Funnyslover

Yesterday I asked the seller, via eBay, :

"Are these original LIM pencils ?"

and the reply has come back :

"Hi, Yes, they are. I hope this helps. Let me know if you have any other questions/concerns"

Unambiguous and somehow genuine sounding ? 

This has got to be one of the most interesting threads of recent times.

I was buying off the spinner racks at age 12 in 1965 and my favorites are Kirby, Ditko and Sekowsky.

I was one of the few in my group who collected both D.C. and Marvel.

As a lover and collector of Sekowsky/Sachs JLA OA, I was particularly struck by vodou's observation that :

"Collectors of all eras have their nostalgic touchstones to which they are aesthetically blind...generally the rest of us don't call that deficiency out, out of kindness, and especially on the The OFFICIAL "This Week..." thread.

And, of course, we all suffer terribly that same deficiency to a greater or lesser extent ;\)"

G'nite

The cover to JLA 21

Bechara - willing to trade ?

G'nite

Does anyone have a link for the Irene Vartanoff inventory list? Irene herself doesn't have it, at least per her last blog post on the topic.

Go to :

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=9560404&fpart=1

and from page 1 go to the very first link wherein the 3rd & 4th images contain Irene Vartanoff's list.

G'nite

Article on potential Kirby art situation:

 

http://www.pipelinecomics.com/the-mystery-of-60s-marvel-jack-kirby-original-artwork/

 

Author took a tidbit from podcast and ran with it. Interesting take.

It reminds me of Chitty Chitty bang bang :

Hide your kirbys

Hide your kirbys

The disney is coming

G'nite

The guy has been punished for his crimes.

The links have been (re)published.

Enough with this enjoyment and heightening of his pain.

Well said.

You might also want to refer them to Condition 9 (3rd sentence) below which provides an alternative wording :

http://www.comiclink.com/TermsConditionsBuying.asp

G'nite

I don't know whether it's been noted before or not, but Comiclink's terms and condition has a phrase similar to Heritage's, but with one big diference:

 

Regardless of the disclosure of his identity, any bid by a consignor or his agent on a lot consigned by him is deemed not to be made in “Good Faith.” Emphasis added.

Yes Clink use the combination of "not" and "good faith" twice in the same set of terms. So theirs is certainly correct.

See Condition 9 at this link :

http://www.comiclink.com/TermsConditionsBuying.asp

Early nite. G'nite

G'nite xx

It's rumored that the front runners are Mike B, Jim H and Peter K.

Assuming auction houses' rules legitimising bids by consignors and their agents will continue, I think we should lobby the auction houses asking that they highlight bids made by consignors (and their nominated agents) - both on screen and on the floor.

Discussion of the MB shilling topic isn't my point. Of course it should be discussed, debated, and ultimately pushes made for answers. I'm simply dismayed that people feel the need to start another topic header to do so. It's dumb, frankly speaking.

 

Isn't that the point however, to divert attention from the original discussion?

 

Which one was the original discussion . . . I'm losing track?

Strictly speaking, that honour may now belong to the " X-Men 2 splash" thread.

That said, certainly the most amusing to date is the long running FRIENDS OF HERITAGE SPEAK UP

There's absolutely no doubt about condition 15

http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

It's what we sign up to when we bid.

I'm inclined to think that there must surely be a good reason for such a publicly visible and transparent condition.

At last ! G'nite xxx

Well next time they bring it up refer them to condition 15 of their own document ( http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms ) and ask them if they intend amending the written words to synchronize better with the spoken.

At last ! G'nite xxx

Before going to sleep read condition 15 again at http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

G'nite xxx

see 15

 

http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

 

Nothing there says what he did wasn't immoral. Nothing said there doesn't disprove his line of being "one of the most honest and trusted sellers" as now false. All it tells me, is that HA is as corrupt and immoral as Mike has shown himself to be in this. So, HA and Mike are both to not longer be trusted. Nothing more.

Indeed. Don't let the facts get in the way. G'nite xxx

see 15

http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

It's of academic interest but irrelevant really. The guy or gal made a mistake.

Condition 15 is what matters

http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

But condition number 15 of their general Terms and Conditions proves that statement wrong :

http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

Read condition number 15 :

http://www.ha.com/c/ref/terms-and-conditions.zx?view=terms

G'nite xxx

Aka Shutting out inconvenient facts. Go read the T&A

The T&A simply declare that the seller or his agents can bid. Should one choose to bid one effectively agrees to these terms. The assumption is that you read the T&A - (seriously not been rude) - something that clearly 999 out of 1000 do not do. Sad really.