posted 06-12-2026 07:11 AM
I have purchased from ASM before, including in their latest auction, and the pieces you've bought are certainly interesting, particularly the Orion plug.As I often say, detail is everything. In my opinion, preserving the story behind an artefact is just as important as preserving the artefact itself.
Looking at these three pieces, they all have one thing in common: there is no signed COA (original or copy) from the original source. That's not unusual, but it does make provenance harder to establish and can affect value. In those situations, you're relying more heavily on the reputation and trustworthiness of the people who have handled and sold the piece - again, not unusual, but noteworthy.
The Artemis COA has a story attached, which is great. That's exactly the sort of information I like to see preserved. The issue is that it's unsigned and doesn't identify the source of the material. To me, that makes it more of a historical background document than a piece of supporting provenance. Ultimately, you're trusting that the seller has done the necessary background checks and is accurately representing what they were told. Personally, I'd ask whether a signed version from the original consignor exists, or at least whether there's any documentation identifying the source and how the story was verified. For the price that this sold for, I would expect at least that much. ASM is very busy with the recent auction, but I expect that they would share this with you willingly when time permits.
The GT-5 piece is the one that makes me a bit sad. The COA doesn't explain how the material was acquired and doesn't identify a source. It may simply be that the information has been lost over time, but without that history, you're left with a piece of space history that has very little documented backstory. In terms of provenance, it's in a similar position to the Artemis piece. Again, I would make the same request as the above from ASM.
The MA-8 piece is a little different. It does include a story and identifies the source, and while it isn't signed by the original source, it is signed by the consignor, Sandy Clarkson. In that case, the question is fairly simple: do you trust Sandy's knowledge and reputation? I've never dealt with Sandy personally, so I can't really comment one way or the other.
None of this is meant as criticism of ASM or Sandy. It's simply my view of the provenance questions surrounding the pieces. Unfortunately, one of the sad realities of collecting historical artefacts is that information does sometimes get lost over the years. Sometimes the artefact survives, but the paperwork and supporting history don't survive with it.
posted 06-11-2026 12:30 PM
advertisement