what would you do if you found the mile high collection 10 years ago?

[FFB]

He told me that Chuck used to crow about how he 'stole' the Church collection from Edgar's heirs and made a mint in the process.

I guess I'm still failing to understand the issue. I work with or know investment bankers, private equity guys, bond traders, etc., and they love to talk all day about how badly they ed the other guy, or how they "stole" a company or asset. Chuck got the Church collection at an insanely cheap price, made what seemed like a mint at the time from selling it off, and bragged to his buddies about it. I would call that... human nature.

 

Exactly. My friends and I recently bought a collection of over 400 books from the 1940s and 50s for 25 cents a book from the original owner (granted, they were mostly low grade and almost exclusively non-hero books, but still worth more than 25 cents a pop). We are still laughing about how cheaply we got them. Anyone things I'm a bad guy because of that? Fine. [#@$%!!!] you, whoever you are.

[FFB]

He told me that Chuck used to crow about how he 'stole' the Church collection from Edgar's heirs and made a mint in the process.

I guess I'm still failing to understand the issue. I work with or know investment bankers, private equity guys, bond traders, etc., and they love to talk all day about how badly they ed the other guy, or how they "stole" a company or asset. Chuck got the Church collection at an insanely cheap price, made what seemed like a mint at the time from selling it off, and bragged to his buddies about it. I would call that... human nature.

 

to use your argument earlier about Scotts statements being 2 separate arguments..... 1) youre saying that all people who screw others in business deals of one kind of another are only exhibitoing human nature in action but 2) Chuck did no such thing according to HIS version of events. According to Chuck, he was generous to the heirs and accepted THEIR terms.....so theres no need for argument 1 which absolves him of doing no worse than anyone else.Also, it was stated earlier that Chuck has honored Church by the awarness he has brought to Edgar and his collection. But if Chuck wanted to honor Edgar, why call it the Mile High collection??? It has only been lately by serious comic collectors here on the boards who have begun insisting that we call it the Church collection, similarly the Reilly collection.

 

Where did Chuck say he was generous to the heirs? You accuse me of accepting everything he says verbatim, yet you put words in his mouth. Which is worse?

[shadroch]

As someone who is semi-familar with the MH2 collection,having seen it and been offered it both before Chck got involved,I would say that while his story contains much more that a grain of the truth,were he to say what he wrote under oath,he'd be in a heap of trouble.

In that story he wildly exagerates some points and brushs over others,such as the fact that he knowingly bought stolen property and that he bought hidden assets from a company that was being investigated on several fronts by differnt government agencies.

Between my first hand knowledge of that situation and the multiple conversations I had with Phil Seuling about how the first direct marketing meeting went when he returned from SD that year,it is obvious to me that Chucks accounts are little more than historical fiction. They remind me of the You Are There books ,or whatever they were called,that I read in grammer school to get an understanding of historical events.

[FFB]

As someone who is semi-familar with the MH2 collection,having seen it and been offered it both before Chck got involved,I would say that while his story contains much more that a grain of the truth,were he to say what he wrote under oath,he'd be in a heap of trouble.

In that story he wildly exagerates some points and brushs over others,such as the fact that he knowingly bought stolen property and that he bought hidden assets from a company that was being investigated on several fronts by differnt government agencies.

Between my first hand knowledge of that situation and the multiple conversations I had with Phil Seuling about how the first direct marketing meeting went when he returned from SD that year,it is obvious to me that Chucks accounts are little more than historical fiction. They remind me of the You Are There books ,or whatever they were called,that I read in grammer school to get an understanding of historical events.

 

Instead of pussyfooting around the issue, why not post some factual detail in your response if you have all of this information? Frankly, I am sick and tired of all of this [#@$%!!!] innuendo.

[Aman619]

He told me that Chuck used to crow about how he 'stole' the Church collection from Edgar's heirs and made a mint in the process.

I guess I'm still failing to understand the issue. I work with or know investment bankers, private equity guys, bond traders, etc., and they love to talk all day about how badly they ed the other guy, or how they "stole" a company or asset. Chuck got the Church collection at an insanely cheap price, made what seemed like a mint at the time from selling it off, and bragged to his buddies about it. I would call that... human nature.

 

to use your argument earlier about Scotts statements being 2 separate arguments..... 1) youre saying that all people who screw others in business deals of one kind of another are only exhibitoing human nature in action but 2) Chuck did no such thing according to HIS version of events. According to Chuck, he was generous to the heirs and accepted THEIR terms.....so theres no need for argument 1 which absolves him of doing no worse than anyone else.Also, it was stated earlier that Chuck has honored Church by the awarness he has brought to Edgar and his collection. But if Chuck wanted to honor Edgar, why call it the Mile High collection??? It has only been lately by serious comic collectors here on the boards who have begun insisting that we call it the Church collection, similarly the Reilly collection.

 

Where did Chuck say he was generous to the heirs? You accuse me of accepting everything he says verbatim, yet you put words in his mouth. Which is worse?

 

thats a nit-pick. Since you know where I stand on this, I was shorthanding with "generous" meaning "did not screw them". I should have been more precise. Of course he wasnt generous in the Christian sense, or in any sense of "giving." And yes, its true he never said he was either.

 

 

And wouldnt I have had to "quote" him to "put words in his mouth? I was characterizing him. As someone who uses words for a living, youd agree theres a difference isnt there?

[Aman619]

Exactly. My friends and I recently bought a collection of over 400 books from the 1940s and 50s for 25 cents a book from the original owner (granted, they were mostly low grade and almost exclusively non-hero books, but still worth more than 25 cents a pop). We are still laughing about how cheaply we got them. Anyone things I'm a bad guy because of that? Fine. [#@$%!!!] you, whoever you are.

 

Yeah, youre a bad guy. But not in Chucks league. Youre just bragging (or making it up) for effect. Its refreshing to hear you admit how you took advantage of the seller. Much more refreshing than how Chuck handles HIS big one-sided deal. If he would just publicly gloat about it finally, all those of us who "disapprove" of his actions could at least admire his honesty... like yours just now.

 

 

hey -- why are we still working this old bone again and again?

[FFB]

He told me that Chuck used to crow about how he 'stole' the Church collection from Edgar's heirs and made a mint in the process.

I guess I'm still failing to understand the issue. I work with or know investment bankers, private equity guys, bond traders, etc., and they love to talk all day about how badly they ed the other guy, or how they "stole" a company or asset. Chuck got the Church collection at an insanely cheap price, made what seemed like a mint at the time from selling it off, and bragged to his buddies about it. I would call that... human nature.

 

to use your argument earlier about Scotts statements being 2 separate arguments..... 1) youre saying that all people who screw others in business deals of one kind of another are only exhibitoing human nature in action but 2) Chuck did no such thing according to HIS version of events. According to Chuck, he was generous to the heirs and accepted THEIR terms.....so theres no need for argument 1 which absolves him of doing no worse than anyone else.Also, it was stated earlier that Chuck has honored Church by the awarness he has brought to Edgar and his collection. But if Chuck wanted to honor Edgar, why call it the Mile High collection??? It has only been lately by serious comic collectors here on the boards who have begun insisting that we call it the Church collection, similarly the Reilly collection.

 

Where did Chuck say he was generous to the heirs? You accuse me of accepting everything he says verbatim, yet you put words in his mouth. Which is worse?

 

thats a nit-pick. Since you know where I stand on this, I was shorthanding with "generous" meaning "did not screw them". I should have been more precise. Of course he wasnt generous in the Christian sense, or in any sense of "giving." And yes, its true he never said he was either.

 

And wouldnt I have had to "quote" him to "put words in his mouth? I was characterizing him. As someone who uses words for a living, youd agree theres a difference isnt there?

 

Where is it written that you have to quote someone directly to put words in his mouth? You said "According to Chuck, he was generous to the heirs and accepted THEIR terms...." That's putting words in someone's mouth.

 

And knock off the snide (nevermind inaccurate) personal comments about my choice of idioms if you can't even bring yourself to use basic punctuation.

[shadroch]

What further details would you like,Scott?

How many ways would you like me to say he was aware that he was buying stolen property? Go read thru his recollections about the deal and

see how he rationalizes it.

There is no innuendos there at all,just the facts.

Why is it when chuck writes something,you accept it as gospel,but everyone else must somehow prove it.

What proof would you accept?

 

 

btw-i got the Spidey. Very nice looking book.

[FFB]

What further details would you like,Scott?

 

I'll take everything you have.

 

Chuck spent something like 18 of his columns going into detail explaining the deal. You say you have a list of facts showing that he's a liar? Let's see them. All of them. 18 pages worth if you have to.

 

You guys keep saying I accept every word Chuck says as gospel. I think you guys need a remedial reading comprehension course. I am not saying I accept what he says as gospel. I am sure that there is a fair bit of embellishment in all of Chuck's articles. But what I am saying is that unless you have some facts contrary to what he's saying in any given article, STFU about Chuck, quit calling him a liar, and quit making up and/or spreading rumors and lies about lawsuits that never happened, details of transactions you know nothing about, etc. I have seen at least a dozen people speak with an authoritative air about a Church lawsuit that we later found out never happened. That is ridiculous, and that is why I am saying "Give up some facts or get outta Chuck's face."

 

Shad, this last paragraph is not so much directed at you in particular. I really intend it to be directed at ALL of you mother [#@$%!!!]s.

[FFB]

P.S. Glad you liked the Spidey #11. I paid 25 cents for it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just kidding.

[skybolt]

All I can say is thank goodness Chuck was there to save all those great books. Otherwise, how long would it have taken for the Church family to trash them. Whether you like or hate the guy, just be glad that he had the good sense to not only purchase the books, but to keep them in such great condition.

[shadroch]

STFU?

quit calling him a liar?

quit making up rumors?

spreading lies and rumors about things I know nothing about?

 

 

Anyone who disagrees with you is not only wrong,but a liar.I've written on my experiances with the MH2 collection. Enough so that two forumites I'd never met asked me about it last week before I even mentioned it in this thread.

 

Fact- The MH2 books were stolen property.

They were books that the distributing company had sworn in an affidavit type document that they had been destroyed. The books dated from when the Goodmans owned the company.Having a hireling of the new owners not want the books doesn't change that. And what new employee,when offered a chance to bring several million dollars into his companys botom line would have said what Chuck claims Mr Hobson(sp) did?

Fact-The owners of the company were being investigated for various things that organized crime families usually are. Don't take my word for it,chuck says it.The father of the man who sold the books died in prison,while the other brother spent a good many years there as well.

Fact- This collection was not some secret. many people were aware of it. The one brother used to come to shows with bags of books,and his son would try to hawk FF48s,whie bragging that his daddy had over a million books just like it.Several syndicates were attempted to be put together to buy these books.They all fell apart over storage considerations,legal considerations,money and fear of flooding the market.

The company they owned,who's name currently escapes me,had serious labor problems with the Teamsters amongst others.

 

Now,shall we talk about how Chuck committed bank fraud by selling his store to an employee and used the promisary notes to secure a loan after he was originally turned down for the money.Its all there in Chucks own words,so will you accept that?

 

To sum it up,We have a man who by his own admissions -Dealt with the mob,knowingly bought stolen property,and engaged in bank fraud,all in one transaction.

in ordr to obtain the money. For many years,Chuck stated that all the MH2 books were either sold or had been mixed in with his general stock.Then CGC comes along and suddenly they find pallets of them,supposedly sitting around undiscovered all these years.

 

I won't get into my discussions with Mr Seuling about the Direct Marketing Meeting where he lost his exclusive agreements as the man is dead,and it is pretty much just a rehash of things available elsewhere.

[awe4one]

For many years,Chuck stated that all the MH2 books were either sold or had been mixed in with his general stock.Then CGC comes along and suddenly they find pallets of them,supposedly sitting around undiscovered all these years.

 

Yep...that whole "I found a pallet in the back" story reeked of bullsh1t.

 

Jim

[Red Hook]

My friends and I recently bought a collection of over 400 books from the 1940s and 50s for 25 cents a book from the original owner (granted, they were mostly low grade and almost exclusively non-hero books, but still worth more than 25 cents a pop). We are still laughing about how cheaply we got them.

 

 

You forgot the banana.

[skybolt]

He told me that Chuck used to crow about how he 'stole' the Church collection from Edgar's heirs and made a mint in the process.

I guess I'm still failing to understand the issue. I work with or know investment bankers, private equity guys, bond traders, etc., and they love to talk all day about how badly they ed the other guy, or how they "stole" a company or asset. Chuck got the Church collection at an insanely cheap price, made what seemed like a mint at the time from selling it off, and bragged to his buddies about it. I would call that... human nature.

 

Exactly. My friends and I recently bought a collection of over 400 books from the 1940s and 50s for 25 cents a book from the original owner (granted, they were mostly low grade and almost exclusively non-hero books, but still worth more than 25 cents a pop). We are still laughing about how cheaply we got them. Anyone things I'm a bad guy because of that? Fine. [#@$%!!!] you, whoever you are.

 

Look at it this way. If he was willing to part with the books for only a quarter each, he could have easily tossed the whole stack if you and your friend hadn't shown up. How many original collectors and their kids have discarded their books without knowing their true value. Heck, my mom threw away all her 1940's and 50's movie related magazines before we immigrated to this country back in 1980. I'm sure some of those books were worth something to somebody.

[FFB]

STFU?

quit calling him a liar?

quit making up rumors?

spreading lies and rumors about things I know nothing about?

 

 

Anyone who disagrees with you is not only wrong,but a liar.I've written on my experiances with the MH2 collection. Enough so that two forumites I'd never met asked me about it last week before I even mentioned it in this thread.

 

Fact- The MH2 books were stolen property.

They were books that the distributing company had sworn in an affidavit type document that they had been destroyed. The books dated from when the Goodmans owned the company.Having a hireling of the new owners not want the books doesn't change that. And what new employee,when offered a chance to bring several million dollars into his companys botom line would have said what Chuck claims Mr Hobson(sp) did?

 

I know, Chuck said they were stolen property. How is what he said a lie?

 

So did Mr. Hobson or anyone else tell you that what Chuck said wasn't true? Marvel doesn't sell back issues or remainder books, and never did to my knowledge. What was Marvel going to do with them?

 

Why does it matter whether the books dated from when the Goodmans owned the company? The books weren't the Goodmans' personal property, they were property of the corporation. As property of the corporation, an executive such as the "Vice President of Publishing" (the guy you dismissively refer to as a "hireling of the new owners") is exactly the kind of person who could waive a claim to ownership of the books on behalf of the corporation as long as it is within his apparent authority to do so (and judging from his title, it looks like it was). And if Chuck was lying about his conversation with Michael Hobson, it's a pretty ballsy thing to do to put it all out there in public where Mr. Hobson could see it, isn't it?

 

Fact-The owners of the company were being investigated for various things that organized crime families usually are. Don't take my word for it,chuck says it.The father of the man who sold the books died in prison,while the other brother spent a good many years there as well.

 

So what? How is this a lie by Chuck, when it is more or less exactly what he says in his articles?

 

 

Fact- This collection was not some secret. many people were aware of it. The one brother used to come to shows with bags of books,and his son would try to hawk FF48s,whie bragging that his daddy had over a million books just like it.Several syndicates were attempted to be put together to buy these books.They all fell apart over storage considerations,legal considerations,money and fear of flooding the market.

 

Didn't Chuck basically say this as well? That another group of dealers already knew about the collection and had made a lower offer? Again, how is this a lie by Chuck?

 

 

The company they owned,who's name currently escapes me,had serious labor problems with the Teamsters amongst others.

 

Yeah, I know that because Chuck said it in his article. How do you know this, are you just accepting what Chuck says as gospel too?

 

Now,shall we talk about how Chuck committed bank fraud by selling his store to an employee and used the promisary notes to secure a loan after he was originally turned down for the money.Its all there in Chucks own words,so will you accept that?

 

How is this bank fraud? You don't know much about secured financing, do you?

 

To sum it up,We have a man who by his own admissions -Dealt with the mob,knowingly bought stolen property,and engaged in bank fraud,all in one transaction.

in ordr to obtain the money.

 

Aye, and there's the rub -- by his own admissions. I was asking you to give me your list of facts showing what a liar he is, and you've completely struck out.

 

For many years,Chuck stated that all the MH2 books were either sold or had been mixed in with his general stock.Then CGC comes along and suddenly they find pallets of them,supposedly sitting around undiscovered all these years.

 

Based on my conversation with Borock, it was one pallet. As for whether or not he found it, I have no idea and neither do you. Is it fishy? Sure. But do you know it not to be true? No.

 

I won't get into my discussions with Mr Seuling about the Direct Marketing Meeting where he lost his exclusive agreements as the man is dead,and it is pretty much just a rehash of things available elsewhere.

 

Do any of these discussions have to do with lies by Chuck? Because I'm still waiting to see some from you after a lot of promises and no delivery.

[FFB]

He told me that Chuck used to crow about how he 'stole' the Church collection from Edgar's heirs and made a mint in the process.

I guess I'm still failing to understand the issue. I work with or know investment bankers, private equity guys, bond traders, etc., and they love to talk all day about how badly they ed the other guy, or how they "stole" a company or asset. Chuck got the Church collection at an insanely cheap price, made what seemed like a mint at the time from selling it off, and bragged to his buddies about it. I would call that... human nature.

 

Exactly. My friends and I recently bought a collection of over 400 books from the 1940s and 50s for 25 cents a book from the original owner (granted, they were mostly low grade and almost exclusively non-hero books, but still worth more than 25 cents a pop). We are still laughing about how cheaply we got them. Anyone things I'm a bad guy because of that? Fine. [#@$%!!!] you, whoever you are.

 

Look at it this way. If he was willing to part with the books for only a quarter each, he could have easily tossed the whole stack if you and your friend hadn't shown up. How many original collectors and their kids have discarded their books without knowing their true value.

 

[Aman619]

And knock off the snide (nevermind inaccurate) personal comments about my choice of idioms if you can't even bring yourself to use basic punctuation.

 

you mean that I dont go back and fix my typos? cmon, get a life, It cant bother you that much, it doesnt bother me or hundreds of other posters here... and what the hell's an idiom again? You callin me an idiom?? That makes you a passed participle!!

[FFB]

And knock off the snide (nevermind inaccurate) personal comments about my choice of idioms if you can't even bring yourself to use basic punctuation.

 

you mean that I dont go back and fix my typos? cmon, get a life, It cant bother you that much, it doesnt bother me or hundreds of other posters here... and what the hell's an idiom again? You callin me an idiom?? That makes you a passed participle!!

 

[Aman619]

thanx.. getting a bit hot in here for awhile.... see ya in the grading contest..real soon