Ok who is rising to "Erotica" ?
Holiday is a good one!
About that Trumpeter with red pants:
I'll try to find some auctions with it, but I come across it very often (at least on eBay Germany).
Ok, but until a few months ago, most of us were convinced that the skipping smurfette with a blue rope was genuine. We now know that there was quantities of them available without ropes, and there is a possibility that the blue rope could have been added later "in mass". I am planning to buy another one from karen of that one and take it apart... but what I mean to say by this is that the blue skipping rope is often seen on eBay, and it doesn't really proves that it is real either way.
Just like the "raw" surprise cones"... just like the chef with a rolling pin and a red boe tie...
Apart from the sheer number of them around he is also seen in the 1995/1996 KMS katalog which I believe was printed before the first edition of the DSK.
The sheer number of them around doesn't prove anything: There are selling the blue skipping ropes by lots of 10s (and there was LOTS of these bags a Passion's last year).
The good news means that the value has dropped. But when it first started to "appear", it was an expensive variation to get.
I take the point that if it was in the 1995/1996 KMS (I don't have that catalogue) as a first piece of evidence, a least as far as dates are concerned. I'll need a little more to be convinced either way.
However I have seen a half painted error Trumpet smurf recently with the red pants and that made me feel like it is quite possible that it is an authentic variation...and also as Rach mentions there are so many of them and they are not that valuable either or worth faking...at least not anymore.
The "not anymore" is what I am pointing out to. However the HPH is a possible indication that it went through the normal manufacturing routes.
We might get an indication if we compare markings.
To be honest, the only way I believe one of these kind of "variations" to be real would be if we had 2 or 3 sellers (who are unrelated and not collectors) who could confirm they bought it themselves in the mid 80s.
Sorry I'm a pain... I know... but I have seen enough "mass produced" fakes now to question everything: believe me, if there is a profit to be made, somebody will have done it. Now we can take the view that if a fake has been around for a long while and has never been identified as one, then we could almost consider it as an original... but by doing that we acknowledge that the original faker has fooled everyone. That has the tendancy to annoy me more than anything else.
Don't take me wrong: If I didn't have one of these red pants trumpeter, then I would want to get one, there is no doubt about it (Just like the blue skipping rope): nevermind if it's a fake or not. I would want it because it is now considered to be a requirement for a complete collection. BUT it doesn't change the fact that I want to know the whole story: Is it a real variation or not? (and as such I believe we need hard evidence and not just belief).
Sorry to be brutal, but it is time we wake up and smell the roses: there is more and more people looking to capitalise on our desire to expand our collections. So the question is, how many times have we been fooled in the past, just so that we are ready to see what's coming? I cannot believe that some people are still questioning whether the "raw" surprise cones are fakes. The fact that they have only appeared in the last 18 months or so sends huge alarm bells (for a smurf that's supposed to have come out in the mid 80s or so (forgot the exact date).
What I just to say is question everything: do not assume.
If you have seen it on a Schleich catalogue or a poster: it's real, boom, job done.
If you haven't, well how did it really come about? Then you will start to discover interesting things...
Was it "Material Girl"? 
)