I was picking through my jar of spare nibs some days ago when I came upon a Slimfold nib, an oblique stub. I thought the spares reserve was no place for such a glorious nib and I decided to see if I could pick up a cheap but attractive Slimfold, not a difficult thing to do as there is usually no great demand for them.
Paging through eBay’s list of Slimfolds I came upon one with good gold plating. I put in a bid and got it for a good price. It arrived a day or two later, a nice pen in its original box. Except that it wasn’t a Slimfold, it was a Duofold Junior. I accept that this error was partly my own fault. There wasn’t a good nib picture and I should have asked the seller what the number was on the nib, but I assumed that he knew what he was doing and could tell the difference between a Slimfold and a baseball bat. How wrong I was!
When I had finished growling and snarling I decided to keep the pen. It’s a nice example of a pen I didn’t really want but after a wash and brush up and some write-testing I’m sure someone will want it. As I still need a Slimfold I returned to eBay to have a look at their offerings. The first Slimfold listed was actually a Parker 45!
I suppose compulsory retraining of eBay pen sellers isn’t likely go down well and the ignorance of sellers can actually work to the buyer’s favour on the odd occasion, when a Platinum is listed as a Platignum for instance.
Thankfully I have been offered a Slimfold by someone who knows his ps and qs so my immediate problem is solved, for which I’m grateful. I have learned a lesson however, one that I had previously learned long ago but had become a little careless about.
Goodwriterspens's Blog 
I think we’re flogging a dead horse to think that all sellers on the bay will one day become savvy enough about f.ps. to know what it is they’re actually selling – most either don’t care or are simply not willing to take the time to be accurate. Some of course are reliable and very worthy souls, but human nature is at play here, and we must accept the inevitable.
Glad to hear that you did eventually get what you wanted Deborah – I understand that the expression ps and qs is one of those antique sayings that owes it’s origins to those guys from the printing trade known as compositors – the two letters looking very similar.
Agree, ignorance can play into our hands occasionally – but I’ve yet to buy a Platinum being touted as a Platignum – but I live in hope:-)
That’s a lovely oblique stub nib by the way – the Slimfold is categorized as a No. 5. I notice that Maxima prices seem to get every more expensive apparently.
My current gripe with the bay is the withdrawal – yesterday – of a ‘Golden Swan’ – someone obviously conned the seller into doing a deal outside the auction, and the pen was withdrawn – so don’t know what was paid. But it’s a rare pen and judging from the seller’s comments they were completely unaware of the pens rarity, so it’s not unreasonable to believe that it was sold for less that what it was worth.
Yes, in the end I got a very nice Slimfold set. The nib is exceptional.
p.s. my reason for sounding hacked off, is that I had a low bid on the Swan, and intended to give all and sundry a good run for their money in the final three seconds:-)
Very sorry to hear that. It must have been most frustrating. I promise not to do it again. (Only joking!)
When I check the model of pen, I often use Ebay as a source (other than Parker’s where I use Parker Collector) and so I could perpetuate the error. On the other hand I also read what is written on the pen as my primary source. Was the imprint on Junior good and readable? In which case the error was just plain stupid.have
I’m afraid I will never find a Platinum as a Platignum as I never look at the latter – I already 100s of them that come in parcels with other pens.
If you ever need a cheap example of a fairly common pen I’m bound to have a spare or 3
Like many Parkers, the barrel imprint was a little worn. Not so worn he couldn’t have read it with a little effort… Yeah, to be honest, I’ve never got a Platinum for a Platignum but you never know. One of these days.
I shall keep your offer in mind, Simon. Thank you.
to be fair, there is some allowance for getting it wrong with these Newhaven squeezable sac Duofolds ……..
the Junior – i.e. the version with the No. 10 nib – can be the cause of some error in description …. ……….
The model is known as a Junior, but I’ve examples where the barrel imprint is shown as Junior Duofold, and even Parker Duofold – which should correctly be used for the much larger pen.
Then there is the Senior Duofold (with No. 35 nib) – some examples of which are simply called Duofold, and which share the name with the older AF button fill pen.
all good fun though – I think;-)
the open nib 17s from 1960/62 (Super or ordinary) can sometimes be found cheaply as the sellers aren’t aware of their scarcity.
Also the last version of the Victory looks to me to be identical to the Junior.
apologies – forgot something else I meant to add …………….
think I’m correct in also saying that somewhere in the late ’60s or early ’70s, Newhaven dropped barrel imprints on this ‘Duofold’ range, thereafter showing only the word PARKER and MADE IN ENGLAND around the cap opening, which sported a thinner cap ring on the very edge of the plastic.
This re-styling also brought in the P45 feathers, I think, making life a tad confusing.
If I have this wrong please do shout:-)
As if it wasn’t confusing enough already!
I agree with you Deborah – I can’t see any difference whatsoever between the Junior and the last Victory – I wonder which fetches the better price?
So – standardization is the ruination of old fashioned good looks.
I don’t think either of them makes what they are worth! Good pens but little demand for either.
Deb, you mentioned seeing a Slimfold that was actually a 45. I’m a little hesitant to raise this, but are you aware that there was a “New Slimfold” which was identical to the 45, except that it had a screw-cap? I did see one on eBay recently. I also own two of them, and they’re not a great pen.
You could be right!
thanks for that – very interesting – being rater thick I’d overlooked that variation, and I definitely don’t have one – perhaps uncommon, since I have enough 45s to sink the Bismark, but don’t recall a screw-on cap.
Being a collector I now won’t sleep until I have an example – going out this morning;-) Being a semi-hooded nib, presumably there won’t be any hint of flex.