That's a lot of money for a knife. Even though it was a early knife there was no plating on it, no proven Vietnam history to the knife as to if it was even in the area at time, although the owner was involved with NASA no proof if it was a actual NASA ordered knife. To me this knife sold for that much money on just a lot of if's and speculations. This is one where someone bought the story and the knife.

I agree with you, it is a lot of money for a knife. But, "a lot" to us ain't much to some, it's all relative. If the "if's and speculations" were sewn up with solid provenance, it would have sold for a lot more.

I think the buyer paid for a very rare knife. There aren't many collectors / buyers in this price range that throw down on b.s. stories and / or empty promises.

Exactly

This is true, but it isn't a story out of the blue. Much of it is based on Lt. Col. Salvo's obit and history. Most facts about his personal history are relatively easy to confirm, including Project Mercury, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, etc.

The carry of the knife in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia is a deduction as is the acquisition during the early space program. But even that can be nailed down with a few phone calls or letters. It seems as if the character of the knife itself is consistant with the deductions.

I am not a collector, but I personally wanted this knife ... but at about 2k less. I wonder when we will ever see another knife of this gendre at auction, or for that matter, when a similar knife was for sale? That question alone might make the price seem worthwhile. Regards...

Add edit - there may not be another knife in the entire world that is connected to so much 1960s US history, certainly not to the early space program AND war in S.E.Asia. I doubt any of the early model 17s were acquired by a person who later deployed, and then when retired had the resume to be seconded to USAID Vietnam, Laos etc. This took a unique man with a unique resume. The more I think about it, the more I think someone got a bargain. Just my opinion as a historian and artifact junkie. Regards.

Jack, All interesting points that I personaly agree with. However, being a sceptic I also think that this knife would of increased in value with just a little more documentation. Like a direct connection to this officer. When you think about it this Astro really is only different than others available by the engraved block letter logo on the blade and the markings with his name on the sheath and the handle. When artifacts start approching these values it is possible for unscrupolous folks to change some things. (I am not saying that is the case here however it has been known to happen) In my opinion complete provenence is everything and something like a notorized letter from a realitive of the original owner or his realitives or some other connection to the man and this exact knife personally, would go the next step to proving the chain of ownership. At that point all of the other documentation and stories would be irrefutable.

Just my opinion from dealing with other documented and undocumeted collectibles.

To be clear this was a rare piece with potentially great history, and I would like to own it as well. I'm just saying with a little more documentation the "buy the knife, not the story" would be less applicable to this great knife.

I agree completely about the need for solid documentation to really confirm this knife as a unique artifact of the '60s, not "just" a unique RMK. But that documentation would seem to be relatively easy to obtain compared to many personal items of the period.

If I had planned to commit serious cash, I would have initiated or commissioned that documentation effort, before bidding (perhaps someone did). That would have included official records, and contact with family members listed in the obit.

The original offer on E-bay did not include the officer's name and history. But based on the marked sheath, an internet search brought his (possible/probable) identity to light several weeks before the close... plenty of time for an in-depth look at the records.

Your thoughts on what documentation is needed is spot on, IMHO.

Regards,