Joseph Rocca 1837
While browsing the endless sea of EBay violins I happened upon this.
Label: Joseph Antonius Rocca fecit Taurini anno Domini 1837
Neck grafting: I can hardly tell the pictures are not that good.
Corners: seem typical of a Rocca?
Varnish: what are those stains? Good gracious
Edit: Apparently it was sold for $1,200 but the state of the varnish is what keeps me baffled. Could this be a Rocca? The seller claims it comes from an estate.
I think it is unlikely that anyone would sell a genuine Giuseppe Rocca for that amount. Some "Joe" Rocca violins have brought over $200,000 AT AUCTION for 20 years. The most recent auction price was over $400,000.
These are interesting cases. Obviously the fiddle is not a Rocca, it's just a phony label. What makes these things interesting is that these sellers don't even bother to monetize the label by asking, say, 5000 or 7500 dollars or euros for the instrument. That would still make it a steal for a genuine Rocca and maybe entice a buyer who thinks it's his lucky day. Instead they ask what a lot of dealers would ask for such an instrument without any label (or just the generic Strad copy label). The Rocca label is just a way to get more attention.
Except that the violin wasn't worth $100 and it sold for $1200, that's called monetizing a fake label.
It was also clearly listed as an "Italian Violin" (it isn't), and the buyer can force a return because the item is not authentic or as described.
Hard to prove that it isn't - not only gorgeous fiddles were made in Italy...
I agree, it would be hard to dispute it isn’t and no doubt to deal with an angry seller.
Actually it would be an easy case to win with ebay, they might ask for a letter from a dealership, but usually ebay is pretty understanding about fraud.
You mean, one wouldn't have to prove that it isn't, but the seller would have to prove that it is what he claims it to be?
All you would need is an established shop to say it was German. Which I assume it is. Ebay usually sides with the buyer in disputes like this.
This discussion has been archived and is no longer accepting responses.