Third Party Press

Hicks Makes Long Awaited Forum Debut on the Champagne Rune

Hambone

Hambone

Community Organizer
Staff member
http://www.ghw2.com/topic/53114-military-trader-questions-kelly-hicks/?page=7

It consisted of preparatory remarks from his friends about how swell he is, then he appeared, thanked them and went into a personal attack rant about how poor Hobo is the cause of all the bad things in the hobby. Even if, for the sake of argument, such invective, misdirection, and ad hominem were true (and those with some awareness know that it isn't) how does that change anything with respect to questions about the significant issues of the Champagne Rune / XRFacts / and Mr. Hicks' assertions about them? How does Hobo's existence and my existence have anything to do with these issues? Revelations that the Champagne Rune is an airbrushed humpjob, that XRFacts authenticated it, that Hicks maintains the legitimacy of both and has not produced an "original" Champagne Rune helmet or even picture of one are the "fault" or responsibility of whom? So all of the posts started and perpetuated by other concerned collectors demanding answers would not be there without Hobo's existence?

Is the hobby now awaiting the appearance of an "original" Champagne Rune as Charlie Brown awaits the appearance of the Great Pumpkin? Is this the new standard in German helmet collecting? Single source authority and woe, doom, personal attacks and "hobby banning" for daring to question? Move along, because I say so that's why, you're a negative hobby anarchist who doesn't deserve to be involved in MY hobby with MY friends? I think now you see my concern with letting such folks try to control the hand held lid tazer pie chart COA authentication (for a small fee of course) game.

IMHO, Mr. Hicks' forum Champagne Rune debut commentary would have been better, or at least relevant and responsive, had it addressed in some detail the following simple questions:
1) As it appears clearly that the Champagne Rune lids examined by DougB (and others) (some with your COAs) are airbrushed, what/who do you think is the source?
2) If the Champagne Rune is real as you contend, can you show us one or even pictures of one?
3) How did XRFacts "authenticate" airbrushed faux decals as being "elementally" consistent with other actual SS decals?

If answering those simple questions is not possible, what about a simple admission that a mistake was made, i.e., "just like all other humans, I made a mistake and was taken in by these airbrushed fakes just like many others. I have made it right with those with COAs and those helmets I've sold" ? The latter would certainly get the acceptance and respect of the people here. I think everyone with some ability to comprehend and perform objective analysis can see. As always, my opinions only.
 
Last edited:
He just posted once on the thread and then it's locked?

It appears that they are afraid to face the facts on the great CR lid hoax. He doesn't appear to be strongly defending his CR lid proclamations. In fact, his wording indicates he's trying to squirm out of the corner. He talks about fake news, but he'd be a perfect fit at CNN.
 
I didn't see him defend them at all. Basically, it was he's a good guy, he and his friends say so, he'll make an appearance soon to confirm that, anyone who questions him is not a good guy, and worse, then histrionic personal attack without addressing anything substantive, the end. GWH2 gets much credit for running no less than three threads on this. I also don't begrudge them for locking it. It wasn't going anywhere. It was going to be the same questions asked of him which he would not answer, personal attacks and chaos by his friends escalating to shut down the thread. They would then claim that anyone not accepting what they tell us is harming the hobby, a "hobby anarchist", etc.
 
Yes, you should be ashamed, because you called out a huckster very well. That's the gist of his rebuttal. The problem with lid collectors is lid collectors. There's a significant portion of that community that has no interest in outing fakes and fakers.
 
The interesting thing is that I never called him out, only pointed out the factual circumstances and rendered my opinions, along with many others, including that he should step up and explain what was going on.

Is the "shame" here requesting answers? Or is the shame here that in 2012 very credible photographic evidence was posted by ZAM at WAF that the CRSS was an airbrushed fake and that it took years and a rare individual to blow the lid of it? Is the shame that the person selling them, and producing COAs for them, says that they are real, yet refuses to produce one or evidence of an original? Is the shame that the hobby has people in it that when faced with this would rather lash out at those who disclose this and demand answers than require the answers themselves? Had DougB not invested tremendous amounts of time, money, and effort, without concerning himself with the fallout and repercussions, which were significant, in exposing this would it have been exposed? He was evidently so disgusted by what he learned that he sold all of his helmets and left the hobby. Were the people he was disgusted by now claiming that WE are damaging the hobby? That's surreal.
 
Last edited:
The thread was closed at the suggestion of "Panzerheld," a guy who has been a member since October of last year (four months...), after he says he wishes he could shake Kelly's hand. What the serious (I have a small penis) is that?
 
Just admit

The lack of admitting that he made a mistake shows a certain surplus of hubris given how he was exposed. Just admit you were deceived even with your years of study
 
So, essentially, according to Hicks, Hobo should be "ashamed" for "damaging the hobby" for asking questions like this:

2012 - ZAM at WAF produces convincing photographic evidence that the Champagne Rune is an airbrushed fake, then is attacked and the thread is locked. At a minimum what was produced should have inspired (indeed, required) closer microscopic examination.
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=578059

Zam1.JPG

Posted at GWH2: Hicks' COA authenticating a M.42 ckl Champagne Rune "brought out of an estate in Germany in June 2015 by a local picker who has sent me several helmets during the last ten years" as shown in an ebay auction on June 7, 2017:

59346ff323994_ChampagneRuneGBad_JPG_c6fe2898f8e5456f0a887c82eb5bd347.jpg
pix135334875_jpg_7cea041021557df7ea27a9d3ffc37ab4.jpg
pix226556579_jpg_63b1ec35cc3e19e6b6a0a6f30252156e.jpg
pix239670043_jpg_eef8723f6099576046321ce6bb0e1278.jpg
Hicks COA 2015.jpg

That "authenticated" SS Champagne Rune helmet is also a ckl lot number 4877, which is clearly in the late no decal range as shown by Brian Ice's excellent lot number publication (which you need to buy if you have any interest in German helmets):
ckl 4877 ice.JPG
 
Last edited:
Champagne Rune comparison. ZAM revealed airbrushed CRSS from 2012 on the left, Hicks COA 2015 on M.42 ckl 4877 on the right. Note that they are not to scale, ckl airbrushed "decal" is a little larger pic. You can see indicia of stencil and airbrushing.
 

Attachments

  • Champagne Rune Compare.jpg
    Champagne Rune Compare.jpg
    199.9 KB · Views: 115
nirvana said:
The thread was closed at the suggestion of "Panzerheld," a guy who has been a member since October of last year (four months...), after he says he wishes he could shake Kelly's hand. What the serious (I have a small penis) is that?
Click to expand...


Exactly!

Pathetic.


And for some reason I don't want to be a friend of KH.......
 
Last edited:
What about the people that lost thousends of Euro's buying these hump jobs simply because the believed what was written on forums like waf, were his buddies controlled the flow of information? Aren't they good people too?
 
So, where does Hicks currently stand on CRSS lids and XRFacts's style lid testing?

Is anyone paying big bucks for a CRSS lid?
 
Peter U said:
Will a CRSS lid be voted "helmet of the year" on GHW this year?
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but in absentia.

I believe it "shameful" not to require an explanation of the statement that there are "original" CRSS and XRFacts authenticated them by showing "copper" in the "decal". At a minimum, one who publishes such things has that obligation as an author to explain or correct in light of what has been revealed. Just my opinions.
 
....is flooding the hobby with disinformation, CRSS helmet and bs XRF COA's not something to be a shamed of?

KH a good guy!
What is there definition of a good guy?
If it is someone that sells expensive fakes with a bs XRF COA to people that don't know any better is, I think my defenition of a good guy is something different and I don't care if he buys drinks at the bar because I know plenty of assholes who do that too but they are assholes nevertheless.
 
In my opinion, KH can be a good guy and still get fooled by the CRSS scam. However, my opinion is admitting you were fooled too is the proper thing to do - but, what kind of exposure does that bring (monetarily?). That is the underlying root issue I bet- you may never see the admission. Politicians do it all the time....same same. I spent substantial energy arguing about CRSS helmets and came to the realization that some people don't want to hear the truth or just plain want to keep living in their carefully constructed reality. In some place there is a group of collectors with CRSS helmets selling/trading them to each other over and over so they can enjoy their hobby. Don't ruin it for them by being hobby anarchist.
 
I didn’t read the ghw thread and may have missed it here, but is he going to stand on his garaintee and offer money back?
 
I refuse to see KH as a victim, let alone an innocent victim, the fact of the matter is that KH is cornered by CRSS helmets, he can't admit that he was wrong, if he does he ruins himself financially.
The only thing he can do is to disappear like Detlev Niemann did when his imfamous COA's started to backfire.
Why don't they start a new hobby, collecting fantasy 3R militaria with fancy COA's and I promise I will not get involved :thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top