & IS IT REAL”