But, in my view-- and I speak as one who would not at all mind owning the pen in question-- a pen that represents a quirky mix of well-known technique and well known (and not really that rare) model/color is not worthy of the iconic status of Aztec, etc.
Very good post David, which I've only highlighted your summary. Even if this pen was painted back in the 1930s by some entity that painted pens back then (to note David N's comment on FPN), my response on that is "so what?".
As David noted above, it's a one-off oddity worth some small premium to someone who likes painted pens. Frankly, I think the market would be broader without the painting and the selling price higher as an early Senior Madarin without any cap lip cracks. The painting drives away a lot of those folks.
If you could substantiate the provenance to a Parker executive from the 1930s, then you're talking a different matter. But to get anywhere near the numbers the OP is looking for, the provenance would have to tie itself back to Kenneth Parker himself. The provenance shouldn't be that hard to come up with, since the original story was that the pen came out of a storage locker owned by a Parker executive. If that much is known, then the name of that executive would also be known and could be shared. Given that it's not being shared, I suspect this part of the story is all BS.
Then you've got the piling on on FPN, with the supposed authentication by the Parker archives. Many of us who specialize in Parkers know how hard this would be these days, with the way that things been moved around. You can't just flip them an email with a couple of photos and get a response back. So start sticking with facts.