AnWARtheart-migration

I understand your points except I don't follow from this post or your previous one about what you see as the process with which to best get information. You're describing how they can block attempts to get cell phone info but what are your thoughts on how to actually get any info?

 

The whole reason (I presume) for those posting in a manner which you find aggressive is because there's a perception by some that precious little info will come without pressure.

 

Can you reconcile those thoughts for me; explain why you think cooling anything is a more effective way of extracting info? Because I very much think that's the question in the mind of the more hawkish types.

 

Bronty I understand where you are coming from. Ideally I would have wanted it to stay somewhat contained when this first started and not have threats of lawsuits etc. so that Mike would be compliant and discuss what happened. That ship has sailed.

 

As to what "We" can do? There isn't much unless someone wants to bankroll this. Investigations are expensive. So are court cases. If the idea is to investigate the auctions, then someone has to get Heritage to disclose the buyers, then those people have to be contacted, give statements, have those statements run down and checked, etc. and maybe at that point there is enough evidence to go forward with a civil case. And that is of course if Heritage is willing to disclose (I doubt they are)

 

I advise the cooling down because it allows for people to become calmer and more ready/open to speak. I highly doubt anyone is going to come forward and say "yea I did it because Mike asked me to" if there are people on here posting that we need to round up every co-conspirator, kick their doors in and try them for wire fraud and then sue them into the third moon.

 

This doesn't need to be bankrolled at the class action level. All you need to find is someone willing to take the case. I suggest starting here.

 

http://classactioncentral.com/

 

There is ample evidence for a solid case based on the admission alone. Mike's privileges against self incrimination are irrelevant here. There are many ways to skin a cat without Mikes testimony or cooperation. In fact, his admission is all that's really needed which he has given. Why are you defending wrong behavior in such NON-OBJECTIVE fashion by downplaying case viability?

 

Good luck certifying a class on the "facts" presented.

Agreed that CA might not be the way to go. That said, there are several statutes upon which a case can be brought . My point was that lawyer shopping the facts is a good next step if cooperation of restitution is not forthcoming. Jaybucks assertion that you need a bankroll to bring this case is disingenuous. Lawyers take cases all the time on contingency. Has Jaybucks never heard of a legal contingency fee? Jaybucks is intentionally? being disingenuous about the uphill nature of litigation for his own agenda driven purpose. What type of lawyer just says don't bother, its going to be hard? Especially without a full understanding of each prospective plaintiffs possible exposure. Heck, one poster said he spent $100k last year. You get several such collectors together and you have a serious case with possibly large real damages.

Because they are two very different things. I'm not doing anything to defend Mike's actions. I think shill bidding, for whatever reason (either as a defense from selling the piece at a loss, or to make more money) is always wrong. You want to sell, you take the risk and sell it. If you have to eat the loss, you do that. Mike was wrong to shill his auctions. I have said that, I will continue to say that.

 

Downplaying case viability is also called setting expectations.

You only need to downplay case viability to your client. No one here is your client. The least people on this forum could expect from you would be to give both sides of the coin. The only side you have taken in your arguments are expressing sentiments AGAINST case viability (which I wholly disagree with). Why are you so biased in your analysis?

I understand your points except I don't follow from this post or your previous one about what you see as the process with which to best get information. You're describing how they can block attempts to get cell phone info but what are your thoughts on how to actually get any info?

 

The whole reason (I presume) for those posting in a manner which you find aggressive is because there's a perception by some that precious little info will come without pressure.

 

Can you reconcile those thoughts for me; explain why you think cooling anything is a more effective way of extracting info? Because I very much think that's the question in the mind of the more hawkish types.

 

Bronty I understand where you are coming from. Ideally I would have wanted it to stay somewhat contained when this first started and not have threats of lawsuits etc. so that Mike would be compliant and discuss what happened. That ship has sailed.

 

As to what "We" can do? There isn't much unless someone wants to bankroll this. Investigations are expensive. So are court cases. If the idea is to investigate the auctions, then someone has to get Heritage to disclose the buyers, then those people have to be contacted, give statements, have those statements run down and checked, etc. and maybe at that point there is enough evidence to go forward with a civil case. And that is of course if Heritage is willing to disclose (I doubt they are)

 

I advise the cooling down because it allows for people to become calmer and more ready/open to speak. I highly doubt anyone is going to come forward and say "yea I did it because Mike asked me to" if there are people on here posting that we need to round up every co-conspirator, kick their doors in and try them for wire fraud and then sue them into the third moon.

This doesn't need to be bankrolled at the class action level. All you need to find is someone willing to take the case. I suggest starting here.

http://classactioncentral.com/

There is ample evidence for a solid case based on the admission alone. Mike's privileges against self incrimination are irrelevant here. There are many ways to skin a cat without Mikes testimony or cooperation. In fact, his admission is all that's really needed which he has given. Why are you defending wrong behavior in such NON-OBJECTIVE fashion by downplaying case viability?

jaybuck, that's a stretch that he would miraculously know the winners of 100 pieces.

 

In the real world I agree with you, but in a legal sense you have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal trial (i.e. wire fraud) or based on a preponderance of the evidence that it is more likely than not in a civil trial. So all Mike's lawyer(s) would need to do in a criminal trial is poke enough holes that one juror is not 100% convinced that Mike did it and that is the end of that conviction. Now as to the civil matter, then you stand a better chance but you still have to put together some evidence that Mike colluded with these individuals to reacquire the pieces. On top of the fact that you have to still prove the other elements of whatever you are suing him over. (This case will never see the light of discovery if the case is not brought on the merits, it has to be able to withstand a 3211 motion.)

The admission is the starting point. Everything works out from there based on the COA.

Tell your story

http://classactioncentral.com/

 

HA, COMICLINK, CC...

 

For the buyers that might have possibly paid a higher price and the top bidders whom lost the piece , I would propose the following:

 

Contact each person and send them a certificate for one buyer fee transaction for free.

 

As an FYI - ComicLink never has Buyer Transaction Fees, so it's always FREE (meaning no upcharges) to Bid on ComicLink as a Buyer - - What you bid is what you pay (plus shipping/insurance for delivery of course) at ComicLink.

 

That's what I absolutely LOVE about bidding and buying on ComicLink.

.

 

Good point, if you were possibly bid up the solution I see is on a future transaction with a 10% discount... Sorry about being unclear

Why not just have Mike give up half of his net worth?

Honestly don't pretend to know what full restitution looks like but your solutions seems kind of arbitrary.

After going through 80-some pages, covering 3 threads this weekend, I'm in the camp of this being somewhat overblown. Was Mike wrong, yes. Are things going a little too far, with the torches & pitchforks ?? I certainly think so.

When we get to the point of FBI links, talks of federal investigations, I think things have gained a mob mentality, and a un-necessarily nasty twist.

Not trying to change anyone's opinion. I certainly wouldn't want anyone to try to change mine, but sheesh...

And if anyone doesn't think other dealers have done the same, you have your head buried in the sand.

I think people just don't like the double standard that those in 'The Club' get to play by, while collectors are considered peons or canon fodder.

That the regular posters who are usually quick to rush in with their moral judgments and legal opinions about almost every issue remain silent speaks volumes about their hypocrisy and lame character.

It has actually been quite funny as some of these long time posters usually love to espouse their moral superiority and deep legal knowledge.

Sometimes silence is an action.

Due to the fact that the class of victims are probably not aware they have in fact been possibly defrauded, the best way I see a considered action moving forward is probably as a class. That's not to say an individual cannot file a claim. Just makes more sense as a class action. I think I am done with this thread but will monitor to see what happens. Definitely smells really really really bad and I am truly surprised at the lack of legal focus, as usually all the boards lawyers come out of the woodwork to do the heavy lifting. Here, I hear crickets in terms of legal analysis.

Good luck all !!

So there are no lawyers who care to comment on this thread? Interesting. Usually there is a lawyer know it all who just loves to pontificate. Here, in this instance, all I hear are crickets. Interesting interesting.

Are there any lawyers in this forum who have thoughts on all this? Would love to hear their opinion. Every forum has a lawyer. Who are the lawyers here in this forum?

I do wonder what other dealers may get caught in this web if it really comes to subpoenas and depositions. Might be really really ugly stuff. That is, if that rock IS in fact ever overturned.

I just stumbled across these posts (I don't visit all that often) and this is disappointing to hear.

 

I recently ended up with one of Mike's pieces in the last Heritage auction, one that I had eyed on his site for a while. During the auction I ended up bidding to just slightly less than the price he had listed at on his website; I ended up as the under-bidder for the item.

 

A week or so later I get a call from Heritage asking if I still wanted to buy the item at my last bid. I asked what happened to the winning bid but the representative said she did not know.

 

I ended up accepting and buying the item. I obviously was willing to cut the check so I am comfortable with the price I guess. What would be disappointing is if this item was bid up, with the the winning bid not really being legitimate and the winning "bidder" not being someone that actually intended to buy the item. Maybe I am niave to art collecting - it's not like I have an extensive collection - but it feels unsavory to me, legal or not.

 

 

Well, you will never know.

 

Unless you call HA and ask directly. But if you call I would be prepared to return the piece should you hear something that concerns you.

 

This is the new normal.

 

Call. I'd love to hear what they say.

 

Demand the ID of the underbidder as well as his bidding history in regards to other mikes pieces both in this auction or in past auctions. I would demand a refund of the buyer fee at the very least.

I doubt they will release any information unless legally compelled to do so.

Ultimately, that maybe is what it will take.

However, likely what will occur is people will never discover the fraud.

That is what makes the crime?/act so perniciously evil.

That which is essentially stolen has been done so very cleverly with the victim unaware he has been duped.

I don't understand how Burkey's shill affiliates wouldn't have to pay a fee too that Mike would have to absorb so Mike's consignment fee even if negotiated lower isn't the full story on activity expenses of the 'shill'.

If next month's auctions are off by like say 80% from estimates I guess we all will know what happened. Either shilling stopped out of fear or Buyers freaked. Going to be an interesting auction. Buy the dip?

Why do it?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 

Bottom line....

Vegas is an expensive town, you all! The girls ain't cheap!

So I guess Mike would find collectors like myself to be stupid for having been using the Heritage archives sold data base as some sort of basis of real information. Mike clearly had absolutely no moral issue with in the pool whatsoever. Guess he is smart and collectors are dumb. I think that's arrogance personified. Granted, I am constructing Mike's thoughts but what other conclusion can I come to? He had to have known he was sending bad price signals to the market and that collectors would rely on the bad data.

Originally Posted By: otherwroldsj33

But if occasionally I regretted putting the piece in auction, and it was already underway, I would do that. Or if I had a piece in auction that I thought just wasn't getting the respect, I might do that. Just not as a matter of routine business.

 

 

Posted by

"Then I'd consider you someone I'd be wary of doing business with, especially at auction. And if you are concerned about "not getting enough respect" at auction for a piece, then solution is very simple: Don't put it up to auction. But if you want to risk your reputation, to get around the dictates of the market, then when those things are exposed, it's on you. Not the people who've exposed you."

 

My reply.

What can I say, beyond I specifically said I would not do it as a matter of routine business.

I don't think it would hurt my reputation at all with most people.

I actually would not care if anyone "exposed" me, and in fact, I would probably, on a more important piece, (not a $300 piece) reveal it anyway.

With due respect, at this point in my life, I have learned there are always going to be people who are not happy with everything I do, all the time. It doesn't even matter much anymore to me with most people think, knowing the hypocritical and depraved nature of most people. As long as my conscience is clear, and I am not a humanist, or one who believes in moral relativism, by the way, I am not really looking to take polls to justify my actions.

So you will subvert auction rules for $$$? Got it! Aren't you the honest cop guy? Sad.