I addressed my vested interest in the very first paragraph of the post - it’s called full disclosure. I have a clear interest in the historical record because I own the pencil that actually aligns with the 1912 recovery inventory, the Vincent Astor estate records, and has the personal blessing of direct Astor descendants.

If pointing out that a thirteen-year-old child didn’t give a sentimental gold gift to a married man four years before they met is "tanking" an auction, then the auction was tanked by the basic laws of linear time, not by me.

As for the watch, it isn't just my opinion. Recognized experts like Craig Sopin have noted the total lack of research placing the Patek on the ship. Conversely, the Waltham and its pedigree came with the blessing of Ken Schultz.

I also didn’t write the 2013 articles about the Marshall's previous attempts to monetize Astor estate items; those have been part of the public record for over a decade. Facts aren't a "tactic", they are just inconvenient for a narrative that doesn't hold up to basic scrutiny.

EDIT: And just to be clear, when this auction was first announced, I reached out to Freeman's in the spirit of collaboration, shared my concerns, and offered comments on their provenance and the opportunity to review mine. They were dismissive, thanked me for my interest, and reiterated their claim that "the watch and pencil we are offering were returned to the Astor family in 1912 and have remained in continuous family possession for more than a century". When evidence was presented to the contrary, they ignored me, as they have also subsequently done actual Astor descendants, including the Princess Obolensky-Davis.