joeypost

I hate discussing it too as it's a very gray and unsettling topic. If Chip is not mentally well that will come out. If I'm wrong that will come out too. The point is not to be right or wrong, though. It's to do the best we can. After all these pages, this post made my day. I know it was asked earlier in the thread, and don't remember a reply, but does Chip still hold any of your inventory? Good question. If he does Vintage should denote that on any books in future sales threads. Folks should know that buying from Vintage might mean getting a book shipped(or not) by Chip. Not the reason for my post, but it is interesting to see other peoples point of view.

I hate discussing it too as it's a very gray and unsettling topic. If Chip is not mentally well that will come out. If I'm wrong that will come out too. The point is not to be right or wrong, though. It's to do the best we can. After all these pages, this post made my day. I know it was asked earlier in the thread, and don't remember a reply, but does Chip still hold any of your inventory?

If you use a credit card you are spending money you don't have. If you use time payments with a dealer, you are spending money you don't have. If you are allowing someone time to pay you are allowing them to spend money they don't have. See how simple it is to spend money you don't have? I agree, people get in over their heads all the time. I haven't had a credit card or a line of credit in over 10 years. You don't have to worry about me spending money I don't have. Nice attempt, but you know that is not what I am talking about. And believe it or not, if I do use a credit card...I have he cash reserves ON HAND before I do so. Again, when you find yourself in the same barrel, it is easy to condone certain practices.

Whether he was buying for personal use or to kick start his business is an important distinction to me. Doug Schmell was removing funds that were entrusted to be held safely. They were not his and he buying personal books with other people's money. When you are self employed or running a small business (like you and I do) you have accounts payable and accounts receivable and there is an overlap. Your accounts payable account can be late and yet you can still have money in accounts receivable to reinvest in the business. It's the nature of small business. It's why many bills can and are payable 30 / 60 / 90 days out. It allows businesses stay liquid while floating in the middle. The intent with the Star Wars figures is an important distinction IMO because people who work for themselves think differently than collectors. That is where I was going with my point. And yes, Chip belongs in the HOS, and yes it wasn't OK that he didn't answer anyone until Brock's CL post, and yes it's not OK that he didn't ship packages out. And I'm not sleeping in a Holiday Inn Express tonight. I have been self employed for 35 of my 53 years of life. I have never, ever spent money I did not have in hand. It is not only a bad habit to get into, it is dangerous, and if you want to really dissect it, can become criminal. I work for myself AND I am a collector and would always put paying my debts before any "deal". TBH anyone who can see this as "OK" would raise red flags in my mind.

You know, I read a post from the bottom up and if I think it's Casey I play a little game and bet myself that it is. So far I'm batting pretty strong. It's not about what a person is capable of. It is about how people react in desperation. But thanks for the post and missing the point of mine! Which is? Being desperate changes the rules for a person? No, the point was that there were a few forum members who accused Chip of buying the Star Wars figures for himself right after Brock posted the entrapment news, but the FB quote by Chip, made 2 minutes after emailing Brock makes it pretty clear that he regularly looks for collectibles to flip. And even though it basically proves that people's posts and perceptions on that point were incorrect you didn't hear anyone recant. That was the point. OK. To me looking for collections to flip while not fulfilling completed transaction and claiming he will be on the street soon if he doesn't get $XX.xxx soon = fraud. You can talk till your blue in the face about it, but I know when I don't have money to spend, I simply don't spend money, no matter how tempting a deal may be. Sure this is true for most people.

You know, I read a post from the bottom up and if I think it's Casey I play a little game and bet myself that it is. So far I'm batting pretty strong. It's not about what a person is capable of. It is about how people react in desperation. But thanks for the post and missing the point of mine! Which is? Being desperate changes the rules for a person? Then again I don't get most things.

You're assuming it has never been done to me. After nearly 14 years of collecting comics since getting back into it and now being a full time dealer, I've lost money to people and I weigh the way I feel about it based on my perception of circumstances. I've lost money to people who I believe were thieves and I've done everything within my power to make sure they were punished including contacting local authorities. But I've also lost money to people who I believe were either poor at managing themselves or ran onto some bad luck. For example, there's a board member who owes me $500 since the mortgage crisis hit in 2008. He was in the job of selling mortgages. He lost his home, his marriage broke down and he's now rebuilding. I know he'll get it to me when the time is right. I'd forgotten about it until now. Punishable? I've already stated multiple times that both are punishable. I do agree that there needs to be consequences to correct bad behavior and to protect people from that behavior. They are just not punishable in the same way IMO. If I'm a judge I weight all the facts before me including past, recent and present behavior. If there is a possibility of mental illness, wouldn't that be weighed in a court of law and taken into consideration? We have a bunch of judges in this thread and many don't believe it's a factor and that is where we disagree. So yes, there needs to be consequences (punishment) but consequences need to fit the crime. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say not to put Chip on the HOS. People need to be aware. I'm just stating the reasons why I think this has all happened and I don't personally believe that there is predetermined malice. The example you use is a one on one transaction. Had you decided to make it public (if it happened here on the boards) action would have been taken by the community. You CHOSE to keep it quiet, and in this case with Chip, others chose to speak out. While unfortunate, it does show a repeated and prolonged pattern on Chips part. With that said, I am interested to see what the vote has to say, because that will be a reflection of what the community here on the boards is thinking. And in case you are wondering I have dealt with many cases of mental illness and in all of them, at no time, were actions that ran contrary to acceptable behavior acceptable.

I think part of the difficulty is that theft (and thieves) are not always or even mainly the simple purse snatching cut and run variety. There are many big thieves in the corporate world (some get caught thankfully) who are 90% law abiding but its the 10% law breaking behaviour, fraud, tax evasion, etc that does them in. They are still in the end thieves. I think you know that you and I see most things alike and I agree that theft has many faces. My main point is that I don't think in this case that Chip is taking the money and running. As I said earlier, he could have done that to several of us board members who were selling literally $10,000's of goods through Chip but he didn't. What Chip did in the past I can't comment on. If it's theft, it's theft through neglect at this point. Both are theft but even in the eyes of the law there is a difference between premeditated malice and simple neglect. I don't think it should be any different here. Would you agree that whether premeditated or not, both are punishable? People are either out goods, money or both. And in many instances the feeling of goodwill towards a down and out member of this community were not reciprocated with trust. I wonder if you were a Judge if you would ever throw anyone in jail. Or would you feel different if it were done to you.

But...are you respected enough to say this Andy? I said earlier in this mess of a thread that if Chip is truly mentally ill time will tell, and while not a direct victim I have been affected by this to the tune of $200.00. I wont go off on Chip about it, but I know I voted yes for him being elected to the HOS. For the most part people have been civil, some have gone overboard. It would be nice if they now used their vote to speak. Regarding Roy's support of Chip I can see his side of the story, but when you find yourself in a deep ditch the best course of action is to just stop digging.

Only one of its kind (so far).

Yep - two little spine ticks, all near the lower staple - hilarious. tears, not ticks. My copy has only ticks - does that mean it's worth $$$ I had one with two little spine ticks that was worth $1,000.00

If Chip is truly ill, time will disclose that. No need for debates based on speculation. Rules were broken. Community trust has been eroded. The inability to fufill deals that were already closed while looking to open new deals has been established. A pattern of this type of behavior has been established and that alone is enough to move forward with. Hopefully Chip can get his act together, but it really sounds like the comic part of his life is the least of his worries. Not minimizing the mess others that purchased from him are going through, but the comic side is just a reflection of his life in general.

Yep - two little spine ticks, all near the lower staple - hilarious. tears, not ticks.

How old is Chip?

Useful. My copy is nicer No one cares

Useful. My copy is nicer

More like a track, and less like a road. Just seems to go on endlessly...one lap at a time.

they had the Dark Knight book graded a 9.9? Ack! How did you know that? That would have been a much better outcome Did CGC send back the incorrect book back to me?? It was an ill fated attempt at humor, based on your bolded comment above.

Yea, BIG time. Movie was entertaining, but that scene was just awesome. Not as exciting as when Yoda opened up his can of whoop- in Episode II, but pretty close. I wasn't expecting it. I just don't get it, and another issue I have with the movie. Vader should move like he did fighting Obi Wan in Star Wars. When I see the end of R1, I wanna poke my eyes out. That's not in continuity with the story at all and I take it as a big FU to me personally as the studio is saying "look what we can do now with computers, to hell with everything else you ever known" Jim Honestly, I hated the Yoda vs. Dooku battle because of the over-indulgent use of CGI, but, as someone who saw the original Star Wars as a 3-year-old and has been immersed in Star Wars ever since, I don't understand this criticism toward the Vader scene at all -- why in the world would they handcuff him by sticking to that awkward, clunky, limited fighting style? Just to stay in continuity?! The Vader in R1 was so much more fluid and mowed through the troopers with superhuman power and dexterity (the way he should)! With as complex and sophisticated as fight choreography has gotten since 1977 (as we saw with Ray Park -- one of the genuine bright spots of the prequels), why would they try to portray one of the most powerful entities in the galaxy in such a stilted, unconvincing style? This scene genuinely *floored* me in a way that most Star Wars movies have so disappointingly failed to do since ROTJ. I can't even comment on most of the rest of R1 because I can't get past how visceral the impression of actually seeing Vader unleashed was: Vader as an relentless, unfeeling, brutal instrument of terror. For me, this was the saga finally living up to its potential and, for once, this jaded fan actually left the theater feeling "satisfied". There have been so many blown opportunities with villains like Maul and Fett (or even the off-camera Anakin/Vader carnage in E2 and E3) where I just felt there was so much unrealized potential. I'm really not the biggest Vader fan nor am I even much of a CGI fan, but this was pure SW porn to me and I was absolutely giddy as the scene unfolded: His blitzing attack, the horror and panic from the rebel soldiers, the desperation to get rid of the plans, it was just masterful. I'm truly sorry that you couldn't enjoy it, because, again, as a fan of the saga for nearly 40 years now, this was one of its highest points. While I can see both points of view, all my family talked about was the ferocity of Vader's attack in R1. In all honesty, I wanted to see it last another few minutes as it was what I always expected of Vader.

they had the Dark Knight book graded a 9.9?

Sal Buscema did some great covers for these reprints. Some easily better than the originals.

Only 5 9.8's in the census (I know someone who owns one or two) Last sale was $685.00 so I would have to say maybe to your question. To me $685.00 is a lot, to some it is chump change.