Sold to a British collector?

Over on the Roman Army Talk (RAT) forum, they've been following the Crosby Garrett story quite closely, but also with a good bit of scepticism (several people there say the piece has a "Balkan" look to it). Interestingly a bloke calling himself "Timogen" joined soon after this and kept insisting it was a "genuine find" (meaning I think genuine british find) and said the lack of ploughmarks could be explained by the findspot but he did not want to give too much away about the latter. He obviously wants people to think (at least) that he has some kind of contact with the finder and inside knowledge - whether or not he has cannot be determined. It is notable however that soon after the sale was announced, he informed list members matter-of-factly that the buyer was a "British private collector". Knowledge from the seller, or something misheard?

There are other artefact hunters who have heard the same thing, a few hours after the sale (10-07-2010, 05:57 PM) on the "Friendly Metal Detecting Forum" a metal detectorist announced: "but it actually turns out that he's a private collector from London". Rumour, or real information? Time will tell. Of course if its a British collector, no export licence to withhold, no second chance for British public collections to buy it. Will the new owner loan it for display in a museum?

UPDATE: In the comments to this text, Mo refers to an article in the Antiques Trade Gazette which says the same thing. Comment from the PAS? At least they could ask if they could go along and fill in the gaps in their "record" of the object.