AFA Scandal

[ComicConnoisseur]

To it's credit... AFA and the collecting community in general have been VERY good at spotting counterfeit Transformers. While it is disappointing that something so large of scale slipped through them, there are probably a lot of things that are submitted and rejected that go unannounced as to not educate the criminals on how to improve their skills.

Good point.

(thumbs u

[Bronty]

Cgc had nothing to do with catching Tmnt and cerebus fakes. Those existed and were caught by collectors long before cgc opened its doors.

 

In fact a modern book would be easier to reproduce with today's technology than an older one.

[Mephisto]

@Buzetta/Sardo's points - it certainly has created a high degree of suspicion in the foreign lines as they are less known, especially with more obscure examples which appear with less frequency.

 

One point which kind of muddy's the waters further is that Toni hasn't helped himself from a perception standpoint by creating the impression of having an endless supply of "case fresh" MOC's. I have noticed a softening of prices on certain characters which appeared with greater regularity over the years, but the suggestion of him making them out of his home was never regarded as anything more than a jab until these allegations surfaced. Makes one wonder if the collecting community should have been questioning the supply of these MOC's as that thought must have entered into more than just that persons mind.

 

 

Forget Danny Dupcak. This reminds me a lot more of Ewert. There was a thread called How does Ewert or something along those lines. Then later down the road we all saw the answer to that threads title which originally was just tongue in cheek.

[Wally's Comics]

wow, I have been tempted to buy some 12 backs or some of the last POTF 17.

 

I would've chosen AFA too...

 

 

 

AFA's still a reliable source for vintage. The fallout from this will mostly effect Palitoy unfortunately, but if you're ever concerned about anything you're interested in buying, just PM me. (thumbs u

 

thanks brother.

 

I have a carded Anakin POTF (tri-logo)

and a Weequay Freeze Frame MOC

 

 

[rjrjr]

 

Imagine if we found out 40% of the AF1's above 4.0 might be franken books, with fake covers and bleached interiors.

 

 

Do you mean AF15's? If so, that figure actually wouldn't surprise me.

 

Here in the Detroit area somebody produced a bunch of counterfeit Cerebus #1's years ago. The quality of the printing was a little off, and the color of the staples happened to be off, but they very nearly passed them off as originals. I don' think the perpetrator was ever identified.

 

Now, if someone went to that much trouble to counterfeit a Cerebus #1, does anyone seriously believe that a high-dollar book like AF15 hasn't been counterfeited?

I wonder if The Walking Dead # 1 has ever been counterfeited?

It`s black and white.

I mean if they could counterfeit TMNT #1 and Cerebus #1 back in the 1980s,then what would stop someone today who has better technology to counterfeit?

That's a good question. I didn't realize The Walking Dead had a B&W interior.

 

The cover would be difficult to produce with exactness. (At least I would assume)

I am pretty sure CGC would catch it, as they caught TMNT #1 and Cerebus #1 fakes.

I have no idea how to safeguard about raws though if it ever happened.

 

 

CGC wasn't even around when those fakes were first discovered. If they have knowledge on how to catch a fake TMNT or Cerebus, it did not originate with them.

 

Wasn't there fake X-Men comics at one point? They were easy to spot however because of the dot-matrix print quality of the covers if I'm remembering the story correctly.

[rjrjr]

Interesting comparison of comic vs. packaged toy counterfeits. Not sure the AF 15 analogy holds though.

 

Counterfeit comics: The difference in an ability to counterfeit Cerebus1 versus AF15 is that the Cerebus has black and white interior and only 2 cover colors, so much easier to counterfeit. Plus the cover red color was fully saturated, so again easier to counterfeit than a red/blue/yellow/black color separation with dot saturation. I know absolutely nothing about toy packaging, but I do remember in 1981 or so the cases of counterfeit Cerebus 1 that made the rounds of dealers in NYC.

 

 

Imagine if we found out 40% of the AF1's above 4.0 might be franken books, with fake covers and bleached interiors.

 

 

Do you mean AF15's? If so, that figure actually wouldn't surprise me.

 

Here in the Detroit area somebody produced a bunch of counterfeit Cerebus #1's years ago. The quality of the printing was a little off, and the color of the staples happened to be off, but they very nearly passed them off as originals. I don' think the perpetrator was ever identified.

 

Now, if someone went to that much trouble to counterfeit a Cerebus #1, does anyone seriously believe that a high-dollar book like AF15 hasn't been counterfeited?

 

Just for clarity, the packaging of vintage materials used period correct materials. Vintage cardback from Palitoy's factory, blisters and period correct action figures. Nothing was reproduced or counterfeit.

 

I think one of the problems with the sealed Star Wars figures that lends credibility to the scandal is there are incorrect action figures (paint detail variations, etc.) showing up sealed on the cardbacks. I don't know the details, but it sounds like figures with these paint variations that were produced later on are showing up on earlier cardbacks. Some have guessed that the Palitoy factory simply was throwing anything they had into the packages at the end. Also, many different cardback/figure/bubble type configurations have shown up via TT than originally thought. This could also be attributed to the factory throwing what they had together at the end. But, there is some speculation that some of the bubbles (those with the tiny pinprick holes) are thought to be reproductions, not the actual bubbles from the time period.

 

All in all, it sounds like more is going on with the TT Star Wars figures than just assembling period correct vintage materials.

 

The modern day assemblage and non-factory sealing process is the only aspect which can be regarded as being "unoriginal."

 

If the assemblage is the only factor that determines "genuine vintage product" then what are we to say about the Action 1 that was pulled in pieces from behind drywall, reassembled to appear as though it was pulled out of the wall in one piece, and sold as a blue label?

 

I never heard this before. So, the Action 1 was put together using restoration techniques and still got a blue label? I'm guessing the book wasn't carefully separated and the pages, stables, and cover were put into the drywall for later discovery and assembly? Are we talking about tear repair and things like that?

 

IF the act of assemblage is the determinant in deciding whether a vintage item can be considered original, then we may need to consider "assemblage" has been going on in this hobby for quite some time without anywhere near as much general knowledge or controversy as this current situation beset on the vintage SW toy hobby.

 

The SW scandal goes well beyond assembly however.

 

The way toys were produced in those days leaves so much room for these types of anomalies to be explained. It is for this reason that errors have been a massively enterprising sub-segment of the vintage Star Wars toy hobby. While I appreciate people picking through this mess with a fine tooth comb, the fact is that factory produced errors are well known in every vintage line, starting from the pre-production phase to the point where the MOC was displayed in a retail store.

 

In some cases, certain figures from specific lines have a higher "error" incidence than others. Variations are no exception to this either, and I won't get into how closely some people follow even the slightest change in a figure. Of all the information put forward, the blisters have had the most room for a counterfeit or reproductive element to eke into the debate, but again, this is not something that can be proven with 100% certainty.

 

If we're splitting hairs that closely, then we can assume the Action 1 does not have "all original" parts, and likely used as close to period accurate staples as possible. While it might not be general knowledge, and was overshadowed by that great story of a fight breaking out in the kitchen that caused damage to the rear cover (Steve himself talks about how much people like a good yarn in Oldguys blog post), I know I'm not the only person who knew what went on with that book. I threw that out there because it isn't that great a departure from the kind of thing happening in our hobby, and in fact the Eastern Colour scheme was a very similar demonstration of someone sitting on an inventory of vintage stock and getting the idea to restart and crank out their own production line.

 

Just so it's clear, you are saying the Action 1 that was discovered in the wall was knowingly restored and put into a blue label by CGC? Or is this just a rumor? It seems that if that were true, that would have major repercussions on CGCs business. After all, restoration detection is one of the selling points of the service.

[rjrjr]

Cgc had nothing to do with catching Tmnt and cerebus fakes. Those existed and were caught by collectors long before cgc opened its doors.

 

In fact a modern book would be easier to reproduce with today's technology than an older one.

 

Any comic from the digital era (where the comic is assembled digitally and sent to the printer digitally) would be super easy to reproduce if one had the original file. I would have a harder time believing any vintage comic could be counterfeit using new technology. The paper stock is different for one thing, not to mention the inks, etc.

[Buzzetta]

Let us not forget the fake platinum, gold and other counterfeit editions that were floating around in the mid 90's.

 

Wasn't one of the knightfall parts made a platinum edition or something?

[rjrjr]

Let us not forget the fake platinum, gold and other counterfeit editions that were floating around in the mid 90's.

 

Wasn't one of the knightfall parts made a platinum edition or something?

 

Similar to the fake platinum, gold, silver, etc., wasn't someone doing an after market change to comics to produce 1 of 1 variants that they were selling on E-Bay? I believe this was in the past 10 years when this happened. I believe the operation was eventually shut down.

[jimbo_707]

Interesting comparison of comic vs. packaged toy counterfeits. Not sure the AF 15 analogy holds though.

 

Counterfeit comics: The difference in an ability to counterfeit Cerebus1 versus AF15 is that the Cerebus has black and white interior and only 2 cover colors, so much easier to counterfeit. Plus the cover red color was fully saturated, so again easier to counterfeit than a red/blue/yellow/black color separation with dot saturation. I know absolutely nothing about toy packaging, but I do remember in 1981 or so the cases of counterfeit Cerebus 1 that made the rounds of dealers in NYC.

 

 

Imagine if we found out 40% of the AF1's above 4.0 might be franken books, with fake covers and bleached interiors.

 

 

Do you mean AF15's? If so, that figure actually wouldn't surprise me.

 

Here in the Detroit area somebody produced a bunch of counterfeit Cerebus #1's years ago. The quality of the printing was a little off, and the color of the staples happened to be off, but they very nearly passed them off as originals. I don' think the perpetrator was ever identified.

 

Now, if someone went to that much trouble to counterfeit a Cerebus #1, does anyone seriously believe that a high-dollar book like AF15 hasn't been counterfeited?

 

Just for clarity, the packaging of vintage materials used period correct materials. Vintage cardback from Palitoy's factory, blisters and period correct action figures. Nothing was reproduced or counterfeit.

 

I think one of the problems with the sealed Star Wars figures that lends credibility to the scandal is there are incorrect action figures (paint detail variations, etc.) showing up sealed on the cardbacks. I don't know the details, but it sounds like figures with these paint variations that were produced later on are showing up on earlier cardbacks. Some have guessed that the Palitoy factory simply was throwing anything they had into the packages at the end. Also, many different cardback/figure/bubble type configurations have shown up via TT than originally thought. This could also be attributed to the factory throwing what they had together at the end. But, there is some speculation that some of the bubbles (those with the tiny pinprick holes) are thought to be reproductions, not the actual bubbles from the time period.

 

All in all, it sounds like more is going on with the TT Star Wars figures than just assembling period correct vintage materials.

 

The modern day assemblage and non-factory sealing process is the only aspect which can be regarded as being "unoriginal."

 

If the assemblage is the only factor that determines "genuine vintage product" then what are we to say about the Action 1 that was pulled in pieces from behind drywall, reassembled to appear as though it was pulled out of the wall in one piece, and sold as a blue label?

 

I never heard this before. So, the Action 1 was put together using restoration techniques and still got a blue label? I'm guessing the book wasn't carefully separated and the pages, stables, and cover were put into the drywall for later discovery and assembly? Are we talking about tear repair and things like that?

 

IF the act of assemblage is the determinant in deciding whether a vintage item can be considered original, then we may need to consider "assemblage" has been going on in this hobby for quite some time without anywhere near as much general knowledge or controversy as this current situation beset on the vintage SW toy hobby.

 

The SW scandal goes well beyond assembly however.

 

The way toys were produced in those days leaves so much room for these types of anomalies to be explained. It is for this reason that errors have been a massively enterprising sub-segment of the vintage Star Wars toy hobby. While I appreciate people picking through this mess with a fine tooth comb, the fact is that factory produced errors are well known in every vintage line, starting from the pre-production phase to the point where the MOC was displayed in a retail store.

 

In some cases, certain figures from specific lines have a higher "error" incidence than others. Variations are no exception to this either, and I won't get into how closely some people follow even the slightest change in a figure. Of all the information put forward, the blisters have had the most room for a counterfeit or reproductive element to eke into the debate, but again, this is not something that can be proven with 100% certainty.

 

If we're splitting hairs that closely, then we can assume the Action 1 does not have "all original" parts, and likely used as close to period accurate staples as possible. While it might not be general knowledge, and was overshadowed by that great story of a fight breaking out in the kitchen that caused damage to the rear cover (Steve himself talks about how much people like a good yarn in Oldguys blog post), I know I'm not the only person who knew what went on with that book. I threw that out there because it isn't that great a departure from the kind of thing happening in our hobby, and in fact the Eastern Colour scheme was a very similar demonstration of someone sitting on an inventory of vintage stock and getting the idea to restart and crank out their own production line.

 

Just so it's clear, you are saying the Action 1 that was discovered in the wall was knowingly restored and put into a blue label by CGC? Or is this just a rumor? It seems that if that were true, that would have major repercussions on CGCs business. After all, restoration detection is one of the selling points of the service.

Wasn't there an article posted about it on the CGC site with before and after pictures? It was certainly pressed, but I don't know that anything was done that would be considered restoration by CGC's criteria.

[rjrjr]

Interesting comparison of comic vs. packaged toy counterfeits. Not sure the AF 15 analogy holds though.

 

Counterfeit comics: The difference in an ability to counterfeit Cerebus1 versus AF15 is that the Cerebus has black and white interior and only 2 cover colors, so much easier to counterfeit. Plus the cover red color was fully saturated, so again easier to counterfeit than a red/blue/yellow/black color separation with dot saturation. I know absolutely nothing about toy packaging, but I do remember in 1981 or so the cases of counterfeit Cerebus 1 that made the rounds of dealers in NYC.

 

 

Imagine if we found out 40% of the AF1's above 4.0 might be franken books, with fake covers and bleached interiors.

 

 

Do you mean AF15's? If so, that figure actually wouldn't surprise me.

 

Here in the Detroit area somebody produced a bunch of counterfeit Cerebus #1's years ago. The quality of the printing was a little off, and the color of the staples happened to be off, but they very nearly passed them off as originals. I don' think the perpetrator was ever identified.

 

Now, if someone went to that much trouble to counterfeit a Cerebus #1, does anyone seriously believe that a high-dollar book like AF15 hasn't been counterfeited?

 

Just for clarity, the packaging of vintage materials used period correct materials. Vintage cardback from Palitoy's factory, blisters and period correct action figures. Nothing was reproduced or counterfeit.

 

I think one of the problems with the sealed Star Wars figures that lends credibility to the scandal is there are incorrect action figures (paint detail variations, etc.) showing up sealed on the cardbacks. I don't know the details, but it sounds like figures with these paint variations that were produced later on are showing up on earlier cardbacks. Some have guessed that the Palitoy factory simply was throwing anything they had into the packages at the end. Also, many different cardback/figure/bubble type configurations have shown up via TT than originally thought. This could also be attributed to the factory throwing what they had together at the end. But, there is some speculation that some of the bubbles (those with the tiny pinprick holes) are thought to be reproductions, not the actual bubbles from the time period.

 

All in all, it sounds like more is going on with the TT Star Wars figures than just assembling period correct vintage materials.

 

The modern day assemblage and non-factory sealing process is the only aspect which can be regarded as being "unoriginal."

 

If the assemblage is the only factor that determines "genuine vintage product" then what are we to say about the Action 1 that was pulled in pieces from behind drywall, reassembled to appear as though it was pulled out of the wall in one piece, and sold as a blue label?

 

I never heard this before. So, the Action 1 was put together using restoration techniques and still got a blue label? I'm guessing the book wasn't carefully separated and the pages, stables, and cover were put into the drywall for later discovery and assembly? Are we talking about tear repair and things like that?

 

IF the act of assemblage is the determinant in deciding whether a vintage item can be considered original, then we may need to consider "assemblage" has been going on in this hobby for quite some time without anywhere near as much general knowledge or controversy as this current situation beset on the vintage SW toy hobby.

 

The SW scandal goes well beyond assembly however.

 

The way toys were produced in those days leaves so much room for these types of anomalies to be explained. It is for this reason that errors have been a massively enterprising sub-segment of the vintage Star Wars toy hobby. While I appreciate people picking through this mess with a fine tooth comb, the fact is that factory produced errors are well known in every vintage line, starting from the pre-production phase to the point where the MOC was displayed in a retail store.

 

In some cases, certain figures from specific lines have a higher "error" incidence than others. Variations are no exception to this either, and I won't get into how closely some people follow even the slightest change in a figure. Of all the information put forward, the blisters have had the most room for a counterfeit or reproductive element to eke into the debate, but again, this is not something that can be proven with 100% certainty.

 

If we're splitting hairs that closely, then we can assume the Action 1 does not have "all original" parts, and likely used as close to period accurate staples as possible. While it might not be general knowledge, and was overshadowed by that great story of a fight breaking out in the kitchen that caused damage to the rear cover (Steve himself talks about how much people like a good yarn in Oldguys blog post), I know I'm not the only person who knew what went on with that book. I threw that out there because it isn't that great a departure from the kind of thing happening in our hobby, and in fact the Eastern Colour scheme was a very similar demonstration of someone sitting on an inventory of vintage stock and getting the idea to restart and crank out their own production line.

 

Just so it's clear, you are saying the Action 1 that was discovered in the wall was knowingly restored and put into a blue label by CGC? Or is this just a rumor? It seems that if that were true, that would have major repercussions on CGCs business. After all, restoration detection is one of the selling points of the service.

Wasn't there an article posted about it on the CGC site with before and after pictures? It was certainly pressed, but I don't know that anything was done that would be considered restoration by CGC's criteria.

 

I wasn't sure. The innuendo in the posting I was responding to was more than a simple pressing was done to that Action 1.

[jimbo_707]

Interesting comparison of comic vs. packaged toy counterfeits. Not sure the AF 15 analogy holds though.

 

Counterfeit comics: The difference in an ability to counterfeit Cerebus1 versus AF15 is that the Cerebus has black and white interior and only 2 cover colors, so much easier to counterfeit. Plus the cover red color was fully saturated, so again easier to counterfeit than a red/blue/yellow/black color separation with dot saturation. I know absolutely nothing about toy packaging, but I do remember in 1981 or so the cases of counterfeit Cerebus 1 that made the rounds of dealers in NYC.

 

 

Imagine if we found out 40% of the AF1's above 4.0 might be franken books, with fake covers and bleached interiors.

 

 

Do you mean AF15's? If so, that figure actually wouldn't surprise me.

 

Here in the Detroit area somebody produced a bunch of counterfeit Cerebus #1's years ago. The quality of the printing was a little off, and the color of the staples happened to be off, but they very nearly passed them off as originals. I don' think the perpetrator was ever identified.

 

Now, if someone went to that much trouble to counterfeit a Cerebus #1, does anyone seriously believe that a high-dollar book like AF15 hasn't been counterfeited?

 

Just for clarity, the packaging of vintage materials used period correct materials. Vintage cardback from Palitoy's factory, blisters and period correct action figures. Nothing was reproduced or counterfeit.

 

I think one of the problems with the sealed Star Wars figures that lends credibility to the scandal is there are incorrect action figures (paint detail variations, etc.) showing up sealed on the cardbacks. I don't know the details, but it sounds like figures with these paint variations that were produced later on are showing up on earlier cardbacks. Some have guessed that the Palitoy factory simply was throwing anything they had into the packages at the end. Also, many different cardback/figure/bubble type configurations have shown up via TT than originally thought. This could also be attributed to the factory throwing what they had together at the end. But, there is some speculation that some of the bubbles (those with the tiny pinprick holes) are thought to be reproductions, not the actual bubbles from the time period.

 

All in all, it sounds like more is going on with the TT Star Wars figures than just assembling period correct vintage materials.

 

The modern day assemblage and non-factory sealing process is the only aspect which can be regarded as being "unoriginal."

 

If the assemblage is the only factor that determines "genuine vintage product" then what are we to say about the Action 1 that was pulled in pieces from behind drywall, reassembled to appear as though it was pulled out of the wall in one piece, and sold as a blue label?

 

I never heard this before. So, the Action 1 was put together using restoration techniques and still got a blue label? I'm guessing the book wasn't carefully separated and the pages, stables, and cover were put into the drywall for later discovery and assembly? Are we talking about tear repair and things like that?

 

IF the act of assemblage is the determinant in deciding whether a vintage item can be considered original, then we may need to consider "assemblage" has been going on in this hobby for quite some time without anywhere near as much general knowledge or controversy as this current situation beset on the vintage SW toy hobby.

 

The SW scandal goes well beyond assembly however.

 

The way toys were produced in those days leaves so much room for these types of anomalies to be explained. It is for this reason that errors have been a massively enterprising sub-segment of the vintage Star Wars toy hobby. While I appreciate people picking through this mess with a fine tooth comb, the fact is that factory produced errors are well known in every vintage line, starting from the pre-production phase to the point where the MOC was displayed in a retail store.

 

In some cases, certain figures from specific lines have a higher "error" incidence than others. Variations are no exception to this either, and I won't get into how closely some people follow even the slightest change in a figure. Of all the information put forward, the blisters have had the most room for a counterfeit or reproductive element to eke into the debate, but again, this is not something that can be proven with 100% certainty.

 

If we're splitting hairs that closely, then we can assume the Action 1 does not have "all original" parts, and likely used as close to period accurate staples as possible. While it might not be general knowledge, and was overshadowed by that great story of a fight breaking out in the kitchen that caused damage to the rear cover (Steve himself talks about how much people like a good yarn in Oldguys blog post), I know I'm not the only person who knew what went on with that book. I threw that out there because it isn't that great a departure from the kind of thing happening in our hobby, and in fact the Eastern Colour scheme was a very similar demonstration of someone sitting on an inventory of vintage stock and getting the idea to restart and crank out their own production line.

 

Just so it's clear, you are saying the Action 1 that was discovered in the wall was knowingly restored and put into a blue label by CGC? Or is this just a rumor? It seems that if that were true, that would have major repercussions on CGCs business. After all, restoration detection is one of the selling points of the service.

Wasn't there an article posted about it on the CGC site with before and after pictures? It was certainly pressed, but I don't know that anything was done that would be considered restoration by CGC's criteria.

 

I wasn't sure. The innuendo in the posting I was responding to was more than a simple pressing was done to that Action 1.

Considering how good it looked afterward, it must have been dry-cleaned or maybe even water-cleaned, and possibly pressed wrap by wrap and reassembled. I'm still not sure whether any of that would trigger a PLOD.

[comicwiz]

Interesting comparison of comic vs. packaged toy counterfeits. Not sure the AF 15 analogy holds though.

 

Counterfeit comics: The difference in an ability to counterfeit Cerebus1 versus AF15 is that the Cerebus has black and white interior and only 2 cover colors, so much easier to counterfeit. Plus the cover red color was fully saturated, so again easier to counterfeit than a red/blue/yellow/black color separation with dot saturation. I know absolutely nothing about toy packaging, but I do remember in 1981 or so the cases of counterfeit Cerebus 1 that made the rounds of dealers in NYC.

 

 

Imagine if we found out 40% of the AF1's above 4.0 might be franken books, with fake covers and bleached interiors.

 

 

Do you mean AF15's? If so, that figure actually wouldn't surprise me.

 

Here in the Detroit area somebody produced a bunch of counterfeit Cerebus #1's years ago. The quality of the printing was a little off, and the color of the staples happened to be off, but they very nearly passed them off as originals. I don' think the perpetrator was ever identified.

 

Now, if someone went to that much trouble to counterfeit a Cerebus #1, does anyone seriously believe that a high-dollar book like AF15 hasn't been counterfeited?

 

Just for clarity, the packaging of vintage materials used period correct materials. Vintage cardback from Palitoy's factory, blisters and period correct action figures. Nothing was reproduced or counterfeit.

 

I think one of the problems with the sealed Star Wars figures that lends credibility to the scandal is there are incorrect action figures (paint detail variations, etc.) showing up sealed on the cardbacks. I don't know the details, but it sounds like figures with these paint variations that were produced later on are showing up on earlier cardbacks. Some have guessed that the Palitoy factory simply was throwing anything they had into the packages at the end. Also, many different cardback/figure/bubble type configurations have shown up via TT than originally thought. This could also be attributed to the factory throwing what they had together at the end. But, there is some speculation that some of the bubbles (those with the tiny pinprick holes) are thought to be reproductions, not the actual bubbles from the time period.

 

All in all, it sounds like more is going on with the TT Star Wars figures than just assembling period correct vintage materials.

 

The modern day assemblage and non-factory sealing process is the only aspect which can be regarded as being "unoriginal."

 

If the assemblage is the only factor that determines "genuine vintage product" then what are we to say about the Action 1 that was pulled in pieces from behind drywall, reassembled to appear as though it was pulled out of the wall in one piece, and sold as a blue label?

 

I never heard this before. So, the Action 1 was put together using restoration techniques and still got a blue label? I'm guessing the book wasn't carefully separated and the pages, stables, and cover were put into the drywall for later discovery and assembly? Are we talking about tear repair and things like that?

 

IF the act of assemblage is the determinant in deciding whether a vintage item can be considered original, then we may need to consider "assemblage" has been going on in this hobby for quite some time without anywhere near as much general knowledge or controversy as this current situation beset on the vintage SW toy hobby.

 

The SW scandal goes well beyond assembly however.

 

The way toys were produced in those days leaves so much room for these types of anomalies to be explained. It is for this reason that errors have been a massively enterprising sub-segment of the vintage Star Wars toy hobby. While I appreciate people picking through this mess with a fine tooth comb, the fact is that factory produced errors are well known in every vintage line, starting from the pre-production phase to the point where the MOC was displayed in a retail store.

 

In some cases, certain figures from specific lines have a higher "error" incidence than others. Variations are no exception to this either, and I won't get into how closely some people follow even the slightest change in a figure. Of all the information put forward, the blisters have had the most room for a counterfeit or reproductive element to eke into the debate, but again, this is not something that can be proven with 100% certainty.

 

If we're splitting hairs that closely, then we can assume the Action 1 does not have "all original" parts, and likely used as close to period accurate staples as possible. While it might not be general knowledge, and was overshadowed by that great story of a fight breaking out in the kitchen that caused damage to the rear cover (Steve himself talks about how much people like a good yarn in Oldguys blog post), I know I'm not the only person who knew what went on with that book. I threw that out there because it isn't that great a departure from the kind of thing happening in our hobby, and in fact the Eastern Colour scheme was a very similar demonstration of someone sitting on an inventory of vintage stock and getting the idea to restart and crank out their own production line.

 

Just so it's clear, you are saying the Action 1 that was discovered in the wall was knowingly restored and put into a blue label by CGC? Or is this just a rumor? It seems that if that were true, that would have major repercussions on CGCs business. After all, restoration detection is one of the selling points of the service.

Wasn't there an article posted about it on the CGC site with before and after pictures? It was certainly pressed, but I don't know that anything was done that would be considered restoration by CGC's criteria.

 

What I was saying is this. The book was pulled out of the wall "not intact." Whether it was retrieved out of several spots, and from half a dozen wraps and a cover doesn't matter. It was not intact. The point of bringing this into this debate is assuming the wraps were intact themselves and didn't need repair when CCS reassembled the book, how different is this from using a cardback, blister and action figure that were all original parts? The Action 1 used a hand to feed through and reseat the staple rather than a machine, and the Palitoy MOC used an iron to mimick the heat seal method used in a factory.

 

Now, assuming they are both using original parts, the suggestion being made in this thread is that the MOC should be considered a fake while the Action 1 got through with a blue label from CGC. It struck me as odd that someone would make the contention that a Palitoy MOC, using all original parts, reassembled and heat sealed, should be considered counterfeit or fake by AFA when the opposite seems to be happening with comic certification.

 

And if you think the Action 1 is the only example, think again.

[THE_BEYONDER]

I've never heard anything about that Action 1 being reassembled prior to this thread. That's messed up.

[Comicdey]

Sounds a bit restored. First I'd heard that too. Not that I followed it much.

[Sardo Numspar]

Interesting comparison of comic vs. packaged toy counterfeits. Not sure the AF 15 analogy holds though.

 

Counterfeit comics: The difference in an ability to counterfeit Cerebus1 versus AF15 is that the Cerebus has black and white interior and only 2 cover colors, so much easier to counterfeit. Plus the cover red color was fully saturated, so again easier to counterfeit than a red/blue/yellow/black color separation with dot saturation. I know absolutely nothing about toy packaging, but I do remember in 1981 or so the cases of counterfeit Cerebus 1 that made the rounds of dealers in NYC.

 

 

Imagine if we found out 40% of the AF1's above 4.0 might be franken books, with fake covers and bleached interiors.

 

 

Do you mean AF15's? If so, that figure actually wouldn't surprise me.

 

Here in the Detroit area somebody produced a bunch of counterfeit Cerebus #1's years ago. The quality of the printing was a little off, and the color of the staples happened to be off, but they very nearly passed them off as originals. I don' think the perpetrator was ever identified.

 

Now, if someone went to that much trouble to counterfeit a Cerebus #1, does anyone seriously believe that a high-dollar book like AF15 hasn't been counterfeited?

 

Just for clarity, the packaging of vintage materials used period correct materials. Vintage cardback from Palitoy's factory, blisters and period correct action figures. Nothing was reproduced or counterfeit.

 

I think one of the problems with the sealed Star Wars figures that lends credibility to the scandal is there are incorrect action figures (paint detail variations, etc.) showing up sealed on the cardbacks. I don't know the details, but it sounds like figures with these paint variations that were produced later on are showing up on earlier cardbacks. Some have guessed that the Palitoy factory simply was throwing anything they had into the packages at the end. Also, many different cardback/figure/bubble type configurations have shown up via TT than originally thought. This could also be attributed to the factory throwing what they had together at the end. But, there is some speculation that some of the bubbles (those with the tiny pinprick holes) are thought to be reproductions, not the actual bubbles from the time period.

 

All in all, it sounds like more is going on with the TT Star Wars figures than just assembling period correct vintage materials.

 

The modern day assemblage and non-factory sealing process is the only aspect which can be regarded as being "unoriginal."

 

If the assemblage is the only factor that determines "genuine vintage product" then what are we to say about the Action 1 that was pulled in pieces from behind drywall, reassembled to appear as though it was pulled out of the wall in one piece, and sold as a blue label?

 

I never heard this before. So, the Action 1 was put together using restoration techniques and still got a blue label? I'm guessing the book wasn't carefully separated and the pages, stables, and cover were put into the drywall for later discovery and assembly? Are we talking about tear repair and things like that?

 

IF the act of assemblage is the determinant in deciding whether a vintage item can be considered original, then we may need to consider "assemblage" has been going on in this hobby for quite some time without anywhere near as much general knowledge or controversy as this current situation beset on the vintage SW toy hobby.

 

The SW scandal goes well beyond assembly however.

 

The way toys were produced in those days leaves so much room for these types of anomalies to be explained. It is for this reason that errors have been a massively enterprising sub-segment of the vintage Star Wars toy hobby. While I appreciate people picking through this mess with a fine tooth comb, the fact is that factory produced errors are well known in every vintage line, starting from the pre-production phase to the point where the MOC was displayed in a retail store.

 

In some cases, certain figures from specific lines have a higher "error" incidence than others. Variations are no exception to this either, and I won't get into how closely some people follow even the slightest change in a figure. Of all the information put forward, the blisters have had the most room for a counterfeit or reproductive element to eke into the debate, but again, this is not something that can be proven with 100% certainty.

 

If we're splitting hairs that closely, then we can assume the Action 1 does not have "all original" parts, and likely used as close to period accurate staples as possible. While it might not be general knowledge, and was overshadowed by that great story of a fight breaking out in the kitchen that caused damage to the rear cover (Steve himself talks about how much people like a good yarn in Oldguys blog post), I know I'm not the only person who knew what went on with that book. I threw that out there because it isn't that great a departure from the kind of thing happening in our hobby, and in fact the Eastern Colour scheme was a very similar demonstration of someone sitting on an inventory of vintage stock and getting the idea to restart and crank out their own production line.

 

Just so it's clear, you are saying the Action 1 that was discovered in the wall was knowingly restored and put into a blue label by CGC? Or is this just a rumor? It seems that if that were true, that would have major repercussions on CGCs business. After all, restoration detection is one of the selling points of the service.

Wasn't there an article posted about it on the CGC site with before and after pictures? It was certainly pressed, but I don't know that anything was done that would be considered restoration by CGC's criteria.

 

What I was saying is this. The book was pulled out of the wall "not intact." Whether it was retrieved out of several spots, and from half a dozen wraps and a cover doesn't matter. It was not intact. The point of bringing this into this debate is assuming the wraps were intact themselves and didn't need repair when CCS reassembled the book, how different is this from using a cardback, blister and action figure that were all original parts? The Action 1 used a hand to feed through and reseat the staple rather than a machine, and the Palitoy MOC used an iron to mimick the heat seal method used in a factory.

 

Now, assuming they are both using original parts, the suggestion being made in this thread is that the MOC should be considered a fake while the Action 1 got through with a blue label from CGC. It struck me as odd that someone would make the contention that a Palitoy MOC, using all original parts, reassembled and heat sealed, should be considered counterfeit or fake by AFA when the opposite seems to be happening with comic certification.

 

And if you think the Action 1 is the only example, think again.

 

Interesting analogy. I guess one subtle difference though would be that the adhesive product used to reassemble the Palitoy MOCs was not vintage. If this Action 1 was in fact "reassembled" I would assume its own original vintage staples were used. Still not sure whether it would be appropriate to receive a blue label if that, in fact, happened.

[comicwiz]

Interesting comparison of comic vs. packaged toy counterfeits. Not sure the AF 15 analogy holds though.

 

Counterfeit comics: The difference in an ability to counterfeit Cerebus1 versus AF15 is that the Cerebus has black and white interior and only 2 cover colors, so much easier to counterfeit. Plus the cover red color was fully saturated, so again easier to counterfeit than a red/blue/yellow/black color separation with dot saturation. I know absolutely nothing about toy packaging, but I do remember in 1981 or so the cases of counterfeit Cerebus 1 that made the rounds of dealers in NYC.

 

 

Imagine if we found out 40% of the AF1's above 4.0 might be franken books, with fake covers and bleached interiors.

 

 

Do you mean AF15's? If so, that figure actually wouldn't surprise me.

 

Here in the Detroit area somebody produced a bunch of counterfeit Cerebus #1's years ago. The quality of the printing was a little off, and the color of the staples happened to be off, but they very nearly passed them off as originals. I don' think the perpetrator was ever identified.

 

Now, if someone went to that much trouble to counterfeit a Cerebus #1, does anyone seriously believe that a high-dollar book like AF15 hasn't been counterfeited?

 

Just for clarity, the packaging of vintage materials used period correct materials. Vintage cardback from Palitoy's factory, blisters and period correct action figures. Nothing was reproduced or counterfeit.

 

I think one of the problems with the sealed Star Wars figures that lends credibility to the scandal is there are incorrect action figures (paint detail variations, etc.) showing up sealed on the cardbacks. I don't know the details, but it sounds like figures with these paint variations that were produced later on are showing up on earlier cardbacks. Some have guessed that the Palitoy factory simply was throwing anything they had into the packages at the end. Also, many different cardback/figure/bubble type configurations have shown up via TT than originally thought. This could also be attributed to the factory throwing what they had together at the end. But, there is some speculation that some of the bubbles (those with the tiny pinprick holes) are thought to be reproductions, not the actual bubbles from the time period.

 

All in all, it sounds like more is going on with the TT Star Wars figures than just assembling period correct vintage materials.

 

The modern day assemblage and non-factory sealing process is the only aspect which can be regarded as being "unoriginal."

 

If the assemblage is the only factor that determines "genuine vintage product" then what are we to say about the Action 1 that was pulled in pieces from behind drywall, reassembled to appear as though it was pulled out of the wall in one piece, and sold as a blue label?

 

I never heard this before. So, the Action 1 was put together using restoration techniques and still got a blue label? I'm guessing the book wasn't carefully separated and the pages, stables, and cover were put into the drywall for later discovery and assembly? Are we talking about tear repair and things like that?

 

IF the act of assemblage is the determinant in deciding whether a vintage item can be considered original, then we may need to consider "assemblage" has been going on in this hobby for quite some time without anywhere near as much general knowledge or controversy as this current situation beset on the vintage SW toy hobby.

 

The SW scandal goes well beyond assembly however.

 

The way toys were produced in those days leaves so much room for these types of anomalies to be explained. It is for this reason that errors have been a massively enterprising sub-segment of the vintage Star Wars toy hobby. While I appreciate people picking through this mess with a fine tooth comb, the fact is that factory produced errors are well known in every vintage line, starting from the pre-production phase to the point where the MOC was displayed in a retail store.

 

In some cases, certain figures from specific lines have a higher "error" incidence than others. Variations are no exception to this either, and I won't get into how closely some people follow even the slightest change in a figure. Of all the information put forward, the blisters have had the most room for a counterfeit or reproductive element to eke into the debate, but again, this is not something that can be proven with 100% certainty.

 

If we're splitting hairs that closely, then we can assume the Action 1 does not have "all original" parts, and likely used as close to period accurate staples as possible. While it might not be general knowledge, and was overshadowed by that great story of a fight breaking out in the kitchen that caused damage to the rear cover (Steve himself talks about how much people like a good yarn in Oldguys blog post), I know I'm not the only person who knew what went on with that book. I threw that out there because it isn't that great a departure from the kind of thing happening in our hobby, and in fact the Eastern Colour scheme was a very similar demonstration of someone sitting on an inventory of vintage stock and getting the idea to restart and crank out their own production line.

 

Just so it's clear, you are saying the Action 1 that was discovered in the wall was knowingly restored and put into a blue label by CGC? Or is this just a rumor? It seems that if that were true, that would have major repercussions on CGCs business. After all, restoration detection is one of the selling points of the service.

Wasn't there an article posted about it on the CGC site with before and after pictures? It was certainly pressed, but I don't know that anything was done that would be considered restoration by CGC's criteria.

 

What I was saying is this. The book was pulled out of the wall "not intact." Whether it was retrieved out of several spots, and from half a dozen wraps and a cover doesn't matter. It was not intact. The point of bringing this into this debate is assuming the wraps were intact themselves and didn't need repair when CCS reassembled the book, how different is this from using a cardback, blister and action figure that were all original parts? The Action 1 used a hand to feed through and reseat the staple rather than a machine, and the Palitoy MOC used an iron to mimick the heat seal method used in a factory.

 

Now, assuming they are both using original parts, the suggestion being made in this thread is that the MOC should be considered a fake while the Action 1 got through with a blue label from CGC. It struck me as odd that someone would make the contention that a Palitoy MOC, using all original parts, reassembled and heat sealed, should be considered counterfeit or fake by AFA when the opposite seems to be happening with comic certification.

 

And if you think the Action 1 is the only example, think again.

 

Interesting analogy. I guess one subtle difference though would be that the adhesive product used to reassemble the Palitoy MOCs was not vintage. If this Action 1 was in fact "reassembled" I would assume its own original vintage staples were used. Still not sure whether it would be appropriate to receive a blue label if that, in fact, happened.

 

There is another angle to the heat seal debate. It is my contention, and always has been, that the grade and formulation of the plastic used on the blister was intentionally chosen for the purpose of not requiring an intermediary adhesive. This did vary with mileage with later lines, regions licensed to produce LFL toys, and materials sourced in each region.

 

Even before these allegations surfaced, the SW collecting community could not come to agreement on this, although the majority agree that no glues were used to factory seal blisters on MOC's.

 

It is this factory method of heat sealing blisters which ordinarily makes reseals using adhesives so easy to spot. The intermediary adhesive almost always can be spotted versus a factory seal because it either creates a contrast difference on the otherwise translucent blister making contact to the card, or it produces an inferior bond which can also be seen in the way the ink on the card reacts to the blister making direct contact.

 

The suggestion that an inventory of unused vintage blisters was stockpiled and used alongside vintage unused cardbacks to produce the appearance of a factory sealed MOC is writing a new chapter in this debate, as hacks to mimic the factory heat seal method haven't yet produced a consistent benchmark for anyone to accurately detect variances and possible methods (i.e. tacking iron or some modified heating appliance to evenly distribute heat, contain heat reference and dialed to a specific temperature).

 

More modern reproduced blisters come with an adhesive and tear away layer (similar to the silica-coated tear away sheet on a bubble or box mailer) that makes it amenable to peel away and stick. These blisters (at least the one on my Palitoy MOC) does not have the appearance of this type of "modern" blister, and the way it is attached to the card, resembles a factory seal to a tee.

 

Final point, the reason why Palitoy has maintained a very strong following among collectors over the years is due mostly to their apparent resistence to yellowing blisters. Their US counterpart, from ESB onward, seem to yellow and rather rapidly once even the slight yellow tint can be spotted. This seems to be the exception rather than the rule with the Palitoy MOC's from the same lines. The ROTJ desert scene Fett is almost impossible to find without a yellowing blister, and yet, every Palitory space scene Fett I have scene has a clear blister. It's unfortunate that the revelation will have an effect on the reputation of the line, but it has otherwise demonstrated an impressive ability to reveal signs of aging, from the 12 Back line and onward, which was a very appealing aspect to my collecting preferences as I avoid later lines mostly for the reasons that the blisters eventually yellow no matter how well kept.

[ComicConnoisseur]

Interesting comparison of comic vs. packaged toy counterfeits. Not sure the AF 15 analogy holds though.

 

Counterfeit comics: The difference in an ability to counterfeit Cerebus1 versus AF15 is that the Cerebus has black and white interior and only 2 cover colors, so much easier to counterfeit. Plus the cover red color was fully saturated, so again easier to counterfeit than a red/blue/yellow/black color separation with dot saturation. I know absolutely nothing about toy packaging, but I do remember in 1981 or so the cases of counterfeit Cerebus 1 that made the rounds of dealers in NYC.

 

 

Imagine if we found out 40% of the AF1's above 4.0 might be franken books, with fake covers and bleached interiors.

 

 

Do you mean AF15's? If so, that figure actually wouldn't surprise me.

 

Here in the Detroit area somebody produced a bunch of counterfeit Cerebus #1's years ago. The quality of the printing was a little off, and the color of the staples happened to be off, but they very nearly passed them off as originals. I don' think the perpetrator was ever identified.

 

Now, if someone went to that much trouble to counterfeit a Cerebus #1, does anyone seriously believe that a high-dollar book like AF15 hasn't been counterfeited?

 

Just for clarity, the packaging of vintage materials used period correct materials. Vintage cardback from Palitoy's factory, blisters and period correct action figures. Nothing was reproduced or counterfeit.

 

I think one of the problems with the sealed Star Wars figures that lends credibility to the scandal is there are incorrect action figures (paint detail variations, etc.) showing up sealed on the cardbacks. I don't know the details, but it sounds like figures with these paint variations that were produced later on are showing up on earlier cardbacks. Some have guessed that the Palitoy factory simply was throwing anything they had into the packages at the end. Also, many different cardback/figure/bubble type configurations have shown up via TT than originally thought. This could also be attributed to the factory throwing what they had together at the end. But, there is some speculation that some of the bubbles (those with the tiny pinprick holes) are thought to be reproductions, not the actual bubbles from the time period.

 

All in all, it sounds like more is going on with the TT Star Wars figures than just assembling period correct vintage materials.

 

The modern day assemblage and non-factory sealing process is the only aspect which can be regarded as being "unoriginal."

 

If the assemblage is the only factor that determines "genuine vintage product" then what are we to say about the Action 1 that was pulled in pieces from behind drywall, reassembled to appear as though it was pulled out of the wall in one piece, and sold as a blue label?

 

I never heard this before. So, the Action 1 was put together using restoration techniques and still got a blue label? I'm guessing the book wasn't carefully separated and the pages, stables, and cover were put into the drywall for later discovery and assembly? Are we talking about tear repair and things like that?

 

IF the act of assemblage is the determinant in deciding whether a vintage item can be considered original, then we may need to consider "assemblage" has been going on in this hobby for quite some time without anywhere near as much general knowledge or controversy as this current situation beset on the vintage SW toy hobby.

 

The SW scandal goes well beyond assembly however.

 

The way toys were produced in those days leaves so much room for these types of anomalies to be explained. It is for this reason that errors have been a massively enterprising sub-segment of the vintage Star Wars toy hobby. While I appreciate people picking through this mess with a fine tooth comb, the fact is that factory produced errors are well known in every vintage line, starting from the pre-production phase to the point where the MOC was displayed in a retail store.

 

In some cases, certain figures from specific lines have a higher "error" incidence than others. Variations are no exception to this either, and I won't get into how closely some people follow even the slightest change in a figure. Of all the information put forward, the blisters have had the most room for a counterfeit or reproductive element to eke into the debate, but again, this is not something that can be proven with 100% certainty.

 

If we're splitting hairs that closely, then we can assume the Action 1 does not have "all original" parts, and likely used as close to period accurate staples as possible. While it might not be general knowledge, and was overshadowed by that great story of a fight breaking out in the kitchen that caused damage to the rear cover (Steve himself talks about how much people like a good yarn in Oldguys blog post), I know I'm not the only person who knew what went on with that book. I threw that out there because it isn't that great a departure from the kind of thing happening in our hobby, and in fact the Eastern Colour scheme was a very similar demonstration of someone sitting on an inventory of vintage stock and getting the idea to restart and crank out their own production line.

 

Just so it's clear, you are saying the Action 1 that was discovered in the wall was knowingly restored and put into a blue label by CGC? Or is this just a rumor? It seems that if that were true, that would have major repercussions on CGCs business. After all, restoration detection is one of the selling points of the service.

Wasn't there an article posted about it on the CGC site with before and after pictures? It was certainly pressed, but I don't know that anything was done that would be considered restoration by CGC's criteria.

 

What I was saying is this. The book was pulled out of the wall "not intact." Whether it was retrieved out of several spots, and from half a dozen wraps and a cover doesn't matter. It was not intact. The point of bringing this into this debate is assuming the wraps were intact themselves and didn't need repair when CCS reassembled the book, how different is this from using a cardback, blister and action figure that were all original parts? The Action 1 used a hand to feed through and reseat the staple rather than a machine, and the Palitoy MOC used an iron to mimick the heat seal method used in a factory.

 

Now, assuming they are both using original parts, the suggestion being made in this thread is that the MOC should be considered a fake while the Action 1 got through with a blue label from CGC. It struck me as odd that someone would make the contention that a Palitoy MOC, using all original parts, reassembled and heat sealed, should be considered counterfeit or fake by AFA when the opposite seems to be happening with comic certification.

 

And if you think the Action 1 is the only example, think again.

 

Interesting analogy. I guess one subtle difference though would be that the adhesive product used to reassemble the Palitoy MOCs was not vintage. If this Action 1 was in fact "reassembled" I would assume its own original vintage staples were used. Still not sure whether it would be appropriate to receive a blue label if that, in fact, happened.

[wardevil0]

Action #1 found in wall

 

The Action #1 in question did in fact receive a blue label, as the photos in the link clearly show. It also has the notation "cover detached." It seems that it avoided the GLOD and PLOD by still being very low-grade: 1.5.

 

Sorry for the big photo, try not to quote it fifty times...

 

[originalisbest]

Interesting comparison of comic vs. packaged toy counterfeits. Not sure the AF 15 analogy holds though.

 

Counterfeit comics: The difference in an ability to counterfeit Cerebus1 versus AF15 is that the Cerebus has black and white interior and only 2 cover colors, so much easier to counterfeit. Plus the cover red color was fully saturated, so again easier to counterfeit than a red/blue/yellow/black color separation with dot saturation. I know absolutely nothing about toy packaging, but I do remember in 1981 or so the cases of counterfeit Cerebus 1 that made the rounds of dealers in NYC.

 

 

Imagine if we found out 40% of the AF1's above 4.0 might be franken books, with fake covers and bleached interiors.

 

 

Do you mean AF15's? If so, that figure actually wouldn't surprise me.

 

Here in the Detroit area somebody produced a bunch of counterfeit Cerebus #1's years ago. The quality of the printing was a little off, and the color of the staples happened to be off, but they very nearly passed them off as originals. I don' think the perpetrator was ever identified.

 

Now, if someone went to that much trouble to counterfeit a Cerebus #1, does anyone seriously believe that a high-dollar book like AF15 hasn't been counterfeited?

 

Just for clarity, the packaging of vintage materials used period correct materials. Vintage cardback from Palitoy's factory, blisters and period correct action figures. Nothing was reproduced or counterfeit.

 

I think one of the problems with the sealed Star Wars figures that lends credibility to the scandal is there are incorrect action figures (paint detail variations, etc.) showing up sealed on the cardbacks. I don't know the details, but it sounds like figures with these paint variations that were produced later on are showing up on earlier cardbacks. Some have guessed that the Palitoy factory simply was throwing anything they had into the packages at the end. Also, many different cardback/figure/bubble type configurations have shown up via TT than originally thought. This could also be attributed to the factory throwing what they had together at the end. But, there is some speculation that some of the bubbles (those with the tiny pinprick holes) are thought to be reproductions, not the actual bubbles from the time period.

 

All in all, it sounds like more is going on with the TT Star Wars figures than just assembling period correct vintage materials.

 

The modern day assemblage and non-factory sealing process is the only aspect which can be regarded as being "unoriginal."

 

If the assemblage is the only factor that determines "genuine vintage product" then what are we to say about the Action 1 that was pulled in pieces from behind drywall, reassembled to appear as though it was pulled out of the wall in one piece, and sold as a blue label?

 

I never heard this before. So, the Action 1 was put together using restoration techniques and still got a blue label? I'm guessing the book wasn't carefully separated and the pages, stables, and cover were put into the drywall for later discovery and assembly? Are we talking about tear repair and things like that?

 

IF the act of assemblage is the determinant in deciding whether a vintage item can be considered original, then we may need to consider "assemblage" has been going on in this hobby for quite some time without anywhere near as much general knowledge or controversy as this current situation beset on the vintage SW toy hobby.

 

The SW scandal goes well beyond assembly however.

 

The way toys were produced in those days leaves so much room for these types of anomalies to be explained. It is for this reason that errors have been a massively enterprising sub-segment of the vintage Star Wars toy hobby. While I appreciate people picking through this mess with a fine tooth comb, the fact is that factory produced errors are well known in every vintage line, starting from the pre-production phase to the point where the MOC was displayed in a retail store.

 

In some cases, certain figures from specific lines have a higher "error" incidence than others. Variations are no exception to this either, and I won't get into how closely some people follow even the slightest change in a figure. Of all the information put forward, the blisters have had the most room for a counterfeit or reproductive element to eke into the debate, but again, this is not something that can be proven with 100% certainty.

 

If we're splitting hairs that closely, then we can assume the Action 1 does not have "all original" parts, and likely used as close to period accurate staples as possible. While it might not be general knowledge, and was overshadowed by that great story of a fight breaking out in the kitchen that caused damage to the rear cover (Steve himself talks about how much people like a good yarn in Oldguys blog post), I know I'm not the only person who knew what went on with that book. I threw that out there because it isn't that great a departure from the kind of thing happening in our hobby, and in fact the Eastern Colour scheme was a very similar demonstration of someone sitting on an inventory of vintage stock and getting the idea to restart and crank out their own production line.

 

Just so it's clear, you are saying the Action 1 that was discovered in the wall was knowingly restored and put into a blue label by CGC? Or is this just a rumor? It seems that if that were true, that would have major repercussions on CGCs business. After all, restoration detection is one of the selling points of the service.

Wasn't there an article posted about it on the CGC site with before and after pictures? It was certainly pressed, but I don't know that anything was done that would be considered restoration by CGC's criteria.

 

What I was saying is this. The book was pulled out of the wall "not intact." Whether it was retrieved out of several spots, and from half a dozen wraps and a cover doesn't matter. It was not intact. The point of bringing this into this debate is assuming the wraps were intact themselves and didn't need repair when CCS reassembled the book, how different is this from using a cardback, blister and action figure that were all original parts? The Action 1 used a hand to feed through and reseat the staple rather than a machine, and the Palitoy MOC used an iron to mimick the heat seal method used in a factory.

 

Now, assuming they are both using original parts, the suggestion being made in this thread is that the MOC should be considered a fake while the Action 1 got through with a blue label from CGC. It struck me as odd that someone would make the contention that a Palitoy MOC, using all original parts, reassembled and heat sealed, should be considered counterfeit or fake by AFA when the opposite seems to be happening with comic certification.

 

And if you think the Action 1 is the only example, think again.

 

Interesting analogy. I guess one subtle difference though would be that the adhesive product used to reassemble the Palitoy MOCs was not vintage. If this Action 1 was in fact "reassembled" I would assume its own original vintage staples were used. Still not sure whether it would be appropriate to receive a blue label if that, in fact, happened.

 

Not that apt a comparison, in my opinion. The main reason, the apples and oranges of it, is the Action 1 in question -- even if the staples were gone/loosened/pried open, and the wraps and cover torn, and scattered all about the general area, they were at one point, an original whole and complete Action #1. Not a copy frankenbooked together from several partial Action #1s. The Palitoy SW examples are all vintage parts (save perhaps any intermediary glue) BUT were never actually together as a whole back when produced, until being made so, in the present day.

 

To try and draw up a comparable example to the Action 1, imagine digging out of a wall an intact vase, perhaps with a few fissures and cracks, but still hanging together on its own, along with its lid in 2 to 3 cleanly cracked apart pieces. If you carefully place the lid pieces together but don't use glue, etc. and they seat nicely atop the fragile vase, that's pretty much what the Action 1 in question is. Had glue or rice paper or ct or etc. been employed in placing the parts back together, then the additives would have pushed it into restored territory, again in my opinion. The aspect of the staples having to be bent back by hand, rather than the original machine assembly, is the one point of differentiation I will grant you -- but with nothing else being done, I haven't any problem with this particular Action #1 being a blue label. It's not a product of mass assembly in the way the Palitoys are, so, as with any Action #1, it's a case-by-case basis in judging them.

 

Another significant difference between the Palitoys and your example of the from-the-walls-Action 1 (and the #2 reason why it's not that apt a comparison) is it's ONE book. Not reams of original Action #1 paper signatures, a stack of new-old-stock covers ready to go, and a vintage comic press all warmed up to go with a fresh load of vintage oiled 1938 staples. It's not even the reams of paper, covers, staples and a guy in a sanitary lab with fine pointed tweezers and a gift for craftsmanship.

 

When and if vast loads of original Action #1 covers and guts are uncovered, then there would be the dangerous potential of something akin to the AFA Palitoy scandal with regard to vintage expensive books. But as noted with the ham-fisted Eastern File copy fakes, it's not all that easy to pull off.

 

Given the extreme price of a theoretically perfect Action #1 or Detective #27, you'd think it would be well worth it for a skilled counterfeiter to try their hand -- but it hasn't happened just yet, and it seems unlikely that the technology is available to make a truly convincing fake.

 

Compared to a stamp, coin, baseball card (or hockey card, for comicwiz and any other hockey-minded Canadians) counterfeit attempt, there's just so much more content to a vintage comic book -- so many more details to have to create out of whole cloth -- that I doubt a full-fledged counterfeit example will ever be created that can pass muster. If original plates, or original printed contents and covers of key books are ever discovered somewhere and have only to be assembled (different from the Action 1 example, as it WAS once assembled) then that would be worrisome.

 

In a way though, the pricing effect would probably just be similar to a previously scarce book getting a population explosion through a wherehouse find. Not all comics would suffer, but the particular issue or issues at hand would.

 

Seeing as how there's been a long price history of the keys, where it would be well worthwhile for nefarious individuals to try and assemble them in multiples from unused, new old stock guts and covers and staples -- I'm pretty confident that there simply isn't any such material around.