Exposing FRAUD And DECEPTION - A Must Watch! 18 18

[kav]

On 8/28/2021 at 2:13 PM, comicwiz said:

More a sidebar, but the part I bolded in your reply, and the reason I stopped submitting to CGC was because of how unprofessional Haspel was towards me when they damaged one of my submissions. He accused me of sending the book in that way. Like you, I had been consulted, by Haspel of all people, on underground comix on a number of occasions, and was happy to help. I was helpful until I had an issue, and then seen as a nobody. Funny how things work out some times, the permanent impressions left by people's actions, and how things eventually catch up to them.

character is revealed when someone doesnt need something from you any more but now you need something from them.

Edited August 28, 2021 by kav

[Bronty]

On 8/28/2021 at 5:27 PM, Transplant said:

No.  I make a market decision to assume some risk in a couple of ways.  1st, my stuff is insured while in transit both ways with a 3rd party, CIA.  2nd, I've known too many examples of CGC declining to take any responsibility for damage that occurred at their facility.  For the most part, what I've seen includes an offer to press it for free and reslab, and/or grading fee credits.  

Would I entrust an Cap #1 to them to run around the country with on a promo tour, even now?  Not without something in writing providing for what happens if it was damaged or stolen.  I also wouldn't have let a brand new company like CBCS, even one shepherded by Borock who I think highly of, take some top census slab of mine and regrade it with no idea of what the market impact would be, without some assurance of being made whole.  Frankly, I'd probably want to get some compensation just for lending my book out so they could advertise with it.  

I'm glad you trusted VGA and WATA, but it isn't super relevant to the point I was making.  I might trust the MOMA a whole bunch.  But something is going to be agreed upon before I hypothetically loan them a Picasso or Rothko.  

On some level everyone mailing their property to a grading company is trusting both the mail service and the recipient to do right by them.     
 

I’ve received and sometimes mailed out enough artwork that I’ve become a little numb to mail risk.   If something happens to that 1/1 object, even if I get some kind of payout I’m still going to be very upset.    If I wanted the money, I would have kept the money.    I want the art, or in this case the game.    Thankfully, in 30 years of collecting things through the mail, I’ve really never had any significant issues.    
 

Obviously at today’s values it would have been a more significant consideration and I’d be really nervous to do it today.    At the values back then, it just wasn’t as material a risk.   

[jaybuck43]

On 8/28/2021 at 10:47 PM, Bronty said:

On some level everyone mailing their property to a grading company is trusting both the mail service and the recipient to do right by them.     
 

I’ve received and sometimes mailed out enough artwork that I’ve become a little numb to mail risk.   If something happens to that 1/1 object, even if I get some kind of payout I’m still going to be very upset.    If I wanted the money, I would have kept the money.    I want the art, or in this case the game.    Thankfully, in 30 years of collecting things through the mail, I’ve really never had any significant issues.    
 

Obviously at today’s values it would have been a more significant consideration and I’d be really nervous to do it today.    At the values back then, it just wasn’t as material a risk.   

Sure Dan we’ve all become numb to mail risk. But none of us mail art or books without insurance. Just because 99% of my shipments have been received without a problem, doesn’t mean we just shrug and mail stuff uninsured.  I always take out proper insurance (or have coverage through my collectors insurance account) when sending or receiving material through the mail. It’s the reason why I have Cgc mail my books on my fedex account rather then theirs. It costs more but I’m assured that every book is properly insured (rather than capped at $100). But accidents happen, especially with specialist material. I had some insufficiently_thoughtful_person improperly mail me some art. He never packed it correctly and broke the frame during shipment, which caused massive damage to the art. It cost me more to restore it then I paid for the art itself. 

[Bronty]

On 8/28/2021 at 11:10 PM, jaybuck43 said:

Sure Dan we’ve all become numb to mail risk. But none of us mail art or books without insurance. Just because 99% of my shipments have been received without a problem, doesn’t mean we just shrug and mail stuff uninsured.  I always take out proper insurance (or have coverage through my collectors insurance account) when sending or receiving material through the mail. It’s the reason why I have Cgc mail my books on my fedex account rather then theirs. It costs more but I’m assured that every book is properly insured (rather than capped at $100). But accidents happen, especially with specialist material. I had some insufficiently_thoughtful_person improperly mail me some art. He never packed it correctly and broke the frame during shipment, which caused massive damage to the art. It cost me more to restore it then I paid for the art itself. 

I’ve always understood it to be really difficult to obtain the same type insurance on collectibles that someone like you might take for granted, outside of the US .      So, I can see why you might think that no one mails things uninsured , but that’s not reality.   Postal insurance in some countries is both limited in scope and based on cost to the seller instead of FMV.    That’s not very useful when an item has appreciated in value, and it seems to result in an increased incidence of package inspection.   I’d say the #1 source of damage to collectibles on international shipments is the careless customs agent.

Edited August 29, 2021 by Bronty

[COI]

You guys asked about his thought process, he explained it, it doesn't match what you would've done in a similar situation; fine, fair enough. Different people, different circumstances, and Dan might handle it differently today.

On 8/28/2021 at 11:23 PM, Bronty said:

It’s really difficult to obtain the same type insurance on collectibles that someone like you might take for granted, outside of the US .      So, I can see why you might think that no one mails things uninsured , but that’s not reality.

I can vouch for this. We don't have the insurance options you guys have, and being that we have to do most of our business outside of our own borders, our risk threshold might be a little different. Last I checked, we don't have the equivalent of CIA here, but that was years ago so maybe something has emerged since. 

I've taken some fairly big risks with packages myself; not at this level, but big enough. 

[jaybuck43]

On 8/28/2021 at 11:30 PM, COI said:

You guys asked about his thought process, he explained it, it doesn't match what you would've done in a similar situation; fine, fair enough. Different people, different circumstances, and Dan might handle it differently today.

I can vouch for this. We don't have the insurance options you guys have, and being that we have to do most of our business outside of our own borders, our risk threshold might be a little different. Last I checked, we don't have the equivalent of CIA here, but that was years ago so maybe something has emerged since. 

I've taken some fairly big risks with packages myself; not at this level, but big enough. 

It looks the same as we have in the states to me. USPS caps out at $5000 as does Canadian post (though I assume that’s $5000 cad so that’s like $4000 in the us) but if you use easypost you can insure anything for 1% of declared value. So that $50,000 shipment costs $500 to insure. But maybe it’s not something you’ve wanted to use for whatever reason, I understand that.

[Bronty]

On 8/29/2021 at 12:09 AM, jaybuck43 said:

It looks the same as we have in the states to me. USPS caps out at $5000 as does Canadian post (though I assume that’s $5000 cad so that’s like $4000 in the us) but if you use easypost you can insure anything for 1% of declared value. So that $50,000 shipment costs $500 to insure. But maybe it’s not something you’ve wanted to use for whatever reason, I understand that.

Well, thanks for the tip.   I’ve never even heard of easypost.    I’ll have to look into that.   I’m not sure how well it would work for me as again, most of the time it’s artwork , which would would be difficult to get an appraisal on, but maybe this will be useful for me at times.  Thx. 
 

I have to say though that even if it does work for me, I’ll have to think twice on the price.    The probability of loss is a lot less than 1% in my experience and while I understand they have to make money, it’s kind of a poor value proposition on average, or at least, not a slam dunk. 

Edited August 29, 2021 by Bronty

[COI]

On 8/29/2021 at 12:09 AM, jaybuck43 said:

It looks the same as we have in the states to me. USPS caps out at $5000 as does Canadian post (though I assume that’s $5000 cad so that’s like $4000 in the us) but if you use easypost you can insure anything for 1% of declared value. So that $50,000 shipment costs $500 to insure. But maybe it’s not something you’ve wanted to use for whatever reason, I understand that.

It's up to $5000 within Canada, $1000 international. 

I haven't sold much for years. When I was actively selling, I either didn't know about easypost, or it wasn't a thing yet. Not sure.

I do know that I got comfortable sending, let's say, a $5000 item with only $1000 insurance. Maybe not the smartest thing, but I did it a lot.

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

On 8/28/2021 at 11:09 PM, jaybuck43 said:

It looks the same as we have in the states to me. USPS caps out at $5000 as does Canadian post (though I assume that’s $5000 cad so that’s like $4000 in the us) but if you use easypost you can insure anything for 1% of declared value. So that $50,000 shipment costs $500 to insure. But maybe it’s not something you’ve wanted to use for whatever reason, I understand that.

In the States you can add the registered option and it can be insured up to $50,000..

[HotKey]

So Heritage and WATA are both in full deny mode, not that I would expect anything different regardless of guilt, but if they are denying everything, does that mean they are going to release a population report and start revealing who wins auctions?

Seems like that's the easiest way to disprove everything and restore some confidence. 

[Bronty]

On 8/29/2021 at 1:54 AM, HotKey said:

So Heritage and WATA are both in full deny mode, not that I would expect anything different regardless of guilt, but if they are denying everything, does that mean they are going to release a population report and start revealing who wins auctions?

Seems like that's the easiest way to disprove everything and restore some confidence. 

The pop report is one thing, that’s a business decision.   
 

But Is eBay going to start releasing the names of winners because some auctions have had questions around them?   
 

Doesn’t every major auction house keep that information private?    Doesn’t heritage’s make an offer program rely on people not knowing who won a given auction?    On some level doesn’t the fact that they hold all the cards with respect to information underpin their entire business model?   If owners of certain types of material could directly contact sellers of that type of material, wouldn’t they potentially lose revenue?    Wouldn’t consignors also get worse results sometimes without auction pressure/fever at play?    Should comic link to start releasing identities because no back cover scan is provided?      
 

I see an awful lot of problems with that suggestion.    All auction houses rely on privacy, and I think there are a lot of legitimate reasons for that.     
 

 

Edited August 29, 2021 by Bronty

[HotKey]

On 8/29/2021 at 5:07 AM, Bronty said:

The pop report is one thing, that’s a business decision.   
 

But Is eBay going to start releasing the names of winners because some auctions have had questions around them?   
 

Doesn’t every major auction house keep that information private?    Doesn’t heritage’s make an offer program rely on people not knowing who won a given auction?    On some level doesn’t the fact that they hold all the cards with respect to information underpin their entire business model? 

 

I agree that everyone has been doing it and Heritage isn't unique to anonymous wins, but given the information coming out, the market now seems primed for any auction house, but especially Heritage since they are named, to come forward with a new business model and say full transparency from now on with all wins.

I know I would be dealing exclusively with any auction house that did that now and I would bet my collection that I would be among many others who would do so as well. They might lose one or two people who like selling anonymous but it would be a small minority I think.

Also credit where it is due to you also, Bronty. Many would have went silent but you are out here providing credible and important information to what went on and I appreciate it. 

[Bronty]

On 8/29/2021 at 6:12 AM, HotKey said:

I agree that everyone has been doing it and Heritage isn't unique to anonymous wins, but given the information coming out, the market now seems primed for any auction house, but especially Heritage since they are named, to come forward with a new business model and say full transparency from now on with all wins.

I know I would be dealing exclusively with any auction house that did that now and I would bet my collection that I would be among many others who would do so as well. They might lose one or two people who like selling anonymous but it would be a small minority I think.

Also credit where it is due to you also, Bronty. Many would have went silent but you are out here providing credible and important information to what went on and I appreciate it. 

Thank you.   
 

I understand that you’d give any such auction house your business, but from what I’ve seen whales (who disproportionately drive revenue - a single star lot can be a significant percentage of an overall auctions results ) disproportionately favor privacy.   
 
so, for that reason, I don’t think you’re ever going to get your wish.    It would cost them more current business than it would generate new business, IMO.

[LearnedHand]

On 8/25/2021 at 4:54 PM, valiantman said:

No randomness.  Purposeful collecting of issues #2 through #300, and being unable to obtain a full copy of #1, having a legal ownership in 1% of a real copy... versus issues #2 through #300 and nothing else.

It's not complicated. 

X

X + 1% of Y (when Y is the key aspect in your goal of collecting X, even though you can't touch Y in person.)

 

Curious:  do you see yourself as a comic book hobbyist/collector?  Or a commodities gambler?  

[MatterEaterLad]

On 8/28/2021 at 11:08 AM, jimjum12 said:

While these may be valid concerns, in the early stages of many hobbies, the record sales often occur between dealers. They are typically the first to be invested in the genre, having a first hand exposure to any popularity increases. The only real difference here is that the internet now casts a bright and unwavering light on people's affairs and a commentator's opinions begin to be presented as fact. Putting alleged thoughts in another person's mind and presented as fact also seems to occur more often now. The gleam of the web also adds to a sometimes false credibility, or what was once called "spin". GOD BLESS...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

The record sales in this case were not by dealers but by owners of the new grading company. Who then misrepresented themselves as collectors.

Those are the facts. To say otherwise is "spin".

-jamie (a friend of integrity, seeker of transparency, avoider of obfuscation)

[MatterEaterLad]

On 8/28/2021 at 3:40 AM, MasterChief said:

The inconsistency on display with current grading and labeling of the Promise Collection is puzzling and, unfortunately, implies preference. While I pretty much agree with what's been presented thus far concerning the loose grading, I get the feeling that if the average joe submitted a book like the one below, it would get hammered in grade and placed not in a Universal holder but in a Qualified or Restored one. To the seasoned collector, that defect is nowhere near production related. The book appears trimmed using scissors (for whatever reason) but there is no notation disclosing that fact on the label.
 

I have an AF15 like that. Except my wonky trimming is on the bottom, back cover. Looks like a rough cut with a blade. I got a purple label. 

The generous grading of the Promise books is what happens when the people who "discover" the collection own the auction house and have a stake in the grading company.

[MatterEaterLad]

On 8/28/2021 at 11:05 AM, jcjames said:

Thanks. I am immensely blessed beyond belief. Eight years and every day is a battle and it still goes on. It changes everything. 

You're right, tomorrow is not promised to anyone. 

That's a long hard battle. Wishing you health and joy and longevity. Hoping that if I'm ever in the same boat I can paddle as strongly and as eloquently as you. 

[Bronty]

On 8/29/2021 at 9:16 AM, MatterEaterLad said:

The record sales in this case were not by dealers but by owners of the new grading company. Who then misrepresented themselves as collectors.

Those are the facts. To say otherwise is "spin".

-jamie (a friend of integrity, seeker of transparency, avoider of obfuscation)

A misrepresentation is essentially something that is not true, correct?    Given that Zac and Richard are avid lifelong game collectors , I don’t see how suggesting the game was bought by collectors is a misrepresentation.      
 

At best, there’s an omission but I don’t think they were under any requirement to disclose all relationships  in the first place.    
 

let’s say you own a private bicycle manufacturer and you issue a press release to say you have entered into a supply contract with a private tire manufacturer.     
 

Are the companies required to disclose every relationship between the parties?   I don’t think they are.   Do you?     

[jimjum12]

On 8/29/2021 at 9:16 AM, MatterEaterLad said:

The record sales in this case were not by dealers but by owners of the new grading company. Who then misrepresented themselves as collectors.

Those are the facts. To say otherwise is "spin".

-jamie (a friend of integrity, seeker of transparency, avoider of obfuscation)

I've read every one of your posts and respect your commitment to fairness ... but the info I've seen ? I think those principals in that grading company were all very much dealers and collectors before they took the next step. If anything, they may have overstepped "the line" a little in their zeal for market promotion. Admittedly, I am on the outside looking in, and only own one slabbed video game. GOD BLESS...

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

...to simplify, I'm not convinced that pulling a "Madoff" is their main focus.... I believe it just appears that way. Sometimes passion leads to foolishness ... it's not always a premeditated transgression, just not thought out as well as it should have been. 

Edited August 29, 2021 by jimjum12

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 8/29/2021 at 9:32 AM, Bronty said:

 

let’s say you own a private bicycle manufacturer and you issue a press release to say you have entered into a supply contract with a private tire manufacturer.     
 

Are the companies required to disclose every relationship between the parties?   I don’t think they are.   Do you?     

Really?