posted 12-17-2000 02:21 PM               

I still find it amazing that any of us are able to buy these artifacts that have been so directly a part of space history. That being said, I recommend that interested collectors consider acquiring those few documented and certified flown artifacts while they are available? - Get them while you can, as they say! Joe Davis’ recent article even hit home for me when he calculated that all of the flown lunar artifacts from all missions, except for space suits and rocks, would likely fit into a small suitcase. Not only are the flown artifacts available, they are reasonably affordable. I believe that the supply and the ability to acquire these things will be short-lived. The window of opportunity to acquire good flown artifacts has spanned the last few years and maybe will last for a few more.

I personally remember wavering on the acquisition of a flown Pete Conrad item before his death and then scrambling to see if I could still get it, even for an inflated amount, immediately after his death. Nine of the twelve Moonwalkers are still living, which makes me think that we also take that for granted, which could also be keeping interest lower than it would be and prices down. I believe that the market can easily absorb the number of certified Conrad items. In fact, it can absorb all of the astronauts certified artifacts. The market is growing and the supply is finite. I personally believe that the blue-chip pieces of space memorabilia will be complete, relevant, certified flown artifacts, from the astronauts. Certification from the recovery teams and scientists that were responsible for disassembly and research are also credible sources. Complete artifacts would be considered just that – complete - like a complete medallion, not one that was melted with thousands of ounces on unflown material, a complete storage locker like the Apollo 13 piece offered at the September 1999 Christies East auction, not just a hinge from one, a complete PPK, not just a strap from one, a complete Checklist book, not just a page from one.

Pieces of the spacecraft make it possible for the mission to occur, so they are no less important. However, I have learned over the years that the organization and display of a collection is a key to their desirability. A nut and bolt are not terrifically exciting for most to see, but I contend that a well-assembled collection of these small pieces and parts would show very impressively, and would likely become very valuable and desirable if assembled with a good eye.

The reality is we are in the right place at the right time. We have incredible opportunities to acquire important artifacts now that I believe we will look back upon and laugh in amazement at what we were able to get. I can envision the same conversations that I hear today about other collectible markets that have already matured – I showed have bought that or I can’t believe that I didn’t get that when I could have.

I have a saying that I often repeat when I consider buying something that is a little over my head – “My only regrets are for the things I didn’t buy.”

First Day Covers (launch and recovery), autographs, pictures, etc. will all have a part in the future success of collecting space memorabilia. In order to continue to attract enthusiasts, a hobby has to have something for everyone, in every price category. A new collector is unlikely to go right for a high-priced flown artifact before he or she has done some research on the hobby. Most collectors mature and their collections mature and evolve with experience. This hobby will be no different.

Yes, flown artifacts will absolutely be the most desirable. Yes, flown artifacts certified by the astronauts even more so. All this means though is the hobby is evolving and the parameters are being defined. I see the blue-chip list of flown artifacts becoming clearer and clearer as the months go by along with predictable price associations – meaning how they price relative to other flown items, not the prices themselves. The prices are volatile as not enough of the great items have yet come to market. The prices have certainly continued higher as more and more interested collectors join us. This is positive. Although my preference and passion is for artifacts that were flown aboard the missions, there is room for all collectors of space and we need them all to continue the growth of our hobby. So give the same encouragement that you would give to a child beginning a collection of the State quarters to all space collectors. After all, we all share something in common, the love of collecting space, but everyone has their own budget and everyone places a different amount of importance on it.

Thank you for allowing me to share my views –

posted 12-17-2000 02:47 PM               

------------------
Happy trails,
Wayne Edelman

posted 12-17-2000 05:53 PM            

Well written thought. I agree with you totally. Any item that comes with documentation from an astronaut is a golden piece of History. We may all be collectors but I think of us as keepers of History. To pass down the stories and artifacts to the generations ahead of us.

posted 12-17-2000 08:43 PM               

One thing that is oft neglected is provenance, the chain of custodianship documentation and the artifacts history. Once that chain is broken that information can never be recreated in retrospect and after 30 years the vast majority of flown artifcacts DO NOT have that cast iron provenance. I was starled when I first decided to buy a flown flag that I couldnt find one properly inscribed, and set about buying one direct from an astronaut so that I could have that unbroken chain of custodianship and "LOA" written on the artifact itself. I have very rarely seen this before I started it. Yes, some flags have a rather generalised inscription which can be interpreted several ways, but to have a clear and unambiguous inscription really elevates the artifact. In my opinion in future years similar items with none versus excellent inscriptions will vary hugely in value, and remember its not just a value thing, its documenting history for the future generations. Already established authenticty items such as the Robbins which I am aware you are expert on do not need this, but for hardware and personal astronaut keepsakes the provenance is where the desireability and value lie.

Cheers
Joe

posted 12-17-2000 09:37 PM               

As a general practice, the memorabilia carried on-board was manifested for launch and not inventoried upon retrieval. As items such as flags were not individually serialized, it is ultimately impossible (even by an astronaut) to guarantee that it was among the items which flew.

Of course, the assumption is made that no one would tamper with the astronauts' possessions, but the recovery technicians were the same who secretly stowed dollars bills aboard the spacecraft as well as the same who hoarded kapton foil and parachute material.

For that matter, the flags in particular may have never been reunited with the astronauts post-flight, as they were probably shipped to some NASA office to be glued onto official certificates and distributed to VIPs and employees.

I know this is nitpicky, but as long as the astronauts and NASA insist on keeping the contents of their PPKs confidential we may never know exactly what flew and what did not.

posted 12-17-2000 10:01 PM            

Thanks Howard for your work in uncovering these jewels.

posted 12-18-2000 04:12 AM               

I certainly place more emphasis and liklihood of an intact ppk being flown and returned to the astronaut than the word of some unknown "official" or dubious yellow tag auction listing.

Robert, the logic you apply can be applied to EVERYTHING. How do we know the Robbins medals are the ones that flew ? How do we know that the A11 Colubia capsule is the capsule that actually flew ? Also please dont confuse the flags carried by Nasa as part of the CM Flag Protocol kit and those flown personaly by the astronauts. There is a big difference here. Dont you trust these astronaut chappies ? Do you think the recovery teams were stealing the astronauts possessions ?

As with all things the actual realities are almost an irrelevance compared to the PERCEIVED realities. If the concensus is that something flew then it did. A good case in point are these LB7 artifacts. There appears to be actually no proof they flew or came off the capsule yet almost everyone is accepting their authenticity THUS they did fly in terms of perception.

Anyway, how do you KNOW they actually went to the moon ? wasnt it all staged on a film set in Nevada ? PROVE it wasnt.

posted 12-18-2000 07:12 AM               

You are correct that the contents of the PPKs were manifested for launch (primarily justified due to weight concerns) but it is also my understanding that they were not inventoried upon retrieval. In other words, what went up may not always have been the same to come down.

Regardless, with the contents of the PPKs confidential, limited to the astronauts' eyes only, we are left to assume what an astronaut says is flown is flown.

Personally, I find no problem with that BUT if one were to really want rock solid proof of provenance than you would need to have a copy of the PPK manifest to prove that what is said to have flown actually flew (and in the case of items like flags you are ultimately left to the astronauts' word as they were not serialized [unlike the Robbins Medallions, which can be verified based on their serial numbers.)

So you are right, Joe. It does boil down to perceived provenance. Which of course, sort of negates the need for any real proof or your "chain of custodianship" as you write in a previous reply. For better or worse, if an astronaut says an item has flown, it is as good as flown.

posted 12-18-2000 12:07 PM               

Howard, Joe, and Robert have all raised some very interesting points on the matter of collecting and I'd like to add the following.

Space memorabilia may fall roughly into three categories: 1)flown items, 2) ground-based official space-related material, and 3)commemorative items, souvenirs, toys, and everything else. This division, while perhaps simplifying the plethora of collectibles out there, does I believe roughly place the valuable and sought after items in some form of heirarchical order. That being said, in absence of a biblical price guide for space memorabilia the true value of anything really depends on whatever the market will bear. THIS IS A VERY GOOD THING.

The joy of many hobbies (and I think of coins, stamps, comics, and hockey cards just off the top of my head) have been seriously degraded by their respective dealer communities who have standardized the values on every coin, or card, or comic issue. Quite honestly, price guides (I call them bibles because they seem to become the word of God once they're published)can be the death of a hobby, and in my opinion, should be avoided at all costs (no pun intended).

This being said, I think the space collecting community has so far very responsibly accepted rough price values for various items. for example an Aldrin autograph is more valuable than a Bean, and of course the exact value of the autograph may depend on SP vs. ISP, or NASA litho vs. Kodak B&W glossy. A Bean SP on a NASA litho (say a really good shot of him) may well be worth more to a collector than an Aldrin scribbled on a 3x5" card with no attributes. The same is applied to flown items. I've bought a piece of LB7 for $x today, but let's face it. There's only a finite number to be sold, and five years from now I could probably if I ever chose to, sell mine at a profit. The value should depend on its desirability, size, and of course the object. I'm willing to bet (because we see it already in the posts here) that an LB7 bolt will be more valuable than an LB7 washer. Why? Who knows? It's collector preference. Sometimes all of this may be considered confusing but I think it really adds to the flavour of the hobby. Why?

Look at the debate over flown items. I think it's silly to suggest an LB7 conspiracy that the nuts and bolts we're acquiring actually came out of a 1990 Subaru four-door instead of the Liberty Bell. At the same time while it's good to be careful in purchasing flown items it's paranoid to assume that everything actually came out of granny's couch rather than the Apollo CM. Like any hobby the collector has to be respnsible, do his/her homework, share his/her knowledge with others (kudos to Robert for this site), choose carefully, and create a forum for study and evaluation. Obviously provenance is important (as Joe has shown with his remarkable lunar map) to a flown item but so is legacy.

For example, I keep a binder that is essentially a catalog of my collection. It kind of looks like an auction catalog, but it's personalized. I have an entry for every item in my collection, using a serial number system starting with best to most common. I write a description of the item, it's significance, a little history on the item, its use, importance, the crew, and mission. I'm also careful to include when, where, how, from whom, and for how much I acquired the item (essentially accession data). This not only helps me remember what I paid for things if I ever decide to part with something, but it also helps me answer questions from the prospective buyer. I can say things like, "I bought this one from lunar legacies on this date" rather than something like "uh...yeah, it's an original John Young....trust me, I got it from some guy's estate...". Add a picture of the item, and you've got yourself a rather impressive little book to dazzle family and friends when you can't drag out the whole collection for show and tell. Also, when away from home, it's an awesome reference to avoid buying a double of that patch you thought you didn't have and something to measure the cost of an Apollo 11 handrail you discovered at a local flea market.

These issues are not particular to space memorabilia collecting. I also collect military medals and this hobby goes through much of the same. General values exist but market value will depend on the rarity and desirability of the item. There's issues of provenance and legacy, and authenticity issues (fakes, re-named medals, etc..) in certain highly desirable items. That being said the collecting community and responsible dealers police themselves, and I think it should be the same with this hobby. Expose fakes and unscrupulous dealers, and help each other to build impressive collections.

How do we know what's been flown and what hasn't? Aside from the obvious flags, patches, gear, coins, etc.. only time and research will unlock the mysteries of the PPK. If we don't know the manifest of a PPK then something claimed as such coming up for sale will have to have some provenance or legacy if i'm going to consider acquiring it. And that should be a general rule for everyone.

Sorry to go on like this, I thought it would be shorter. Please I'd like comments from anyone on anything written here. Share your views, it's our hobby.

posted 12-18-2000 05:17 PM               

------------------
Happy trails,
Wayne Edelman

posted 12-27-2000 09:46 PM               

Here are some of my thoughts on certification.

I hear Joe Davies’ point that if an artifact is certified by an astronaut as flown then that is the end of discussion and we should accept it as flown. I also understand his point that we can’t be skeptical of everything that was purported to have flown. Where does that get us? I can accept the standard that with astronaut certification the item is authentic but that doesn’t automatically make it desirable to me.

I want to introduce another view into this certification discussion.

As the artifacts from the space race continue to become commoditized it seems reasonable to respect an item that comes with bona fide certification from an astronaut. However, speaking as a collector, I find more comfort in the artifacts that not only have the bona fide certification, but also are separately certified, like the Robbins Medallions and the Apollo 11, 15 and 16 covers. When I am enjoying my collection and I hold one of the Robbins Medallions in my hand, I marvel at the fact that it was along side of our heroes right in the midst of history. I am feeling certain that it was really there. I don’t get that same feeling with many of the generic items like the flown flags for instance. As they have changed hands over the years, it seems so easy for one of those generic little flags to have been switched. The medallions are numbered. The Apollo 11 covers are signed, quarantined and hand numbered. The Apollo 15 covers have the notarized letters with serial numbers. If an astronaut says that it was flown and he provides certification, it is hard to argue unless there is documented evidence to the contrary. For instance, in my quest to complete a Robbins Medallion collection, I was offered a purportedly flown Apollo 15 silver medallion from one of the astronauts. I declined to purchase it because its serial number had been documented as not flown. The astronaut asked how I could know that this one was not flown. I advised him which of them were and which were not, explaining that the flown medallions displayed the designer’s initials and that the landing site was misspelled. He acknowledged that he never noticed this and at the time he received the medallions he believed that they all were flown. The point of this explanation is to illustrate that a number of astronauts really didn’t know what they had flown. I don’t believe they would purposely mislead anyone and I think they just assume what was returned to them was flown. It seems unlikely that we will ever get to see those personal PPK manifests, and I suppose even if we did, they would not prove which flags were in the PPKs.

This experience has made me very cautious about what I want in my collection. There is no way to prove that a generic item like a flag was truly flown or not. As long as it is certified as such, I suppose it was. I guess it all comes down to comfort and if the buyer is satisfied then that is all that matters. And there are many other items like checklists that fall in-between. Again, my comfort is with quantifiable artifacts like The Robbins Medallions, the Apollo 11 covers, the Apollo 15 covers and Duke’s Apollo 16 covers. I am skeptical by nature, so the fact that these items are serial numbered gives me greater comfort than a flag or any other generic item that could possibly have been substituted for the one actual flown. Please accept my comments in the spirit of productive debate.

posted 12-28-2000 12:01 AM               

Again a very interesting and insightful commentary. You've highlighted one of the points that concerns all space memorabilia collectors, and that is the desire for the "warm and fuzzy" when buting a collectible or flown item. Needless to say there will never be a fool proof system to ensure the validity of all items offered as flown and the final check has to be the collector him/herself. Caveat Emptor.

I think it's unrealistic to suggest that flown items should be given more certification than they already are, afterall unless specifically stated, much of the PPKs or official government kits flown on Shuttles are for personal and organizational distribution, not for resale or injection into the collector market. So I don't think NASA or anyone else is about to itemize and serialize every flown flag, patch, or souvenir.

Ultimately, older items such as Apollo flags may very well change hands several times, making it all the more important for collectors to attach providence and legacy to their artifacts. We can never nullify forgery, however educated study and open exchange of information will certainly reduce the opportunity for mischief. I wrote in an earlier post that we must police ourselves as no one else will or should.

Most golden age period items have very little certification because let's face it, alot of the stuff wasn't yet considered collectible. One can only imagine what was thrown in the garbage as "worthless". This hobby is still largely in it's infancy and I think we're lucky to be collecting at this time. Twenty years from now, good luck at finding Lions Bros. patches for under a hundred bucks or even some of the astronaut autographs that we can have easily today.

From a personal point of view, I tend to save myself a lot of headaches over authenticity by being very selective of what kind of flown items I collect. NASA coins (and flown metal medallions) for example are probably a safe bet, as are museum issued flown parts. While your example of the coin and astronaut is good, for the most part I think it safe to take their word for flown items from their personal PPKs. Also, personally I'm not into buying chunks of cord or bits of shuttle for huge prices just because it supposedly came off a spacecraft, and personally I don't understand the fascination with owning a flown liner bag (now a bag used to collect moon rocks or one of Harrison Schmidt's tools, that could entice me..) Again the collector needs to beware.

Certainly the values of items will swing up and down, but the advantage of space memorabilia is that unlike many hobbies where millions of an item may have been produced, most space collectibles were made in very finite amounts. And while the number of collectors will grow, NASA or whoever will never produce more of certain items. There was only one Liberty Bell 7, and maybe a few thousand bits put out for sale. Eventually the collectors will outnumber the items available, and value of these artifacts will increase. The same can be said for Lions Bros. paches, Robbins Medallions, and others.

Certification is certainly one way to give space memorabilia value but its really the collectors who provide value. Otherwise it would just be junk.

Cheers,
Andrew Godefroy
Canada

posted 12-28-2000 05:53 AM               

As a hardware and equipment enthusiast, the "warm and fuzzy" feeling cited so accurately in Andrew's reply arises when I am presented with the corresponding NASA and/or contractor ID tags, scrap paperwork and if possible, data packets. While I admit that this papework can be forged, it is more difficult to do accurately and convincingly than say an someone certifying an item flown with their signature.

Thank you Howard for raising this important topic. As a result of your post, I have taken an action overdue in its coming. When I started collectSPACE I was more forgiving when it came to listing items in my collection (here on the site) which do not include the proper documentation to certify their status. As of now, they have been removed.

posted 12-28-2000 09:50 AM               

I've seen too many shuttle to Mir flags now, so I wont bid on those anymore. Maybe others; rarer ones? I don't have any Robbins or moon covers; and probably never will get the chance to!

I always look for the ID tags; last month, an ebayer had a wing leading edge for sale; but the reserve was prob way up there.

All in all... I must be more careful. Your sorty about the astronaut not knowing what he had flown sounds a bit fishy to me. Sorry to say it but *just* because of who they are doesn't mean we should always believe them. They're people too. On the contrary, you guys are all right, there's no way to prove authenticity, but we shouldn't think its all fake. Judge for yourself! I will to from now on and always, no matter what we're talking about.

But let keep it up! Don't let modern civilization get you down Good luck everyone!

BTW Robert, I don't remember clearly, though I've looked at your collection a few times; what did you remove? It seems mostly STS stuff. But which items?

------------------
-Ben

"'Time was invented to keep everything from happening at the same time.
Space was invented so that everything doesen't happen to you.' -Anonymous"

posted 12-28-2000 12:15 PM               

I think it is safe to assume that any flag mounted (a.k.a. glued) to an official NASA certificate (and it should be obvious which were created by the agency and which were created privately) can be considered authentic.

The flags I was referring to (and I believe others) were the loose flags carried by the astronauts in their PPKs. The NASA flags in comparison were probably packed away in some corner of the CM and were never touched by the crew.

To address Ben's question, the following items were removed:

• A8 kapton tape
  
• A11 kapton tape
  
• A13 parachute cord fragment
  
• ASTP heatshield fragments
  
• STS-82 thermal barrier
  
• Soyuz fragments
  
• Vostok 2 parachute cord

posted 12-28-2000 08:33 PM               

I also see what flags; by "loose", do you mean i.e. those sold at Novaspace?

posted 12-28-2000 09:30 PM               

I think carefully documented, and hand marked items by the astronaut who sold/passed on them can be safely relied upon as genuine. These item's documentation should state where they were flown, and that they had been continuously in the procession of the astronaut until sold. The item itself (such as a flag) should be hand notated by the astronaut as to where it has been flown and when.

Our friend Joe Davies was one of the early leaders in making sure that these items were documented in just that way. Prior to Joe documentation was eratic and sketchy at best. And while someone may say "Well the item wasn't in the astronauts pocession the entire flight, launch to landing and beyond", you can safely assume that the item is as purported.

Some things you have to take on trust, and when it comes to the integrity of our astronauts you need not worry. Let me illustrate this point.

At the UACC show in Chicago last August I carried an item for a friend to be signed. It was an aspirin flown on Apollo 7 with documentation from the "Rocketman" Ricky Lanos (spelling?), a good source. I asked Walt Cunningham to write on the LOA the aspirin was attached to that it had "flown on Apollo 7". Cunningham refused saying "How do I know it was in my spacecraft?!" I think this illustrates well just how careful these astronauts are about certifying any item as flown.

Now a point about Robbins medallions. I thought that when they said "flown" they ALWAYS meant that that particular medallion had flown on the mission. As pointed out in Howards great book on the subject, that many (A13 & A15) were melted down & recast containing the flown metal. Well for those missions that spoils it for me as I want the actual item to be flown NOT just the metal. This may be a fine point to some but it matters to me. It's like flying a spool of thread then weaving flags saying they're flown...the flag was not flown, just the material.

I still love Robbins medallions but for some missions (A13 & 15) they hold no interest for me. In fact I recently traded my very much loved A8 Robbins for a great A8 flown & crew signed on the NASA card American flag. A good trade for both parties.

------------------
Happy trails,
Wayne Edelman

posted 12-28-2000 09:59 PM               

I was a bit surprised to see that de-listing some of your flown items, like the kapton tape, from your flown items listing. Isn't it possible that you just might be throwing out the baby with the bath water?

I recall a running dialog back in March & April of this year under Flown Hardware where this very subject was discussed. I had raised the question about the Miner/Reid, Underwood, Slezak, & Williamson COA's that typically come with that sort of item. Michael Orenstein from Superior Galleries provided quite a bit of background on the last three gentlemen, their positions in NASA, and their access to flown items. Your own site here at CollectSpace has information about Ossie Reid and his role during the Apollo years and his access to flown materials as well.

Towards the end of that discussion, even one of the biggest flown item skeptics, Joe Davies, said:

"I agree 100% about the smaller items such as kapton and pieces of parachute, etc, the NASA recovery engineer is the best authority. My references were to the larger, more substantial or historic artifacts."

I think all collectors need to be careful when confronted with a claim that an item has been flown, but I'd contend that a COA from a person who had legitimate access to items like kapton tape or parachute material is something more than worthless. Granted it would be better if everything had been serialized and cataloged like the Robbins Medals were, but that isn't reality, and rejecting everything that doesn't have that level of traceability is unfairly condemming at lot of good, legitimate flown material. I don't think that serves the hobby any more than those people that forge signatures and try to sell materials that are obviously not what they're claimed to be.

posted 12-29-2000 09:30 AM               

I guess I'd have to agree that if an original LOA or COA doesn't come with the item, it's one more reason to question its authenticity.

The items in my collection are a hatch plug & heatshield fragment mounted in lucite like the LB7 items, engraved with the flight number, and an original Miner LOA for each. Also, a piece of kapton on an original Miner LOA. I've been in personal contact with Ricky Lanclos, who actually purchased the entire Reid & Miner collections initially, then helped prepare them for sale along with LOA's by Mr. Miner (Ossie Reid had already died by then). In addition, I had personally contacted Mr. Miner about his role in all of this and how he had aquired part of Ossie's original collection in the first place. I even reviewed an Apollo Postretrieval Procedures Manual used by the Rockwell personnel aboard the recovery ship to see how & when Ossie Reid would have collected the samples he did, and how he would have been able to retain possession of them. I came away from this exercise with a good feeling that everything was legitimate, and there were no inconsistancies or nagging doubts that would raise a red caution flag.

On the other hand, I also have a piece of kapton on one of those cards you mentioned with a reproduced & size-reduced COA, and I'd have to agree that I've got my doubts about that one as well. It boils down to doing your homework to track down the item's history since the flight, and dealing with reputable people like Ricky.

posted 12-29-2000 10:08 AM               

Your post nicely summarized my own feelings on this issue.

A few of the items I removed from the site were indeed aquired from Ricky. My decision to delete his items from my site was not meant to cast doubt on him or his memorabilia and I hope no one would read such into my actions.

posted 12-29-2000 08:18 PM               

The Apollo 15 Robbins Medallions #1-#127 are absolutely 100% flown. The restruck medallions #128-#304 were NEVER flown. #128-#304 were restruck to correct the mispelling but are not a mixture of flown and unflown metals. They are simply NOT flown.

In is not known whether the Apollo 13 Robbins Medallions are struck from just the original flown medallions, but they may be.

We will never know, however, I would estimate that they are at the very least struck from 90% of the original flown metal. This is certainly much more desirable than the MFA medallions or the Franklin medallions that contain a micro amount of flown material.

I disagree with mzieg about desirability of certain items. I would gladly have a coin that Columbus had with him aboard his voyage to America, especially if it was struck with the highlights of his voyage, like the dates, ship names, etc. Keep in mind that The Robbins Medallions are not just coins. They are a time capsule of information about the mission. They depict the mission emblem on the obverse and the crew names, launch, landed and return dates and sometime the landing sites and space craft names of the reverse.

I also believe that you are not fully understanding the value of a historic artifact compared to a more common one. You are correct when you say that in forty years an artifact that has simply flown in Earth orbit will be very common and probably considered a throw away compared to how revered it was during the first years of the space race. In 50 years it may also be commplace to have Moon rocks in a collection, but the artifacts like the Robbins Medallions were aboard the actual missions. They will be one of the few complete artifacts that anyone will be able to view that can be said to have actually been there. There is romance and desirability in this fact. Look at the STS-8 Flown covers from the early '80s. They were flown aboard the Shuttle, certified and retailed for $15.00 each. Almost 20 years later you can get all you want for about $20.00 each. No collector interest. This is what you are referring to, but I truly doubt that any of the commemorative items I refer to like the medallions and covers will meet that same fate. Look at the Apollo 15 covers! Their second life came about because of the STS-8 covers and they just continue to become more popular ($15000 or so at last auction). It isn't because they flew in orbit, its because of the "sizzle" of their history that attracts collector interest. I submit that even if we begin routine Moon landings like the regularly scheduled STS missions of today, the appeal of the Apollo missions, especaily Apollo 11, will always create excitement, therefore demand for artifacts related to it.

posted 12-29-2000 09:15 PM               

I agree with your comment that an A13 is more desirable than a MFA A8, A11, etc. but is apples & oranges. A few atoms of flown metal is in the MFA's while the majority of the material in the A13's is flown. But like I mentioned in my first comment it's not as desirable a medallion flown, but not recast. I want to know the actual object NOT just it's material was flown. It's like my Conrad "tie-tac" only 50 were made (provided by Grumman) and ALL were flown to the lunar surface. Few other surface artifacts are as rare and these are well documented in "Chariots for Apollo". Plus mine came with a LOA from the man who flew them in his LM PPK, Pete Conrad.

Don't anyone misunderstand me though, Robbins medallions are one of the most desirable of flown items.

Here's a question for you Howard. Which if any of the Robbins medallions flew to the lunar surface? The gold ones? Others? None? Just curious.

------------------
Happy trails,
Wayne Edelman

posted 12-29-2000 10:57 PM               

I completely disagree that as space flight becomes more routine that the value of certain flown items will significantly decrease. That would be like saying there's no value in owning a piece of the Hindenburg because we have plenty of blimps we could rip parts off of today.

In defence of the STS-8 covers, they are valuable because of what they represent historically. Sure there's plenty around now. I'd challenge anyone to say that the survival rate of these artifacts exceeds 70% in thirty years, and 50% in a hundred years. By then any "antique" space shuttle artifact will be a collectible.

Part of the challenge of all this is to judge your own level as a collector. When I started this hobby I was satisfied to own a piece of parachute cord or a swath of liner bag. I'm beyond that point now to seeking more unique items, but it was those bits that got me started. If we want our hobby to survive and flourish we need to encourage younger or less wealthy collectors to become invloved, and part of that is going to be making available less expensive yet interesting artifacts available. Personally, I think the STS-8 covers are an excellent inexpensive starting piece for a space collector.

Well, there my two cents...again. Who's next?

Cheers,
Andrew.

posted 12-30-2000 05:04 AM               

Kids are seen eating Apple Jacks when a parent, guardian, older kids, etc. enter the room and look puzzled at the cereal eating kids. Then the question comes:

"Why do you eat Apple Jacks if they don't taste like Apples?"

To which the kids always reply:

"We eat what we like!"

As collectors, no matter how many strange looks we may receive, we collect what we like.

I do not think it is wise of us to try to rank memorabilia by their forecasted future value (or for that matter, current market value). As collectors we should know that collecting for financial gain can be a very unrewarding experience. The market for memorabilia is too volatile and anyway, this is supposed to be a hobby, not a part time job.

posted 12-30-2000 09:23 AM               

I don't belittle anyone collecting anything within this hobby and I agree that collecting the STS-8 covers is a great beginning. My point with those covers was that after 20 years their desirability within the hobby is flat, their rarity ranking is common and because of these issues, their value has barely changed. Values will happen as an afterthought and will be driven by what the hobby determines to be most desirable. The STS-8 covers may actually get a new life as it is realized that because of them, the Apollo 15 crew sued to get their confiscated covers returned. They now become a part of the story.

Collectors like a challenge! If everything were easily obtained many of us would find other interests. It is a fact of collecting. The hunt is very much part of the obsession. The search, the acquisition, the trade, the sale, the hope of finding the Hope Diamond in a garage sale. If I offend the purist collectors, I apologize, but I believe that the interest and passion is certainly what drives someone to concentrate on a particular subject, but the other variables are just as important to continue their interest.

posted 12-30-2000 12:22 PM               

Unlike other areas of collecting, where the items of desire are often created as collectibles or at the very least, manufactured and marketed commercially, memorabilia collectors, and in particular space memorabilia collectors, often deal with items never intended for public consumption. Therefore trying to rank, let alone catalogue, what space memorabilia collectors seek and own can be a daunting task.

Yes, there are items within our hobby that were created and marketed commercially as a collectible. A few have been mentioned in this thread, including the Robbins medallions and STS-8 covers. These items are more easily catalogued and appraised as they were created with that in mind. They are essentially limited edition souvenirs of mankind's first attempts at space exploration.

It becomes more difficult however when you start trying to compare these collectibles with artifacts such as flown equipment, spacesuit components, and flight test hardware. As these items were created to serve specific, functional purposes, ranking their desirability as a collectible can be a challenge.

Therefore, my advice would be to divide these two areas of our hobby before attempting to establish a ranking system. Space collectibles and space artifacts should be considered separately.

posted 12-30-2000 04:59 PM               

A previous comment by Howard in another column stated how wonderful it would be to have a complete locker, or complete checklist, and that the medallions are in themselves complete. Unfornutately, as addressed in his own book, it would be virtually impossible to have a complete set, for one must be satisfied with limiting the "collection" to the silver medallions, as the gold ones have more than likely been passed on to either wives, children or places unknown. There lies the rub, I've collected autographs for over 30 years and am quite proud of my collection - from an Act of Congress establishing Veterans benefits for widows, orphans and the wounded of the Revolutionary War signed by Jefferson, to letters of Dickens, Tchaikovsky, Washington, and many others. But each field - be it music, or presidents or whatever becomes very pricey to make a "complete" colletion unless you focus your specialty - presidential signatures is easy enough - but if you wish to have them as Presidents you must mortgage the house for William Henry Harrison. So will your holy grail quest for the Robbins Medallions - unless you take out those gold ones.

I acquired a one page checklist from the Lunar Module "Eagle" signed by Aldrin and notated that it was on the lunar surface. Would I like to have the "complete" LM checklist - who wouldn't - it's just not going to happen - only Armstrong had one - and his is in his museum and Aldrin - who has been selectively selling off the pages. It gives me incredible satisfaction (an understatement) to know that this page was actually used on the flight and made it to the lunar surface during this most historic flight, and that he actually wrote the gimbal markings on it and notated the time just prior to the landing. To ME - the page is enough - it is complete - it is a snapshot of time on the LM of specific events that took place.

I enjoy my medallions - as you must yours. Ron loves his actual pices of space hardware, Wayne his Tie Pin of Conrad's, and who hasn't drooled in his lap after seeing Joe Davies lunar map on his web page. We each collect what we do because simply it is what we enjoy - my holy grail will be different than many others - if I'm in the majority does it make it better - I think not. Let it rest - let us all enjoy what we have, what we continue to pursue and for whatever reason - and finally and think it has been done so many times, and so well on this web page - to share with each other the joy we feel by finding some other comrade in collecting and enjoying space - the final frontier. I've become a bag of wind which is what I tried to avoid - and which is one or the reasons I hadn't registered for so long. For now - that's my opinion and I stick to it!

posted 12-30-2000 05:50 PM               

The little silver communion set used by Col. Aldrin after landing on the Moon. I believe this item is currently in possession of his church, but you never know what the future may hold. Example: The church might wish to build a new chapel.

An item I've never seen on the market is one of the little LM's pried off Grumman tie bars and given to Armstrong to carry to the lunar surface at the last moment. 100 total flew, 50 returned to Grumman and 50 stayed with Armstrong. Have any of you seen one of these? They, like my A12 tie tac, have ties to Grumman making them, for me anyway, highly prized.

What items OTHER than ones in museums would y'all value highly?

------------------
Happy trails,
Wayne Edelman

posted 12-30-2000 08:58 PM               

Rob brought up a good point, one shouldn't compare items made specifically for the collector market with actual artifacts. The two simply don't compare. That being said, the only scale of value I think that could really be applied is rarity. Let's face it if there's only one of an item (e.g. Armstrong's helmet he wore on the moon) it'll be much more sought after than say one of a hundred flown flags. I think that's a given. Added to this is what the collector's consider desirable. There may be only one free-dried twinkie ever eaten on Apollo but is anyone going to really pay thousands for the empty wrapper when you could spend that money on other items? It's all perspective.

Other hobbies do suffer similar dillemmas, medal collecting is one. Victoria Crosses literally auction for hundreds of thousands compared to more common campaign medals, but even very common medals can be valuable if they're unique in some way. Added to this is the militaria that surrounds it. Does one go after a Crimean medal with bar Balaklava or does one bid on a lance used in the charge of the light Brigade? Frankly I'd be satisfied with either.

Space collectibles come in many shapes and sizes. Collectorsa will decide what everything is worth to them, and as so many have already stated, each collector has his or her own best find.

Good hunting gentlemen,
Andrew G.

posted 12-31-2000 01:04 PM               

Howard Weinberger started out this discussion about certification and authentication, and that is an area where more work could be done. The greatest asset to this hobby is an educated "collectorate" - that is, well informed collectors who can make wise choices about the kind of space collectibles they have interest in. Books like Russ Stills' "Relics of the Space Race" and articles in the Resources section of this web site, like the ones written by Howard about the Robbins medallions, or Don Boggs' article on NASA publications, are what can really benefit this hobby now and in the future. There is a real danger that some important background information will be lost forever to the collector community as knowlegeable people pass on, so now is the time to capture all that we can, while we can. Unfortunately there are a limited number of people who posses that kind of information, and not all have been as inclined to take the time to document what they know. Maybe they've never given it a thought, but wouldn't mind doing so if they saw the need. My hat goes off to those that have contributed in the past, and my appeal goes out to those who might feel compelled to contribute in the future.