John Styler has a correction.
When I said “cheap” I was referring to the price at the time, not today’s value or quality, less anyone jumps down my throat (The real novice is back. I can’t believe with the thousands of cheap items like shades ….)

And, from Rande Bly.
I feel the signature on the shade is authentic. Carder’s post production signatures were sometimes placed in uncustomary or unusual places. I have even seen it on the exterior upper body of a late production 1928-1933 Rouge Flambe piece. The shade would have been hard to sign in that manner on the other end and I feel the placement was a good choice. His post production signatures regressed in neatness as he aged. A crisp signature of his indicated an earlier signing. Forging Carder’s signature on glass is more difficult than just simply inscribing Steuben which was done by the hand of many factory workers and varied considerably. I took a criminology class in hand writing analysis and there is actually a lot of factors that can be used to authenticate a signature. As I understand it Thomas Dimitroff may have some knowledge in this Steuben sub-field. My appraisal…..add $100 to it’s value.

From my understanding of the personality of Mr. Carder if you were to ask him to place a post production signature on a piece of glass he would never refuse you just because your piece of glass was only worth a hundred dollars. Value of the piece of glass had nothing to do with the privilege. Now perhaps clarification of the way the we use the term post production should be reviewed. I would not call the signature on the exterior body of a piece of Intarsia post production even though it was done after the item was produced. When I use the term post production I am referring to a signature that Mr. Carder has placed on the piece after it has left the factory. I would imagine Mr. Carder would even place it on the exterior body of a piece if that was your request.
Rande Bly of Alabama