AFA Scandal

[asteroid-comix]

For the most part, the way Jason Joiner came forward with this information (which he claimed to have known for a number of years) screams diversion/deflection. It's also highly irresponsible to not have come forward with what he knew about the number of "unused" cardbacks he claimed were floating around, but then again what can you expect from someone who is known for passing off fake movie props as real.

 

To be fair, I don't think he came forward with the information with any malice towards Toni. I watched it unfold. JJ seemed to be caught up in the limelight as he shared stories of the old days of SW collecting. He mentioned a vague reference along with a handful of other stories. A couple of boardies on SWFUK started to drill him with questions. It was only through their questions that everything came to light.

 

[comicwiz]

For the most part, the way Jason Joiner came forward with this information (which he claimed to have known for a number of years) screams diversion/deflection. It's also highly irresponsible to not have come forward with what he knew about the number of "unused" cardbacks he claimed were floating around, but then again what can you expect from someone who is known for passing off fake movie props as real.

 

To be fair, I don't think he came forward with the information with any malice towards Toni. I watched it unfold. JJ seemed to be caught up in the limelight as he shared stories of the old days of SW collecting. He mentioned a vague reference along with a handful of other stories. A couple of boardies on SWFUK started to drill him with questions. It was only through their questions that everything came to light.

 

Point taken. And for clarity, what I intended most to come from the comment is that it seemed way too opportune from a timing standpoint to come forward with this information to divert attention away from himself. It boggles the mind that not even someone like Tom Derby knew of the existence of this many cardbacks floating around, and for it to come out in the open only when things got heated for JJ left me in suspicion squint mode.

[comicwiz]

Prior to this revelation, the following post distils several comments made over the years. No one came even close to suggesting a hundred were in existence from any single individual, much less compiling comments from everyone dating as far back as 2004, so to hear JJ suggesting Antoni Emchowicz purchased 25,000 of them is staggering:

 

From 2004

My recent Lando Skiff Ebay score...Palitoy Proof or unused backer?

 

From that same thread, a comment made by "Billy_Boy" follows

 

The 50 or so examples I purchased (and then proceeded to sell) were all 'saved' from destruction in 1985!

 

None of the unused cards I saw were ESB 45A/B cards... BUT there were quite a few RotJ 45Cs and 65s!

 

Considering the number of 'case fresh' Pal 45 B/C cards and Dutch/German Pal 45s that 'hit the market' at the same time... I'd imagine* hundreds of these sealed boxes were 'flogged off' cheaply at the sad demise of Palitoy! *= I recently had this 'assumption' partly confirmed from an original pair of buyers too!

 

I've been told (from reliable sources) that the Tri 'Snowtroopers' were found loose in VAST supply at carboot sales around Leicester! Some were complete in baggies, whilst a few examples had strange MOULDED 'grey limbs'? I doubt these were ever true 'protos', BUT were probably just 'tests' of some form in the Palitoy factory!

 

Hundreds of Tri PotF items were exported for sale on mainland Europe and the Tri-logo 4-Packs and 64 figure boxes were sold through various warehouses in the UK!

 

I can also vividly recall seeing dozens of Palitoy 45C Boba Fetts (mostly Tri 'light blue' versions) for sale at only 49-69 pence each! I'd seen the odd example of this variant on imported Meccano RotJ and Tri-logo cards, BUT I hadn't spotted that many for sale at retail on this particular cardback before?

 

The same goes for some other 'Tri Variants'... like the Pal 65** 'dark brown booted' Luke Bespin, the Pal 45 'pale faced' Han Hoth and the Pal 45 'pale faced' AT-AT Commander figures etc???

 

Items just started to appear 'from out of the woodwork' that simply hadn't been seen by collectors that often before? The sheer numbers of Tri Boba Fetts were dazzling!!! = I just wish I'd bought more of them to keep at that time too!

 

It certainly was a great time to buy masses of the toys at 'bargain' prices!!!

 

Bill

 

From 2008: Palitoy unused cardbacks?

 

Then again in 2010

 

I purchased 4 or 5 of the Unused Palitoy backers from ToyToni at the Atlantique City Show. I was under the impression(maybe he told me?) they came from the same source as all of his minty carded stuff. I then later bought some more from him through the mail. I think I ended up with 8 different with 3-5 doubles and maybe a triple. Which ones were they? I do not remember. One day, I will fire up the old computer that has some pics on it and we will see which ones I had. He told me he had more of them, but I stopped buying them because they were $100 a piece and I felt they weren't actually worth that at the time. Proof cards were on a downswing at the time. I contacted him a year or 2 later and he said he had no more. Every year or 2, I shoot him another email making sure he didn't find more. I sold all the doubles to friends and at shows, but held on to one of each. Then got bored with them, got them graded, and sold them on ebay. Wish I had more info for ya.

Thanks,

Andy

[ComicConnoisseur]

Thanks AF.

 

To wade through this whole mess, I want to try to explain the more important developments in as close to the chronological order they occurred to help people better understand what has happened.

 

In order to do this, we need to review the subject of doubt swirling around one Palitoy 12 Back vinyl cape (VC) Jawa. While this scandal does not to my knowledge effect the Palitoy 12 Back line, it is a central talking point to the whole matter.

 

For years, there was suspicion and doubt surrounding the authenticity of a Palitoy 12 Back VC Jawa. Then earlier this year, AFA had authenticated a Palitoy 12 Back VC Jawa MOC and while one would think the doubt would lift, it only raised more questions. To better understand the gravity of how important this development was to the vintage Star Wars toy line, finally having a certified example of something considered to not have existed would be akin to finding a 10 cent price variant of AF 15.

 

Some of these questions emerged partly from the way the authentication loop seemed to lack credibility itself. The submitter claimed to have sent in the MOC, had it graded, and AFA returned it with a 75 grade IIRC. Then more questions emerged, and the submitter requested that AFA provide a COA, which it did, but the COA was not signed or dated. Keep in mind, this happened during a point in AFA's history where CIB had decided to part ways, at least in so far as providing the authentication aspect "in-house" on AFA's behalf for rarer toys. I don't want to dwell on this point too much because there are a number of additional questions concerning who actually performed the authentication on the Palitoy 12 Back Jawa. Suffice it to say that the COA was meant to put to rest the remaining doubts.

 

Nonetheless, as we move forward on this particular topic, the reason why these doubts and questions of concern were not only continuing to persist, but seemed to gain more steam is because one of the people who was believed to own one, or had been the source of the example that had passed certification was a Jason Joiner. The allegations against this individual are storied, and revolved around incidents where he passed of fake props as original.

 

This is the backdrop to the much larger matter which I will get to now. At the point where the debacle over the authenticity of the Palitoy VC Jawa reached a boiling point, Jason Joiner alleged that another dealer by the name of Antoni Emchowicz, also known as Toy Toni (toytoni.com) had purchased some 25K unused cardbacks from Palitoy when they closed the factory.

 

When this claim emerged, people began to compare notes on what they had purchased from Antoni Emchowicz, and started noticing some problems, mainly with the way the seals of the blister were attached the card. This note comparison evolved further when a collector who claimed to have an example of the "unused" cardback, and compared it with an MOC that came from Toy Toni, and a childhood MOC. He quickly started to notice issues on the MOC originating from Tony, claiming the cardback had registration and printing errors not found on his original owner cardback.

 

This wild variation in printing did raise concerns over the legitimacy of the MOC's coming from Antoni Emchowicz. The primary belief is that these "unused" cardbacks Antoni Emchowicz purchased were "unused" for a reason - they failed to pass quality control. And while it is a salient point in the discussion, especially when there are three known variations caught in the wild for a single character (C-3PO), there are also a number of seasoned collectors and experts (Tom Derby and ChrisG to name a few) who aren't yet ready to consider these types of production anomalies as confirmation of something being amiss.

 

I contacted AFA (Chad Thompson) and UKG (Stephen Ward) just before going on holiday, and both confirmed they were aware of this situation. I also managed to speak to Stephen Ward on the telephone, and one of the things that came from the discussion is that Antoni Emchowicz has primarily used AFA to submit his items, but UKG had also graded some of his items, which included toy lines like Meccano.

 

For the most part, the way Jason Joiner came forward with this information (which he claimed to have known for a number of years) screams diversion/deflection. It's also highly irresponsible to not have come forward with what he knew about the number of "unused" cardbacks he claimed were floating around, but then again what can you expect from someone who is known for passing off fake movie props as real.

 

While Jason's reputation certainly didn't help the legitimacy of the claims, Antoni Emchowicz didn't do himself any favours by remaining silent on the allegations, nor did it help any that he was found to have several eBay accounts, one of which was used to buy "mint" loose figures which seemed to be consistent with the character MOC's he sold through his online store. When the fiasco erupted, it is also alleged that he switched his profile to private and had changed his alias over 30 times from the time the account was first created.

 

The main thing to take away from all this is that it has created a high degree of suspicion on the Palitoy line of Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi action figures. The more valuable being the double-stem Palitoy ROTJ Boba Fett, and the 45/65 Back Boba Fett with unpainted knee.

 

I have attempted to communicate my concerns directly with Antoni Emchowicz with no response. Prior to this scandal, he was known mostly for being a co-author/photographer of a New Cavendish Books published work called " Future Toys."

 

I have not yet decided how to approach the situation of being compensated for the piece I bought from him, but Antoni Emchowicz needs to realize that he can't use the same same cage he uses to photograph sharks to deal with the monsoon of allegations surrounding him.

 

In fact with the exception of coming clean on what he did, nothing can save him from the ferocity of the accusations made against his image and reputation. The sad irony, if the allegations turn out to be true, is how a writer/photographer who covered the "Future Toys" beat stands to have single-handedly decimated the future of the Palitoy vintage MOC line, all in the name greed.

I wonder if people will start digging into what else he sold?

Was this guy Antoni Emchowicz, also a big time vintage Japan robot seller as well?

I mean if he wrote a book about vintage Japan robots, maybe the board members of the vintage Japan robot forums

ALPHADROME and ROBOTJAPAN might have more info on him?

[COI]

This entire thing is really unbelievable. On the one hand, it's really interesting to see what can happen when a grading company makes a mistake of this magnitude. On the other hand, I'm not invested in it, but I sympathize with those of you who have been taken.

 

Joseph, I hope you get some restitution.

[Buzzetta]

Prior to this revelation, the following post distils several comments made over the years. No one came even close to suggesting a hundred were in existence from any single individual, much less compiling comments from everyone dating as far back as 2004, so to hear JJ suggesting Antoni Emchowicz purchased 25,000 of them is staggering:

 

Here is my question and I do not mean this in a told ya' so way.

 

I have been out of MOC Vintage SW for awhile having sold my collection a few years ago with the last piece I bought around 2004. One thing I noticed at the time was that people were (and still are) openly admitting that they were resealing bubbles to repro/custom cardbacks. As I am out of touch with that collecting community, was their anyone at the time that raised the concern that the customs were getting too good? I feel that it was only a matter of time before someone duplicated the cardback with correct card stock.

 

Is everything on the up and up in your collection? I know that the Fett is one of the more coveted pieces from the Palitoy figures as it was different from the US Version. I am hoping that were not burned.

 

Custom Cards - Check out the Amanaman

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=star+wars+vintage+reproduction+card&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.Xstar+wars+vintage+custom+card&_nkw=star+wars+vintage+custom+card&_sacat=0

[Sardo Numspar]

Thank you for posting this. I read through the entire thread on SWFUK and it is fascinating to see how an off the cuff comment escalated into a hobby changing debacle. Unfortunately, this may have a far-reaching impact way beyond the Pailtoy MOC market directly at issue. If the allegations are true, it means that a process has been discovered that allows one to re-attach the bubbles to these cards and has been used for years, which passes full muster by both grading houses as unopened factory sealed. If the grading houses cannot distinguish between factory bubble sealing and post factory home sealing, it puts into question the authenticity of all bubble sealed vintage toys that are certified as factory sealed.

 

It is important to note that all pieces of the items in question are believed to be authentic (including the plastic bubbles) and that only the timing and manner of sealing is at issue. However, it is not surprising that collectors in that hobby are furious that items they paid top dollar for - from who apparently used to be a very reputable dealer - were not as advertised. Would a similar analogy be if CGC had no way of telling if a cover has been re-attached to a book (even when all parts of the book, including vintage staples, were used)? I guess every one of the Pailtoy MOC's at issue is an undetectable Franken Toy, and that hobby will be forever altered by this scandal.

[comicwiz]

Thanks AF.

 

To wade through this whole mess, I want to try to explain the more important developments in as close to the chronological order they occurred to help people better understand what has happened.

 

In order to do this, we need to review the subject of doubt swirling around one Palitoy 12 Back vinyl cape (VC) Jawa. While this scandal does not to my knowledge effect the Palitoy 12 Back line, it is a central talking point to the whole matter.

 

For years, there was suspicion and doubt surrounding the authenticity of a Palitoy 12 Back VC Jawa. Then earlier this year, AFA had authenticated a Palitoy 12 Back VC Jawa MOC and while one would think the doubt would lift, it only raised more questions. To better understand the gravity of how important this development was to the vintage Star Wars toy line, finally having a certified example of something considered to not have existed would be akin to finding a 10 cent price variant of AF 15.

 

Some of these questions emerged partly from the way the authentication loop seemed to lack credibility itself. The submitter claimed to have sent in the MOC, had it graded, and AFA returned it with a 75 grade IIRC. Then more questions emerged, and the submitter requested that AFA provide a COA, which it did, but the COA was not signed or dated. Keep in mind, this happened during a point in AFA's history where CIB had decided to part ways, at least in so far as providing the authentication aspect "in-house" on AFA's behalf for rarer toys. I don't want to dwell on this point too much because there are a number of additional questions concerning who actually performed the authentication on the Palitoy 12 Back Jawa. Suffice it to say that the COA was meant to put to rest the remaining doubts.

 

Nonetheless, as we move forward on this particular topic, the reason why these doubts and questions of concern were not only continuing to persist, but seemed to gain more steam is because one of the people who was believed to own one, or had been the source of the example that had passed certification was a Jason Joiner. The allegations against this individual are storied, and revolved around incidents where he passed of fake props as original.

 

This is the backdrop to the much larger matter which I will get to now. At the point where the debacle over the authenticity of the Palitoy VC Jawa reached a boiling point, Jason Joiner alleged that another dealer by the name of Antoni Emchowicz, also known as Toy Toni (toytoni.com) had purchased some 25K unused cardbacks from Palitoy when they closed the factory.

 

When this claim emerged, people began to compare notes on what they had purchased from Antoni Emchowicz, and started noticing some problems, mainly with the way the seals of the blister were attached the card. This note comparison evolved further when a collector who claimed to have an example of the "unused" cardback, and compared it with an MOC that came from Toy Toni, and a childhood MOC. He quickly started to notice issues on the MOC originating from Tony, claiming the cardback had registration and printing errors not found on his original owner cardback.

 

This wild variation in printing did raise concerns over the legitimacy of the MOC's coming from Antoni Emchowicz. The primary belief is that these "unused" cardbacks Antoni Emchowicz purchased were "unused" for a reason - they failed to pass quality control. And while it is a salient point in the discussion, especially when there are three known variations caught in the wild for a single character (C-3PO), there are also a number of seasoned collectors and experts (Tom Derby and ChrisG to name a few) who aren't yet ready to consider these types of production anomalies as confirmation of something being amiss.

 

I contacted AFA (Chad Thompson) and UKG (Stephen Ward) just before going on holiday, and both confirmed they were aware of this situation. I also managed to speak to Stephen Ward on the telephone, and one of the things that came from the discussion is that Antoni Emchowicz has primarily used AFA to submit his items, but UKG had also graded some of his items, which included toy lines like Meccano.

 

For the most part, the way Jason Joiner came forward with this information (which he claimed to have known for a number of years) screams diversion/deflection. It's also highly irresponsible to not have come forward with what he knew about the number of "unused" cardbacks he claimed were floating around, but then again what can you expect from someone who is known for passing off fake movie props as real.

 

While Jason's reputation certainly didn't help the legitimacy of the claims, Antoni Emchowicz didn't do himself any favours by remaining silent on the allegations, nor did it help any that he was found to have several eBay accounts, one of which was used to buy "mint" loose figures which seemed to be consistent with the character MOC's he sold through his online store. When the fiasco erupted, it is also alleged that he switched his profile to private and had changed his alias over 30 times from the time the account was first created.

 

The main thing to take away from all this is that it has created a high degree of suspicion on the Palitoy line of Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi action figures. The more valuable being the double-stem Palitoy ROTJ Boba Fett, and the 45/65 Back Boba Fett with unpainted knee.

 

I have attempted to communicate my concerns directly with Antoni Emchowicz with no response. Prior to this scandal, he was known mostly for being a co-author/photographer of a New Cavendish Books published work called " Future Toys."

 

I have not yet decided how to approach the situation of being compensated for the piece I bought from him, but Antoni Emchowicz needs to realize that he can't use the same same cage he uses to photograph sharks to deal with the monsoon of allegations surrounding him.

 

In fact with the exception of coming clean on what he did, nothing can save him from the ferocity of the accusations made against his image and reputation. The sad irony, if the allegations turn out to be true, is how a writer/photographer who covered the "Future Toys" beat stands to have single-handedly decimated the future of the Palitoy vintage MOC line, all in the name greed.

I wonder if people will start digging into what else he sold?

Was this guy Antoni Emchowicz, also a big time vintage Japan robot seller as well?

 

That's him. The eBay handle (at least the one which is known) is Marsking

[comicwiz]

This entire thing is really unbelievable. On the one hand, it's really interesting to see what can happen when a grading company makes a mistake of this magnitude. On the other hand, I'm not invested in it, but I sympathize with those of you who have been taken.

 

Joseph, I hope you get some restitution.

 

Thanks Andrew.

 

I'm sure many of you will find Tom's comment posted on RS interesting, and at least on how this whole situation crept-in out of nowhere:

 

Hello Everyone,

 

It has been quite some time since I’ve posted on these forums, but the recent situation regarding figures originating from ToyToni is certainly one on a large enough scale to warrant my posting here. The following observations and opinions represent only my personal thoughts on the situation based on my understanding of what has transpired thus far. There is so much information, both in the form of well thought out observations, as well as unfounded accusations that it is difficult to fully wrap my head around everything, so please be advised that changes to some of my opinions are likely as more information is gathered.

 

Background

 

First, I would point out that this specific situation differs significantly from any other which has ever occurred within this hobby. IF true, this is not the same as previous instances where unscrupulous individuals have made fake or reproduction items. It isn’t even the same as when coins were allegedly re-struck using the original vintage dies or hardcopies allegedly created using vintage silicon molds. IF true, this would be an entirely new issue in the collecting community because it would theoretically involve all authentic vintage materials. This distinction is quite important for several reasons.

 

Expert opinions are formed from years of experience, proven techniques of observation and study, and available knowledge within the collectible community at any given time. Any experienced collector or expert can be adept at spotting reseals (i.e. blisters which at one point were opened and then glued back to the card) or detecting recards (i.e. cards which have been recently printed for the purpose of carding loose figures), but not one collector, dealer, or expert that I am aware of (including myself, CIB, AFA, or UKG) has any experience detecting something of the type being investigated here. This is because, to my knowledge, there has never been any substantiated find of a large quantity of unused vintage cardbacks and blisters previously. This is an entirely new animal. In fact, if there were a find like this today, the unused cardbacks would, in the vast majority of scenarios, be worth much more than carded figures, the only obstacle being the sheer quantities of certain cardbacks. There wouldn’t be any motivation to mount blisters on cards when the cards would be worth much more on their own.

 

The two primary methods used to detect altered items are entirely useless in a scenario such as the one being investigated. Detecting reseals by looking for signs that an item was once sealed and then opened do not apply because even if these items are what many collectors fear, they are not reseals. They would not have been sealed to begin with. With the countless combinations of card types, blister types, and blister seals present on European issue figures, it would be next to impossible to determine when an authentic blister was actually sealed to an authentic cardback. There is simply no known method to detect whether something was sealed in 1983 or 1993. There has never been a reason to develop such a method, nor could one likely be developed even if there were, especially in the case of primarily smooth blister seals. By the same token, methods used to detect recards would be useless as well. A loupe or higher power form of magnification can detect that an item was not printed using printing methods of the vintage era, but these authentic cardbacks would have been printed in the vintage era. Vintage cardbacks are vintage cardbacks and distinguishing which batch they were printed in is virtually impossible, as it would take a larger scientific sample of known authentic cardbacks from different sources than is likely to be accessible to the vintage collecting community.

 

It is important to keep in mind that not one collector, dealer, or expert in the world had any evidence or made any observations, outside of the high condition (which would be present for case fresh figures any way), that would have made a distinction between the figures in question and other similar figures known to be sealed in the vintage era, prior to the information recently provided by Jason Joiner, but apparently known to him for over two decades. The information is certainly useful now, but would have been much more useful to the community if divulged much earlier. However, that is neither here nor there. At this point, the only thing that can be done is attempt to confirm the true nature of the items. Are they authentic vintage carded figures or are they authentic vintage parts of carded figures sealed at a later date than the date of original issue? Using existing terms such as fake, resealed, bootleg, or reproduction are simply incorrect and not applicable to this situation. Nothing materially would be fake about these items, other than possibly the type of adhesive. That being said, very little is known today about the specific vintage adhesives used or blister sealing process any way. However, the nature of the items would certainly be different as they would not have been sealed in the true vintage era, making them intrinsically different.

 

Moving Forward

 

The bad news is that these figures are now likely to always be suspect within the collecting community. I believe it is more than likely that the court of public opinion will come to some type of majority consensus when this is over, but I think that short of some type of confession by Toni, there is unlikely to ever be enough evidence to be absolutely certain. This is primarily due to the relatively small number of control samples available to the collecting community and the very large number of production variations which are known to occur during different processes at different times and different locations. I have personally seen countless printing flaws which made it through QC to retail and are MUCH worse than any printing differences observed in the threads I’ve read on this topic.

 

As many contributors to these threads have mentioned, it is important to not rush to judgment. I haven’t seen any smoking gun which completely implicates Toni in any wrong-doing. I don’t know him personally, but like anyone else, he should get the benefit of the doubt until as many facts are out as possible. So far though, the numerous observations, while circumstantial, are adding up and his refraining from comment to a significant degree or attempting to defend himself are hurting his case more than any other factors. However, everyone is different. While some people immediately become defensive and present their side of a story, others choose to refrain from commenting for extended periods of time. This doesn’t necessarily support guilt or innocence.

 

However, it is my personal opinion that moving forward, honest sellers should disclose the questions surrounding these figures when they are offered for sale. This greatly affects me personally (possibly more so than any other individual) because in addition to the 30-40 figures of this type I had stashed away, I just spent about $10,000 at the recent Vectis auction on additional figures of this type. I thought the prices were decent and that they would be a good long term investment. While that is still possible, it seems less likely than a significant loss in value.

 

It is also my personal opinion that both AFA and UKG should continue to monitor the situation and decide what both companies can do to warn collectors about the possible nature of these items if that course of action seems warranted once all information which can be brought to light is brought to light. I agree that the response from AFA seems too curt and should have included something about continuing to monitor the situation as it develops. I am traveling now, but will personally bring that up with them after Christmas.

 

At the present time, it would seem that an important issue is what should be done by AFA and UKG. As suggested by Joseph_Y and several other forum members, but going a step further, IF, after additional research and investigation it appears that anything below board can be substantiated, EVERY example of any carded figure variation on the suspect list should potentially be labeled with a qualified label moving forward. The accompanying document should briefly summarize the situation and the possibility that while the item can be verified to be vintage in regard to material, no absolute determination can be made in regard to when the blister was originally sealed to the card. Again, with such a limited number of control samples and hardly any qualified to be labeled as ‘scientific’, with everyone taking everyone else at their word and items changing hands so many times over the years, I have little faith that anything will ever be entirely conclusive. Additionally, this same disclaimer should be added to the verification page on AFA’s website when the serial number of any previously graded figure which represents a suspect variation is searched for / verified by any user of their web site. Furthermore, I agree that if requested, any suspect figure should be re-evaluated free of charge by AFA and re-cased with a Qualified label. Keep in mind, these suggestions are my opinion at the moment. I have not discussed this with AFA, but I believe it is in their best interest to make collectors aware of the possibility that these specific carded figure variations may have first been sealed after the original issue date, assuming ongoing analysis supports this approach.

 

Regarding use of a black light, it is with significant experience that I will say that this will more than likely create more misinformation than help. It helped with hardcopies, but I believe that was due to age and not specific material type. With carded figures, it can help detect ink and RE-sealing. However, both black light and significant magnification in regard to an original blister seal (i.e. not resealed) usually create more confusion and suspicion than help. I can say based on very significant experience that if you analyze most blister seals under extreme scrutiny of this type, you’ll begin to think that maybe everything is suspect. Expect very mixed and inconsistent results.

 

Being that I have 80-100 carded figures of these types from different sources over the years (most of which likely trace originally to Toy Toni) I would be uniquely suited to compare decent quantities side by side, some of which I know are from different sources and absolutely authentic. However, I cannot start on this until after the holidays. In addition to traveling, I am in a mad rush to complete a huge My Little Pony wonderland for my oldest daughter before Christmas. While that may sound trivial to many on here, others with children of their own will understand that the children absolutely come first.

 

Additionally, I am in the final stages of completing the long awaited book and planned to devote most of my time immediately following Christmas to completing that project so that it can be sent for printing. After that, I have agreed to start February 1st on several web projects to improve multiple websites for which I have already committed my time. I will designate a contact at CIB, Rob (rob@collectinvest.com) to be a communication point for the forum members most knowledgeable in regard to this topic and most active and integral to these threads. You know who you are and if you want to bounce information back and forth with Rob, please feel encouraged to do so. He could also address or relay questions to me about any specific characters that I have available to examine and photograph.

 

All of this makes my head hurt because the situation is so complicated due to the sheer numbers and large amount of time spanned.

 

The only good news moving forward is that this affects only a handful of specific carded variations from Palitoy and General Mills. It would be incredibly unlikely to occur in the future for the simple reason that truly unused cardbacks carry so much value in the present day market and as stated earlier, are in most cases more valuable than an identical carded figure. You’ve got to find the silver lining, though it’s not much of one. I certainly hope Toni prepares a detailed response and/or additional information comes to light which clears all this up. Until then, I’ll reserve any final judgment.

 

I don’t have time to respond or comment in such detail moving forward. I do however have faith that many of the more experienced and level-headed members of the multiple forums involved will do a good job focusing on finding the truth, whatever that may be.

 

Thanks for reading,

 

 

 

Tom

 

 

[comicwiz]

@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.

 

My personal take is that this situation is really not that much different than Fantasia (Dupcak) selling Eastern file copies, marrying unused cover wraps to beat-up interiors. CGC was able to flag them mostly by the CT/trimming to match up the cover to the interiors, and the Eastern stamp Danny was using to market them as file copies. The supply of cover wraps was finite, and they ended-up into hands of many other collectors who acted responsibly, treasured them for what they were, and/or weren't looking to use them to dupe people.

 

We are talking an apples to apples comparison because the allegations are that Toni was using unused cardbacks coupled with blisters. The source of these blisters is still unknown, and based on some of the crude jobs I've seen in photos shared by collectors, I was wondering if he was actually recycling vintage breached examples as well.

 

Regardless, the supply is likely finite (both cardbacks and MOC's). I can tell you that the time I acquired my Palitoy Fett, he didn't have any double-stem versions left to produce the Palitoy Fett, but had he shown it to me, I would have immediately been suspicious because the registration of the MOC on the double-stems I've seen are horrendous. If not suspicious, I would have altogether avoided the atrocity.

 

So while the questions have been around for just about ten years, no one knows the range of character versions existing for the unused cardbacks. People were buying them from Toni at shows as "unused" cardbacks, but my guess is he was slowly doling them out to not create the appearance he was sitting on a stockpile. AFA was also grading them as "proofs" when people submitted them, but the value cap on them probably forced Toni to seek other avenues to cash them out.

 

Based on the little experimentation I've performed on cardbacks, I can tell you the cardstock and application of media are less stable under heat than their US counterparts. Even using a tacking iron to heat seal the blister would have produced flecking/peeling/lifting of the paper stock. Some glue will produce a flora that is visible under blacklight, but this probably would have been well thought out by anyone looking to reseal them in a convincing manner.

 

My hunch is that heat sealing them was not as exacting a method as one would like, and eventually as the scheme evolved, a suitable spray adhesive was used. This would be entirely different from the factory seal method regardless of which country the MOC's were produced, so this might be one area of detection that certification companies like AFA or UKG might explore further moving forward. I seriously doubt that anyone doing this moving forward would consider heat sealing unless they are going to reproduce the tooling method used by LFL/Kenner and it's foreign licensed affiliates.

 

In fact, on the part about trial-testing methods, the claims are that some experimentation occurred between using adhesives and heat to seal the blisters. This conclusion was arrived at from comparing different examples coming from Toni using a timeline of when people purchased them, and based on the photos shared by collectors.

 

This makes logical sense, especially because some of the photos shared demonstrate a wild variation in the "neatness" and "believability " of factory seal. Even when looking at the Palitoy version I own, I don't see anything off about the seal, although I don't particularly like the paint smear I see on the blister, which to me indicates the possibility the MOC was assembled from vintage parts, and a loose figure repainted to appear unopened.

 

What makes the accusations seem more legitimate is the selection of AFA to grade (UK) Palitoy figures. One response could well be that AFA sells for a higher premium so Toni sought that route to cash out at a higher return, but it could also be reasoned that Stephen Ward might have been able to better identify seals for each toy line than AFA might due to UKG's experiences handling a disproportionate population of vintage Palitoy lines in the UK.

 

The way each release was produced varied from one region to the other, so only someone familiar with a specific toy line might be able to catch anomalies. This type of "completist" collector is becoming rarer these days, as most collectors are gravitating to character focus collecting (economics), making the acquisition of one-off foreign lines a generally unknown area for most. This is not only exclusive to buyers, but sellers as well who are simply reselling items floating around in the wild.

 

The short answer to the suggestion that non-vintage materials could be used to clone a vintage example is probable, but not likely, to be convincing to people who have an average level of knowledge and MOC collecting experience. The detection capabilities of course requires a depth of experience which many would assume AFA and UKG would have in spades, but what we have here isn't an ordinary situation. We are talking about assemblage of vintage materials similar to a warehouse find of unused covers and interiors made to look like they were made 30-50 years ago, but instead were being made today.

 

The way I see it playing out is that interest will whittle-down to the point where people will collect what they are most familiar with, and that might mean a return to sticking with US produced, vintage Kenner. While I've dabbled in foreign lines, and I've always had a weakness for Palitoy, I have only three pieces total, and only one came directly from Toni. There is another piece which I haven't yet looked at which was purchased through an RS member which might have come from Toni, and the third is an MOC die cast from the original Star Wars movie line, which is no way effected by this situation.

[Sardo Numspar]

Thank you for your insight. I have never dabbled in the Star Wars vintage toy hobby, so bear with me on these questions.

 

(1) It is my understanding that many Kenner examples have an indent on the back that lines up with the blister seal as a result of the pressure used during the factory sealing process. Does the same indent appear on factory sealed Palitoy MOC's? If so, wouldn't the use of a spray adhesive raise red flags with the grading companies?

 

(2) it seems logical that TT would use a US based grading company to try and pass these foreign items as legit factory sealed. However, didn't he also submit through UKG and receive factory sealed grades (I apologize for my ignorance - I don't know the term used for this in the Star Wars toy collecting hobby).

 

(3) If all of this is true, TT was circulating post-factory sealed figures/cards in near mint condition well pior to either AFA or UKG coming into existence. Were these high grade examples used as benchmarks for the grading companies and as part of their created grading standards due to the items' uniqueness in grade and seemingly never-ending supply? If so, what impact will this controversy have on the future of the two grading companies at issue and their grading protocol moving forward?

 

What struck me as the most damning evidence against TT (other than his silence) is the fact that he has an alternate Ebay account used solely to buy mint loose Palitoy figures, changed his Ebay ID 30 times, and changed his Ebay account to private as soon as his feedback comments began appearing in the SWFUK tread.

 

While this is fascinating reading, I am very sorry you are personally affected by this and hopefully this market will find some way to adjust so that you can mitigate any financial loss.

[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...

 

 

[comicwiz]

Thank you for your insight. I have never dabbled in the Star Wars vintage toy hobby, so bear with me on these questions.

 

(1) It is my understanding that many Kenner examples have an indent on the back that lines up with the blister seal as a result of the pressure used during the factory sealing process. Does the same indent appear on a factory sealed Pailtoy MOC's? If so, wouldn't the use of a spray adhesive raise red flags with the grading companies?

 

I don't believe there is a consistent enough tell on factory sealed examples using the method you describe. Remembering also that Kenner began licensing toys in foreign markets immediately after the early bird set was produced, which is why you have foreign lines such as the Palitoy 12 Backs in existence. On earlier lines, the "waffle" pattern was used as a way to better grip the blister during the heat seal process. As this "machining" process evolved, later lines (Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi) no longer bear a waffle pattern. Unfortunately prior to this revelation, a lot of the detection methods relied on a process of elimination, and my hunch is that they predicated on the assumption that unused factory cardbacks were not available for people to produce a vintage MOC with the likeness of a factory sealed example. In the wrong hands, the assemblage of vintage cover stock, interiors and staples would give comic certification just as much trouble.

 

(2) it seems logical that TT would use a US based grading company to try and pass these foreign items as legit factory sealed. However, didn't he also submit through UKG and receive factory sealed grades (I apologize for my ignorance - I don't know the term used for this in the Star Wars toy collecting hobby).

 

Yes, he did submit through UKG. Based on my conversations with Stephen Ward, my understanding is that he submitted a Meccano MOC - my suspicion is that it might have been the VCJ that AFA's Tom Derby would not authenticate, which would stand to reason that he probably used UKG as a back-up on stuff he wasn't able to pass through AFA. It was also my understanding from that conversation that the "bulk" of items Toni had graded were sent to AFA.

 

(3) If all of this is true, TT was circulating post-factory sealed figures/cards in near mint condition well pior to either AFA or UKG coming into existence. Were these high grade examples used as benchmarks for the grading companies and as part of their created grading standards due to the items' uniqueness in grade and seemingly never-ending supply? If so, what impact will this controversy have on the future of the two grading companies at issue and their grading protocol moving forward?

 

I think the certification aspect probably came into the equation for two reasons. The first being that "condition freaks" began seeking out the best examples, and Toni was restricted on how much he could do based on available supply of vintage materials. A second reasoning being that a grabby type who is using a scheme to seal MOC's was seeing certified examples doing well on eBay and didn't want to leave that money on the table. Seeing samples of successful candidates being graded probably gave him the necessary confidence to try his own hand at submitting them. I can't speak on his MOC's serving as a template or benchmark for graders, although I would have to think he saw certification mainly as a threat to his ability to dupe people, until he began seeing his wares floating around in graded cases.

 

What struck me as the most damning evidence against TT (other than his silence) is the fact that he has an alternate Ebay account used solely to buy mint loose Pailtoy figures, changed his Ebay ID 30 times, and changed his Ebay account to private as soon as his feedback comments began appearing in the SWFUK tread.

 

While this is fascinating reading, I am very sorry you are personally affected by this and hopefully this market will find some way to adjust so that you can mitigate any financial loss.

 

Thanks Sardo. Based on what I am seeing, I'm afraid there is more than just one person involved in this scheme. There is a great deal of brokering in the vintage Star Wars hobby. Not all participants might have been aware of what was happening, but the way this scheme has been played over the years, I would be surprised if there weren't more people involved than Toni.

 

As far as the way this will devastate the market, people will eventually steer away from Palitoy ESB and later lines in the same way people are avoiding Marvel/DC SA with protruding outer edges. It's unfortunate that events like this debase/devalue an entire population of vintage items, especially when it's linked to greed, and simply by suspicion of association rather than some manner of separating manipulative techniques from original production traits.

[comicwiz]

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

[Hado]

Jeez Joe,

I really hope you're able to get some compensation if your figures are affected.

I also hope you're having a fun, safe holiday with your family.

[thunsicker]

This entire thing is really unbelievable. On the one hand, it's really interesting to see what can happen when a grading company makes a mistake of this magnitude. On the other hand, I'm not invested in it, but I sympathize with those of you who have been taken.

 

Joseph, I hope you get some restitution.

 

Thanks Andrew.

 

I'm sure many of you will find Tom's comment posted on RS interesting, and at least on how this whole situation crept-in out of nowhere:

 

Blah blah...

 

 

 

Tom

 

Hey Joe. Can you let those of us who are somewhat following this but don't know the hobby too well know who Tom is? Is he from AFA?

 

I'm following this to see how it plays out in the hopes that I get some insight in how these grading companies handle this kind of issue.

[Bronty]

Tom used to own cloud city (a sw dealer) and then was heavily involved with AFA but has now gone his separate way. You might think of him as Steve Borock in toys

[comicwiz]

Jeez Joe,

I really hope you're able to get some compensation if your figures are affected.

I also hope you're having a fun, safe holiday with your family.

 

Thanks Glen, and hope you're having a great holiday too

[comicwiz]

Tom used to own cloud city (a sw dealer) and then was heavily involved with AFA but has now gone his separate way. You might think of him as Steve Borock in toys

 

Yes this is correct. Tom Derby and Ron Wallace run CIB (collectibles investment brokerage) which served as the authentication arm for AFA on rarer items.

 

This authentication function is useful for items like the vinyl cape Jawa, where a certificate of authenticity (COA) from Tom Derby would provide consumers the added level of confidence that the item is genuine.

 

On the point of going separate ways, getting CIB to provide a COA is still an option when submitting to AFA, although the cost has gone up significantly as Tom used to provide AFA an "in-house" rate.

[Buzzetta]

I think the one thing that we may see is an increase in loose Palitoy figures like the light blue grey Boba Fett. For those that do not have a copy in the past some were going straight for a carded sample. Now that some of those may be in doubt, people will welcome the loose figure as a certainty rather than risk a carded sample.

 

Damn it, I knew I should have picked up a loose Palitoy Fett.