[lilith]

Originally Posted by hmwe46

My care card has chinese/japanese (?) on the third tri-fold.

However my round hang tags all have two languages and always the color.

I recently saw two hang tags on eBay without the color listed. They both claimed to be 01-05 bags, I have no idea if that's authentic or not. Great question!

Can any of the more experienced gals chime in??

Also, lilith, can you post pics of your bag??

Hi, here come the pics...The bag was purchased on eBay in July 2005 and i think it is a fake. It was sold as east-west Paddy. Yes, i was asking about the trifold, not the round tag!

[Ms Julee]

I just bought a used Chloe Paddington bag and the seller absolutely swore it was authentic. She said she got it off the Neiman website. I inspected it and figured everything I knew about authentication (so far) told me it was. THEN, once I paid her and she left, I did more research to be sure and discovered the information about the lock keyhole. Mine is upside-down!

I emailed her and she still insists it is authentic. She offered to send me the tag via mail to prove it. She said she couldn't find it before she brought me the purse, but she looked again later and has found it.

I guess my question is, is it at all possible some keyholes were upside-down? This is a very dark brown bag she got for Christmas last year, so it's an 2005 bag. The tag inside reads 02-05-53.

Thanks.
Julee

[Roxane]

lilith, Ms Julee, this is the wrong thread to post authentication requests.

[Ms Julee]

I'm sorry. I wasn't asking for authentication as much as I was asking if the current tip regarding the lock keyhole could possibly be wrong.

Thanks for responding.

[Roxane]

Originally Posted by Ms Julee

I was asking if the current tip regarding the lock keyhole could possibly be wrong

No, all authentic Paddys have the keyhole right-side-up only. Sorry that you bought a fake.

[chicky]

Something else i've noticed:

On fake paddies, the square brassware that holds the handle to the bag via the tear drop, is always more square than it should be.

It seems to be a uniform trait, so i'm putting it up here.

Comparison pics:
jaune - genuine, with curvier brassware
black - fake, with square, angular brassware

[lilith]

Originally Posted by chicky

Something else i've noticed:

On fake paddies, the square brassware that holds the handle to the bag via the tear drop, is always more square than it should be.

It seems to be a uniform trait, so i'm putting it up here.

Comparison pics:
jaune - genuine, with curvier brassware
black - fake, with square, angular brassware

great, thank you

[chicky]

And another...with regard to Brass hardware bags.

On the Chloe nameplate that holds the padlock (see pic) the fakes seem to quite often have a 'brushed' effect, as though they've been rubbed down with a wire brush, to attempt to recreate that vintage look.
Failing miserably, of course.

On a genuine bag, this plate should have the same oxidised appearance as the padlock.

[Roxane]

Originally Posted by chicky

And another...with regard to Brass hardware bags.

On the Chloe nameplate that holds the padlock (see pic) the fakes seem to quite often have a 'brushed' effect, as though they've been rubbed down with a wire brush, to attempt to recreate that vintage look.
Failing miserably, of course.

On a genuine bag, this plate should have the same oxidised appearance as the padlock.

The brushed look is actually not any attempt. It is an inherent result of the cold rolling process that produces the metal sheet from which the name plate is cut. Those are abrasive marks from the rollers. (Sorry, I am a college professor in metallurgy and friction/wear happens to be my research area.)

The reason why the roll marks are not so obvious in genuine Chloes is because of the thick oxidized layer that covers the base metal. However, I have seen authentic Chloe name-plates where you can see the marks faintly through the oxidized layer when the light is bright and shining at an angle. How deep the roll marks would vary from batch to batch of metal – these depend on many things, e.g. variations in brass composition thereby affecting metal hardness, how worn the rollers are, the roller material, roller pressure, etc. Furthermore, the oxidized layer can also vary in thickness even if the production process is the same, due to variations in material compositions.

It is possible that when the roll marks are deeper or oxidized layer is thinner, even the layer cannot totally cover the appearance of fine lines (like how make-up becomes increasingly less effective when one ages!!!)

[chicky]

Originally Posted by Roxane

The brushed look is actually not any attempt. It is an inherent result of the cold rolling process that produces the metal sheet from which the name plate is cut. Those are abrasive marks from the rollers. (Sorry, I am a college professor in metallurgy and friction/wear happens to be my research area.)

The reason why the roll marks are not so obvious in genuine Chloes is because of the thick oxidized layer that covers the base metal. However, I have seen authentic Chloe name-plates where you can see the marks faintly through the oxidized layer when the light is bright and shining at an angle. How deep the roll marks would vary from batch to batch of metal – these depend on many things, e.g. variations in brass composition thereby affecting metal hardness, how worn the rollers are, the roller material, roller pressure, etc. Furthermore, the oxidized layer can also vary in thickness even if the production process is the same, due to variations in material compositions.

It is possible that when the roll marks are deeper or oxidized layer is thinner, even the layer cannot totally cover the appearance of fine lines (like how make-up becomes increasingly less effective when one ages!!!)

I appreciate what you are saying, as you obviously know what you are talking about, and thank you for your input.

However, what i was trying to say is that genuine bags do not have this marking in an *obvious* fashion, like the fakes do.

As you said yourself, this marking is underneath the oxidised layer, therefore it shouldn't really be noticeable. Certainly on most bags, if not all?

On both of my authentic bags, no 'scratch' roller markings are visible at all. I think i'd be quite disappointed if there were! The surface is smooth - in both bright light and normal daylight.

On the fakes i've studied, it is very obvious.
Including the fake Chloe paddy bowler that i own.

[joyfishyu]

Originally Posted by asl_bebes

Hi guys! I know that all the paddy owners will be able to pick out the real one ... but I wanted to show pics to help those planning to buy their first paddy on eBay and may have never seen a real one IRL. Here's some pics to show what people should be looking for ... hope you guys have fun! Let me know which pics are the fake and which are the authentic one?

I should say the one on the right (from the viewer's angle) is auth. I can see the padlock is more of a matte look and the edge of the leather seam is not white. Also the dust bag is more like a velour feel, but the one on the left is just low-quality cotton bag.

Correct me if I am wrong. It is fun to use lordguinny's tips for a little practise. Thanks again！

[joyfishyu]

Originally Posted by hmwe46

Here is the plate off a really ugly BlueFly fake:

Blue Fly sells fakes too?!!

[hmwe46]

LOTS of them ^^^ check the files

[sdario15]

Fantastic information! Am now debating the color of my paddy and if it is better to go w/ tan or nutmeg!!

[tranquility85]

One of the earlier tips regarding authenticating Chloe paddingtons was that the zipper should easily zip. However, I find that mine is very tough! My bag passes all the other inspections, but it is just this one issue that is worrying me.

Has anyone else had this problem with their authentic bags?