Here's the real problem and how those paragraphs are misrepresented- the Balabushka(s) that I referred to in the paragraphs that joe brought up were being sold as Balabushka cues...and then later in the description you found out that the cue was refinished...such that it didn't seem like a big deal. I found that to be unethical in simply calling the cues Balabushkas with a later note of them being refinished. I still have the same stance on this subject.
In the case of this (Rambow) cue, I have no control over how the seller listed the cue on ebay. I didn't even know he was selling it until I started to get emails about it. joe would like very much for me to prove a double standard here, but he fails to recognize that I am not the one selling it or promoting it. If he were to look at the appraisal, in the cue title section at the very top of the document I delivered, it reads : "Fully Restored Herman Rambow Custom Cue c.1962." See, the cue is exactly that- a cue that was once an original Rambow that was fully restored by someone else. I did not list it as a Rambow with a later footnote that oh...by the way...it has been completely restored but it's no big deal...which is not uncommon on Joe's web site- here's an example:
http://classiccues.com/cues/balabushka.htm
This one should read either "restored or fully restored Balabushka" not "Balabushka" with the very bottom note stating that the cue was refinished and rewrapped by Tascarella, especially considering the fact that this refinish and rewrap are the most important points to any serious collector.
Joe will have you believe that refinishing a cue is no big deal and it is what the public wants. Well, when was the last time anyone heard of a Balabushka being "on sale" like the one that is reduced in price above? If that cue was original, there would be no problem getting the asking price plus more for that cue. However, it sits there with the restoration of that cue as a small footnote rather than in the title of the cue where it belongs...in the same place I titled this Rambow as a "Fully Restored Herman Rambow Custom Cue c.1962." However, cue collectors (even newer ones) are learning what is important...hence the discount.
As far as more details about this Fully Restored Rambow Cue that is on Ebay, I looked up my notes and found the following:
Shafts- not original to the cue. Hercek can't remember if he made them or not. I don't think he did. I think they were made by someone else but I could not find out who made them.
Provenance- interestingly, someone name Mark Kulungian (isn't that Joe's partner?) brokered the deal of this cue from the second owner to the third owner and wrote a long letter (which Skip, the owner of the cue has) pitching the cue stick. Oh, by the way, here is my note on that letter:
"Finally, the third document is a letter from the cue dealer who brokered the sale between Lehmann and Ruehl. This letter should be kept simply for completeness, but is not important. There are several discrepancies in this letter including a claim that Lehmann “won the World Snooker Championships in back-to-back years…” which is not true (to the best of my research). The letter also states that the cue was made for Herbert Lehmann by Rambow, when in fact it was made for Lehmann’s uncle (per Lehmann’s letter) eight years prior to becoming the property of Herbert Lehmann. Rambow cues that belonged to important players are worth more money..." Now if Rambow cues that belonged to important players are worth more (which they are), isn't it interesting that this one, according to Mark's letter, was made for a guy who won the World Snooker Championship back to back...when in fact I can't find any record of that achievement by that player AND that player himself admits the cue was made for his uncle 8 years prior?
Finally, regarding the valuation of the cue. Typically when a cue is restored like this one, the value naturally goes down. However, when a cue maker like Hercek does a complete restoration (with restoration photos), it will probably add value to the cue ultimately (maybe not today) because of Joel's reputation as a master cue maker...not because the cue has been made near mint again. There will be collectors who will pay more for Joel's esoteric work including such restorations than they would for original Rambows, just because it is Joel's work, As a restored Rambow, I wouldn't pay a penny for it...but because the work was done by Joel, I am considering making a modest bid to add it to my Hercek collection.
Deno Andrews
Maybe if it came with a 9-page letter from you, it would be OK. What a joke.
)