If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Anyone know anything about Leeds pen company?
I recently purchased a (made in USA) lever-filler that has LEEDS on the
clip. I emailed Bob Leeds (of Penopoly, I think) thinkingf that with his last name... He doesn't know anything about the history of the company, either. Can anyone help? Thanks, Gerald Martin |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Gerald Martin wrote:
I recently purchased a (made in USA) lever-filler that has LEEDS on the clip. I emailed Bob Leeds (of Penopoly, I think) thinkingf that with his last name... He doesn't know anything about the history of the company, either. Can anyone help? Rather low end cheaply made pens. Just a most tiny step above the total nonamies junkers IMHO. Sorry I don't know more but as I say so many times there were 100s of companies like that about which little is known. For the simple reason their quality don't attract the attention nor interest of the average collector. Unlike even Wearever, which if not known for quality as least cannot be ignored due to sheer quanity if nothing else. Frank |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Well the basic history can be summed up in a few lines:
During the war Parker and Sheaffer went over (mostly) to war production of things that needed their technology like bomb sights and the government gave out contracts to companies to make pens to give to soldiers with the parameter being that they be available for government purchase for a cent or two each. These companies who had virtually no history in pen production (like Wearever, Leeds, Stratford, Majestic, Ambassador etcetcetc) started production as a result of this, either to compete for those contracts or to compete on the consumer market with the companies which did get those contracts. (not sure I can see anyone ever wanting to write a book about how people produce junk when pushed although I did have a stab at it in my last book "Fountain Pens - Their History and Art" and did try to warn collectors to steer clear of such companies in my first book "Fountain Pens - A Collector's Guide") Licensed to Quill "Gerald Martin" wrote in message ... in article , at wrote on 8/1/03 8:07 PM: Gerald Martin wrote: I recently purchased a (made in USA) lever-filler that has LEEDS on the clip. I emailed Bob Leeds (of Penopoly, I think) thinkingf that with his last name... He doesn't know anything about the history of the company, either. Can anyone help? Rather low end cheaply made pens. Just a most tiny step above the total nonamies junkers IMHO. Sorry I don't know more but as I say so many times there were 100s of companies like that about which little is known. For the simple reason their quality don't attract the attention nor interest of the average collector. Unlike even Wearever, which if not known for quality as least cannot be ignored due to sheer quanity if nothing else. Frank Thanks, Frank. Is there a book g that might contain all these little company histories, per chance? Love YOUR book, btw. Gerald |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Licensed to Quill wrote:
Well the basic history can be summed up in a few lines: During the war Parker and Sheaffer went over (mostly) to war production of things that needed their technology like bomb sights and the government gave out contracts to companies to make pens to give to soldiers with the parameter being that they be available for government purchase for a cent or two each. These companies who had virtually no history in pen production (like Wearever, Leeds, Stratford, Majestic, Ambassador etcetcetc) started production as a result of this, either to compete for those contracts or to compete on the consumer market with the companies which did get those contracts. (not sure I can see anyone ever wanting to write a book about how people produce junk when pushed although I did have a stab at it in my last book "Fountain Pens - Their History and Art" and did try to warn collectors to steer clear of such companies in my first book "Fountain Pens - A Collector's Guide") Waaaaaaay wrong at least as regards to Wearever and Stratford. Both were around well before World War One in fact. Both heavily reduced production during WW2 as they switched to the war effort. Both had to produce many of their pens with 14kt gold nibs during the war due to the steel shortage. Both greatly increased the quality and price of their pens during the war as a result. Both were selling many pens in the $2.75 each and up area during the war, a far cry from the 25 and 50cent models they concentrated on during the depression and never did any of them ever sell pens for a cent or two. Thats silly. Stratford was the Saltz pen company. I can't say for certain what they made for the war effort but I do have documents from Saltz explaing why their pens were in short supply due to war production at their plant. Wrearever, among other things made valve stems and stem covers for them for use in Army Jeeps during the war and as I have explained before they were able to use some of their valve stem covers as blind caps on some of their WW2 button fillers. I have sold individual Wearever and Stratford pens for as much as $200. for a single one. Both companies made some OUTSTANDING high quality pens. Granted such pens are rare, but to say they only made pure junk is misleading and wrong. I'd refer you to the Lady Wearever article I had in the PCA Penant a couple years ago, and next issue will have an brief item on the 1968 Limited Edition Wearever Sterling Overlay. What I object to most is the statement that these two companies had no history of pen production. Wearever was easily the largest pen company on earth by the 1950s. They started about 1912. Saltz was smaller and possibly raveged by tragedy but was still in business in the late 1980's making ballpoints and may in fact still be around although I have not checked that. Wearever pens are still made although they now concentrate on advertisng pens. These two companies are among the longest surving pen companies of all times. I will gladly pay $100 each for every mint WW2 Stratford Maganetic pen you or anyone else can get me. Boxed set with pencil $200. I won't list all the rarer higher quality Wearevers because that would take too long, but one of their better ones was a 51 clone that had a life guarantee, sold for $5.00 and had a very heavy high quality gold FILLED cap. During the War even Parker expressed fear of Wearever's semi-upscale movment in pens in an article in Forbe's magazine about the pen industry. (I have the article.) The basic history of both companies has not been written and both are perhaps far more complex and interesting than Parker, Sheaffer or Waterman. With Saltz it ranges from a Jewish family coming here from Germany around 1900, to moving its business back to Germany around 1930 when the depression hurt them so badly here, trying to work with the changes there in their German homeland thru the 30s and (or so many have said, without documentation I am aware of yet) eventually vanishing in the Holocuast, and meanwhile the US end of operations trying to keep up their part of the pen business and sucessfully outlasting those that could not. Wearever, under the Kahn family survived successfully until the family head David passed on and the remaing family members sold the business to Dixon about 15 years ago which continues the name in a, granted, greatly reduced manner, but at least the name survives to this day. To call these companies pure junk to avoid is unfair and shows an elitist attitude that only expensive pens are good pens. Sure both companies did make tons of low end junk. But they knew their market and were fully capable of making pens that could WRITE as well and be as dependable as any pen made at any price when they choose to make a better pen. Which they both did on at least some occasions. Plus they showed ingenious design in some cases never before or since seen in pens, such as the Magnetic that remains one of the most unique pens ever made. End of rant. Other than to repeat that old saying, "One man's junk is another's man's treasure." Frank |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Licensed to Quill wrote:
And I still insist that they produced virtually no quality pens. I have yet to see a quality Wearever in 25 years of collecting and the same goes for Stratford. I accept that Stratford was the low end of Salz (end meaning end of production of pens rather than / as well as end of the market) and I certainly agree that Salz had an interesting history (which had nothing to do with producing quality pens) but I still maintain that you would be hard pushed to find any quality Stratford pens. I am not being intransigent on this: Show me a .jpg of any wearever or ambassador pen which in ANY way rivals the big five (Sheaffer Parker Watermans, Swan, or Montblanc depending where you are) in quality that demonstrates I am wrong. I again refere you to the Penant article on the Wearever Lady Fair series, which showed a two page color spread of their pens that are identical in quality to the Lady Sheaffer's of the same era. In fact even I cannot tell the two brands apart until I remove the cap and see the nib. Like Sheaffer Wearever used a smooth stainless steel nib for those pens. Sheaffer did make some of theirs with 14kt nibs, but only the upper end of the line. All Wearevers over 1.95 used gold FILLED trim that is more imprevious to wear than any pen made at any price today using cheap plated trim. In fact the gold filled trim of Wearvers seems to stand up every bit as good as Sheaffer, and FAR better than Waterman or Parker of the 40s. Of course not one out of 20 Wearever pens of that era have the gold filled trim, because probably less than 10% of their production was in the pens in the 1.95 to $5.00 range. The rest was in the dollar or even less range. As I said the next Penant may have pics of the sterling Wearever LE of 1968. Its really not super quality but does show they could do a sterling overlay if they wanted to. I have copies of many of the Consumer reports you mention and they also come down rather hard on Parker, Waterman and Sheaffer of the era and picked Venus as the best fountain pen back then in some of their reports. As for Stratfords I assume you have not seen the Magnetic which is a button filler with gold filled trim and a beautiful large well made (and heavy thick gold) 14kt nib with "Stratford" in a nice script logo. To borrow Parker's term "Like a pen from another planet," being streamlined like a Buck Rogers Space Ship. I'm not arguing Wearever or Stratford made plenty of high quality pens. They did not. They were sub Esterbrook on average. A working man's pens that WORKED. They knew their market. Its like asking if today's 19 cent Bic is a quality pen. You would probably say it is not. But it a highly reliable pen, in fact it does write as good or better than the average $500 ballpoint which just holds some other brand refill that may not write as well. I would maintain the quality of a 19cent Bic is extremely high when it comes to writing. The same goes for a Wearever that sold for a buck way back when. I am usually amazed how very well a properly restored dollar Wearever can write. Let's agree to disagree becaause I know I will never change your mind and you cannot change mine when it comes to what each of us defines as quality vs price, then or now. Frank |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Frank
I disagree with you strongly on what you say in your last paragraph and accept all of the rest: I will have my mind changed when I see something that changes it AND my current project is a new book featuring those kind of pens. There IS a relationship between quality and price but it isn't an absolute one: Pier used to introduce people to fountain pens by opening up a booth in Cambridge Mass and selling vintage pens which write well and look quite nice to students who had never seen a fountain pen before. He thereby introduced lots of people to collecting / using vintage pens (later) which were of higher quality. Very few people indeed start collecting by retail-buying and then starting to write with a Coronet or a No:7 with a blue nib or a MontBlanc safety. JR wrote in message ... Licensed to Quill wrote: And I still insist that they produced virtually no quality pens. I have yet to see a quality Wearever in 25 years of collecting and the same goes for Stratford. I accept that Stratford was the low end of Salz (end meaning end of production of pens rather than / as well as end of the market) and I certainly agree that Salz had an interesting history (which had nothing to do with producing quality pens) but I still maintain that you would be hard pushed to find any quality Stratford pens. I am not being intransigent on this: Show me a .jpg of any wearever or ambassador pen which in ANY way rivals the big five (Sheaffer Parker Watermans, Swan, or Montblanc depending where you are) in quality that demonstrates I am wrong. I again refere you to the Penant article on the Wearever Lady Fair series, which showed a two page color spread of their pens that are identical in quality to the Lady Sheaffer's of the same era. In fact even I cannot tell the two brands apart until I remove the cap and see the nib. Like Sheaffer Wearever used a smooth stainless steel nib for those pens. Sheaffer did make some of theirs with 14kt nibs, but only the upper end of the line. All Wearevers over 1.95 used gold FILLED trim that is more imprevious to wear than any pen made at any price today using cheap plated trim. In fact the gold filled trim of Wearvers seems to stand up every bit as good as Sheaffer, and FAR better than Waterman or Parker of the 40s. Of course not one out of 20 Wearever pens of that era have the gold filled trim, because probably less than 10% of their production was in the pens in the 1.95 to $5.00 range. The rest was in the dollar or even less range. As I said the next Penant may have pics of the sterling Wearever LE of 1968. Its really not super quality but does show they could do a sterling overlay if they wanted to. I have copies of many of the Consumer reports you mention and they also come down rather hard on Parker, Waterman and Sheaffer of the era and picked Venus as the best fountain pen back then in some of their reports. As for Stratfords I assume you have not seen the Magnetic which is a button filler with gold filled trim and a beautiful large well made (and heavy thick gold) 14kt nib with "Stratford" in a nice script logo. To borrow Parker's term "Like a pen from another planet," being streamlined like a Buck Rogers Space Ship. I'm not arguing Wearever or Stratford made plenty of high quality pens. They did not. They were sub Esterbrook on average. A working man's pens that WORKED. They knew their market. Its like asking if today's 19 cent Bic is a quality pen. You would probably say it is not. But it a highly reliable pen, in fact it does write as good or better than the average $500 ballpoint which just holds some other brand refill that may not write as well. I would maintain the quality of a 19cent Bic is extremely high when it comes to writing. The same goes for a Wearever that sold for a buck way back when. I am usually amazed how very well a properly restored dollar Wearever can write. Let's agree to disagree becaause I know I will never change your mind and you cannot change mine when it comes to what each of us defines as quality vs price, then or now. Frank |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
lucrative | Mathew Hadley | Juke Boxes | 1 | October 10th 04 04:22 PM |
Latest on Rowe International | The G Man | Juke Boxes | 4 | November 4th 03 12:28 AM |
Sad Day in Grand Rapids, Michgan | The G Man | Juke Boxes | 6 | September 6th 03 01:12 AM |
Has anyone heard or used this company? | Mr.Vampy | Autographs | 2 | August 21st 03 02:38 AM |