Another big 'WhatThe...' is of course the ill fitting (and apparently ill-tempered) cat/dog/whatever. But that is just me
First of all gor5505 gets applause for being observant and not jumping to conclusions. Even if 'a base is a base is a base', certain versions *can* be a giveaway - take the 'typical' elaborate Volkstedt figure base, for example. It is of course only one point that a person should check but is always a good start, especially as the 'base' shown here is really peculiar ... I just don't want to know where that pilar ends at
D&b antiques: I always like to say that I am not an expert but like Ginni am merely an educated amateur. As much as I am honoured by the trust some people put in me I like it even more when folks actually 'get it themselves'. I saw this post and did not want to answer as I simply knew that somebody would get it right. The path to knowledge is best traveled in good company and that means people should share and learn and not rely only on a single person (simply to avoid errors 'cuz we're all human).
The company of Samson & Co is a typical example of how different points of view can distort history over time. While it during his time was pretty clear that he did not 'fake' items but merely created (as was demanded by his customers, btw!) his own 'interpretations' of certain items the common incompetence (as in 'not knowing' right up to 'not wanting to know' a.k.a. plain greed) of sellers today quickly turns Samson items into originals on one side or at least into 'evil fakes' on the other.
However one has to add that especially with companies that used hand-painted marks the normal variation of a given 'original' mark alone is reason enough to *always* closely inspect items using various approaches, depending on manufacturer in mind. In a given lot of 100 original old Meissen items you will probably only find a hand full that really show a mark as displayed in a given reference book. The best comparison in this matter is that folks should get a slip of paper and sign it five times a day over a period of a week - oh wonder, not every signature looks the same. Now imagine a decorator adding a mark to 20 items a day over a year ... and bingo, one finds that "divergence" actually is the norm.
Talking of: recent surveys claim that 2/3 of all citizens are more or less overweight. Blow me down but the last time I checked my math 2/3 actually was the norm (mathematical as in two-thirds majority or artistic as in the 'golden average', et al). Which means that 1/3 of all citizens is actually underweight but wants to dictate the norm? Statistics ...
