That's why I love vintage bags and antique furniture and other stuff. It seems that there was once a commitment by both company and employees to produce quality products to be proud of. We've lost that in the quest for fast turnover of cash and a throw-away society. I can't help but think and hope that as resources shrink we'll be forced to readopt the old values.
AUTHENTICATE this COACH
- Thread starter greenpixie
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
- Status
re: THE ANCHOR
Ive been meaning to post about the anchor that appears on some older Coach hardware. I have a pretty good idea why its there. Heres my theory:
There was a CT manufacturing company that long held a trademark on that anchor mark. In 1998, that company was absorbed into a much larger conglomerate that no longer manufactures hardware (but instead imports it.) I imagine that at one time, before that 1998 date, Coach was purchasing some of its hardware from them.
The company started out in the early 1800s making wire products. As ownership changed and more firms were acquired, they branched out into all sorts of other production. In 1848, when incorporated as North & Judd, they were known for equestrian hardware and bits and spurs, as well as buckles and trouser clips. (Just as an aside: both the Norths and the Judds were ancestors on my fathers side of the family.)
The Civil War brought the firm great prosperity, as they began producing more military hardware and the like for the war effort. Over the years that followed, they added all sorts of other products, too, mostly metal, much of it brass, and all made in CT.
In the 1950s, the company acquired a firm called Wilcox-Crittenden that made marine hardware (e.g. clips and swivels used on sails for boats, and things like that.)
You might note how similar the swivel clips used on Coach bags are to the halyard clips and swivel-snaplinks found on the rigging on sailboats. I dont think this is a coincidence.
My theory is that Coach bought hardware from them at some point in the years after the Wilcox-Crittenden acquisition. The hardware made by North & Judd and their successors carried that anchor mark up until the sale in 1998. Since Coach did not manufacture its own hardware, they had to purchase it from firms that did. If Coach purchased some of its hardware from them, it only makes sense that the anchor would appear on the hardware on certain Coach bags.
As I said, it's a theory, but I think I'm on the right track here.
Ive been meaning to post about the anchor that appears on some older Coach hardware. I have a pretty good idea why its there. Heres my theory:
There was a CT manufacturing company that long held a trademark on that anchor mark. In 1998, that company was absorbed into a much larger conglomerate that no longer manufactures hardware (but instead imports it.) I imagine that at one time, before that 1998 date, Coach was purchasing some of its hardware from them.
The company started out in the early 1800s making wire products. As ownership changed and more firms were acquired, they branched out into all sorts of other production. In 1848, when incorporated as North & Judd, they were known for equestrian hardware and bits and spurs, as well as buckles and trouser clips. (Just as an aside: both the Norths and the Judds were ancestors on my fathers side of the family.)
The Civil War brought the firm great prosperity, as they began producing more military hardware and the like for the war effort. Over the years that followed, they added all sorts of other products, too, mostly metal, much of it brass, and all made in CT.
In the 1950s, the company acquired a firm called Wilcox-Crittenden that made marine hardware (e.g. clips and swivels used on sails for boats, and things like that.)
You might note how similar the swivel clips used on Coach bags are to the halyard clips and swivel-snaplinks found on the rigging on sailboats. I dont think this is a coincidence.
My theory is that Coach bought hardware from them at some point in the years after the Wilcox-Crittenden acquisition. The hardware made by North & Judd and their successors carried that anchor mark up until the sale in 1998. Since Coach did not manufacture its own hardware, they had to purchase it from firms that did. If Coach purchased some of its hardware from them, it only makes sense that the anchor would appear on the hardware on certain Coach bags.
As I said, it's a theory, but I think I'm on the right track here.
Very interesting. Thanks for the information. It makes sense that the anchor was a trademark of the hardware manufacturer rather than Coach since it isn't a symbol that is associated with Coach. I suspect that Coach only bought hardware from them for a short period of time because we have only seen anchors on a few styles, probably from the early 80s.
And I have a wallet that I purchased from FOS that has the snap head logo sideways. I probably never would have noticed if I didn't hang out here, but now I can totally envision someone questioning the authenticity because of it.
And happy New Year to all, especially our lovely authenticators from whom I have learned so much!
I've also been researching that anchor stamp and found the information about the company you refer to.
I found other anchor marks on brass items that were much older, and since that company has been around since the Civil War it makes sense.
Here are two morel links to check out:
http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/for...d-dotanchor-stamped-leather-liner-chinstraps/
http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/antique-brass-belt-buckle-big-size-142371875
I've discovered 2 more anchors in my collection...on lobster-claws. On the IMPERFECT Convertible Clutch (NYC) a few posts ago. And on a Small Swinger (USA). I would never think to look on the inside of those clasps!
HAPPY NEW YEAR to EVERYONE!
What great research work from you two detectives! It just adds to the allure of the brand. I now really want a Coach bag with an anchor! I'm hoping my NY basic bag will have them but it's yet to arrive from Tunisia.
I hardly ever yell at people, I just remind them that the phone personnel at Coach don't always have all the details.
Transposed prefix digits are common especially in bags from Costa Rica and Italy. We never worry about those.
And we've seen some apparently genuine bags with incorrect style numbers. Plant employees sometimes made mistakes, and in the late 1990s especially Coach's Quality Control department seems to have been on permanent vacation. So we should never declare that a bag is fake just because of a serial number mistake. There should be other mistakes too that can't be explained away by sloppy QC or careless plant workers. But something like a plant code mistake is harder to justify than a wrong style number, since once the plant code was set on the stamping mechanism, it never changed as long as it stayed at the same plant.
I'll accept that the color was available, with only 2 or 3 catalogs from that year I'm not going to have a record of every color. None of my 1999 catalogs show any dark red shades except for the Bridle line and I'm pretty sure that the Currant color available on the Bridles was exclusive to that line only.
But be cautious with that 1997 date for nickel (silver) hardware, there are a LOT of "But"s there. Originally it was available in 1996 with a few Business and Travel items, then in 1997 ONLY with a few Soho items and colors. It was used on the Neo line in 1998 and as an optional hardware color with selected leather colors, starting with Black and Grey in early1998 and some other colors added through the year, as well as on the entire Hudson line. In 1999 more colors were added, like Camel and Mahogany, but it was only very limited availability in 1997. (All this is based on Coach's catalog pages, BTW).
So it was introduced gradually, and availability depended on the year, style and color of the bag.
Thank you Hyacinth, my last post on this I swear. The seller states it was purchased as a gift by her husband and she no longer has proof of authenticity- understandable, and has offered me to return the bag. Your thoughts please, should I return it due to ambiguity?
I'm like you. I scour used furniture and antique malls looking for furniture made from solid wood frames, not cardboard, particle board, or legs that screw on, to re-upholster. If a piece of furniture is put together with an Allen key, I'm not interested. I have quite a few new Coach purses but I just can't get into them the way I can with the vintage ones. Plus did anyone ever worry about colour transfer on older bags the way they do now. Happy New Year, everyone!
If you feel the details and quality are the same as the others you own and are just planning on using it yourself, I'd keep it. If it's eventually going to be re-sold, a serial number discrepancy might cause problems.
You have a big advantage over me since I can't see or feel the bag. With the limited availability or "online only" styles like that, exceptions were made, and maybe more mistakes were allowed to slip through. It doesn't seem like the kind of style that would be faked. If you're comfortable with it except for that one problem, I'd say keep it. That's what I'd do.
More opinions are welcome.
Happy New Year everyone! Could I make use of your authentication expertise once again? I am interested in purchasing this bag to restore. Can you tell me if it is authentic?
No measurements were provided in the online listing, but here is a link to the store. The item has been reserved for me and can be found here:
https://www.etsy.com/ca/listing/174215230/vintage-coach-cross-body-classic-black
No measurements were provided in the online listing, but here is a link to the store. The item has been reserved for me and can be found here:
https://www.etsy.com/ca/listing/174215230/vintage-coach-cross-body-classic-black
Attachments
I have one more question about a bag I asked you guys to authenticate a few days ago. The consensus was that it is authentic, but when I google the bag style number, a totally different looking purse shows up. I know the bag I had posted previously is probably old, and maybe the bag style has just evolved into something totally different, but i just wanted to make sure. If anything else, this is a learning opportunity for me.
When I google coach bag style "9826" this type of bag shows up:
This is what the bag I am looking at looks like (I posted about it a few days ago), and it is also "9826".
When I google coach bag style "9826" this type of bag shows up:
This is what the bag I am looking at looks like (I posted about it a few days ago), and it is also "9826".
If it were me, I wouldn't take a chance on it. I've never seen an authentic bag with a month code error that egregious. I think the shape of the flap might be off a little as well, and possibly the location of the turnlock.
You can't google a style number for a bag that was made before 1994. Your bag has a unique serial number - the digits don't mean anything. If it had a style number, there would be a month code, which is always a letter, in the first digit. Your bag looks like an authentic compartment bag.
- Status