Wow Ron, was not expecting that at all. Nevertheless, I will put it to you this way and as I have stated in this thread and the article on my site that is linked in this thread, I have never said Heiser did not make the sheaths, and in fact am aligned with what the 'preponderance" of evidence suggests. I even called it in print BEFORE you or anyone else jumped on the bandwagon. It wasn't until the sample sheath auction that you guys jumped on and made an issue of it.

All I have said and for those that have actually read my posts to include the newbie and the experienced collector alike, is that I would like to have some hard proof which up to this point has been unobtanium.

That being said, do YOU have any communication between Bo and the stamp maker? Do YOU have any communication between Bo and Heiser? Do YOU have an communication between Bo and Maurice Johnson? Do YOU have any hard evidence that states when or where sheaths were stamped?

I didn't think so.



No, you are incorrect. Bob H. and myself ("we") had numerous conversations (you were not privy to and I believe beginning before you were collecting) about this many years ago dating back to the late 90's. Although we had our thoughts that it would be improbable that Johnson could make an exact duplicate of a Heiser based on several factors , we (meaning Bob and myself) decided it was easier to give a RMK stamped sheath the nod to Maurice Johnson. It was as simple as that.




Supposition at best yet I am clutching at straws? YOU nor I nor anyone else knows this. Period. All you have said has not answered any of the questions that are "not germain to the crux of the issue". Well, they are exactly that, they are the issue.

IF, and that is a BIG IF, you can answer even one of the questions presented with hard proof, I am all ears.

Perhaps the best way to reference these sheaths is as "transitional" between Heiser and Johnson.

Does that make everybody happy?

But hey, what do I know, kinda dark where I am and the sand is in my eyes.