Buy the gun, not the story.

Unless there is a factory letter confirming this shipped to Annie Oakley or documents such as Annie Oakley’s will or other documentation stating she used this particular gun with its specific serial number, such as a contemporary newspaper article, it’s nothing more than a story.

It might have belonged to Annie but Her using it is doubtful. She basically retired in 1913, the gun being made in 1915, however she did some volunteer and display work after her retirement. Plus the other factor is She owned a lot of guns and unless it was something special, engraved or presentation, to Me it would be just another used ’92 s.r.c., needing an explanation for the provenance. I had a fella trying to sell Me a Colt rifle one time that had more paperwork it than the I.R.S. has, but no proof of Cody owning it. It was a good story though. I find there is a lot of claims of various dignitaries owning various guns and even some forgeries, so unless there is definitive proof of ownership I’d pass, at least to paying that kind of a premium.

Chuck said
Hopefully whoever buys it makes out OK.  

If he swallows all that claptrap, he’s got way more money than brains, & I’m not concerned about his welfare.

There is an old, well used adage about if you can’t cite facts, try to baffle with bull sh**.  Usually, the more extraneous “facts” in a description (and RIA is pretty good at this at times) and the longer the write up, the less it applies.  My take.  Tim

steve004 said
Sad to say, but some people believe that if something was sold through a major auction house, that factor alone is authenticating provenance.  And whoever buys this piece may use that, “provenance” to sell it at a favorable price.  It won’t be sold to anyone here of course.  Of the guys out there actively buying, “collectible” guns, some are quite knowledgeable and savvy and some are not.  Some of the guys who are not knowledgeable or savvy do have money – and aren’t afraid to spend it.  I see it happen all the time.  It reminds me of the rifles pictured in Madis’ books.  Many people believe that if a rifle was pictured in one of his books, it is completely correct.  And … many of the rifles pictured in his books were correct.    

That’s a good point Steve. This also holds true at times with a gun that was owned by a well known collector. Sometimes I see large, high rent collections advertised in one of the major auction houses with guns that are hard to believe they even exist. Just because Billy Bob the millionaire collector owned it doesn’t always mean its an original and legit gun.

steve004 said
Some of the guys who are not knowledgeable or savvy do have money – and aren’t afraid to spend it.  I see it happen all the time.    

The main way Big Spenders quickly acquire impressive collections is by the simple expedient of communicating their desires to the major dealers.  They don’t have to say anything so crude as “money is no object”–the dealers understand that implicitly!  I’ve known of two amazing collections built that way–collections you might assume would have taken a lifetime, or two, to amass–because I know very well one of the dealers who did the buying for Mr. Big.