I’ve no doubt Cronnolly is capable, and may always, make an excellent wooden flute – I have only passing experience with his flutes, and only the polymer ones at that. So this comment is less about your story or about Michaels’ flutes in particular, than about flutes in general.
Sometimes, a singular flute is just a great flute, for reasons that are not consistent, necessarily, with the rest of those made by the same maker. It is the fluke-flute. My antique German is a particularly nice one; many German flutes are not (I don’t even know the maker, as it’s an anonymous antique). I might have trouble reselling it for what I believe it’s worth, but, because of its actual playing value to me, I am doubtful I will ever part with it.
Here’s the thing: the makers that usually establish the best reputations generally do so because of consistency in their work – ie, most of their flutes are very good, not one or two. There is some variation of course, between their flutes, some better than others, some with more magic to them. But, in general, if you buy from a maker with a steady rep, you will be most likely have a flute with a certain level of competence and quality. And good makers will take them back and work on them if, for one reason or another, the buyer feels they don’t meet those requirements.
So, if you are looking to sink a fair amount of money into a good flute, it is much less a gamble to go with a maker with a very good reputation – makers that have endorsements given by players that have experience and have played for some time (famous-player endorsements are not as important, as they rarely get a “stock” item, anyway).
Still, the bottom line, to me at least, is that if the flute in your hands is a good one, you really shouldn’t care who stamped it. Resale, of course, is another matter, but in many cases, like yours, you probably won’t want to sell a gem like this anyway.
Gordon