• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Exposing FRAUD And DECEPTION - A Must Watch!
18 18

Started by comicwiz,

1,299 posts in this topic

Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 8/29/2021 at 11:25 PM, jaybuck43 said:

He sold his stake in wata TO turner. And that’s according to Heritage.

Honestly Jason, I don’t follow.     Turner is associated with collectors universe.   So now Goldin is associated  with Wata and Halperin no longer is.   What exactly is the perceived issue there?  
 

If you’re pointing out that everybody seems to know and deal with everybody  , I’d say the answer is yes.    So if that’s your angle then I understand where you’re coming from. 
 

But how exactly is that different that HA buying out Maddalena or becoming associated with the Mannarinos?    There aren’t many auction houses.    When one gets bought or sold, it’s probably going to be to someone else in that world.   

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites
southern cross

southern cross

Posted
Posted

Ok I have a very pretty tulip.

I give it to someone who will grade my tulip for the first time who has never graded a tulip.

Turns out the tulip is pretty but not real pretty.

Grading company travels with the florist and says what a pretty little tulip.

Then the florist auctions the tulip and the florist, the graders buy the tulip at ten times market value let's say.

Then they say the tulip market is blooming.

I just love this.

And I love the people involved saying differently as this is all cool drama.

I did give my wife a small amount of information about this and the fact someone may have done a little bad $100k thing when they were thirteen.

Her response, is it a shell game. 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 8/29/2021 at 11:09 PM, comicwiz said:

You clearly don't know what clickbait is, and let's just say it's rich to accuse others of being irresponsible when there's still questions being raised about propping-up this company, just because they"re all swell people, and are passionate about video games. 

Right.

I know you feel strongly that this kind of article/video writing/recording is doing important work and a driving force for truth.

The issue I take with that is from what I’ve seen of it so far, it’s errors, facts and accusations tossed around together.    And I have pointed out some examples of what appear to be clear, factual errors made in that video.

Why would you, why would I, why would anyone think it’s okay for someone to smear others based on errors and/or a misunderstanding of the facts?   (See: moldy game privilege for but one example).   

Now, there are a couple things suggested  in that video that I would hope aren’t true and that I’m not in a position to know.   But I cannot respect a result if I don’t respect the process.    If I indict those of accused of murder based on whether the day their file was processed was a day that ended in y, I will indict a good number of guilty people

but I’ll also Indict innocents , and the basis upon which I indicted had no merit.   

 

 

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted
On 8/29/2021 at 11:51 PM, southern cross said:

Ok I have a very pretty tulip.

I give it to someone who will grade my tulip for the first time who has never graded a tulip.

Turns out the tulip is pretty but not real pretty.

Grading company travels with the florist and says what a pretty little tulip.

Then the florist auctions the tulip and the florist, the graders buy the tulip at ten times market value let's say.

Then they say the tulip market is blooming.

I just love this.

And I love the people involved saying differently as this is all cool drama.

I did give my wife a small amount of information about this and the fact someone may have done a little bad $100k thing when they were thirteen.

Her response, is it a shell game. 👍

Tulip, shell game.   The implications being that what is being traded has no value?   
 

I think part of the attitude from some comic collectors boils down to “what I collect is cooler than what these guys collect so can they be going for similar money?   Must be a scam!”

Link to comment
Share on other sites
southern cross

southern cross

Posted
Posted

It becomes shady when the grading company, auction house, owner and everyone involved gets in bed together.

And buys a item at a inflated price and they say wow the market is booming 

Bronty mate 

There are guys with a table on a sidewalk selling stuff, they get a crowd around them 

And one of their mates emerges from the crowd and says that's a steal, I'll buy that.

Then suddenly the crowd moves in and buys it.

Having a game sell for $100k brings confidence in the game market.

Would it have happened if the owner of the grading company and the owner of the auction house didn't buy it?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted
On 8/30/2021 at 12:39 AM, southern cross said:

It becomes shady when the grading company, auction house, owner and everyone involved gets in bed together.

And buys a item at a inflated price and they say wow the market is booming 

Bronty mate 

There are guys with a table on a sidewalk selling stuff, they get a crowd around them 

And one of their mates emerges from the crowd and says that's a steal, I'll buy that.

Then suddenly the crowd moves in and buys it.

Having a game sell for $100k brings confidence in the game market.

Would it have happened if the owner of the grading company and the owner of the auction house didn't buy it?

 

 

I understand what you mean, but your post starts with the premise that 100k was an inflated price.   I don’t think that’s true.   100k was not an inflated price for that game at that time.   I’ve made the point there was another buyer willing to pay six figures.    So, how can we say that figure was in any way unreasonable ?   I don’t think we can.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted
On 8/30/2021 at 12:55 AM, southern cross said:

One other buyer?

If the auction house and grading company were not bidding would it have sold for $10k 30k?

What was the third under bidders high price?

Or was the second bidder one of the eventual third owner and the bid price was set at that price?

 

You’re a bit confused on the facts.

it was a private sale, not an auction.  
 

So had the purchasers not bought, it would have sold for 100k+ regardless.    That’s what I am getting at. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 8/30/2021 at 1:01 AM, southern cross said:

From the video one is led to believe it was bought thru a auction

I have only watched parts of the video but if what you say is true then that’s an issue with the video because it was a private sale.

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted
On 8/29/2021 at 9:58 PM, Bronty said:

You’re a bit confused on the facts.

it was a private sale, not an auction.  
 

So had the purchasers not bought, it would have sold for 100k+ regardless.    That’s what I am getting at. 

Can you explain?  Why would it have sold for 100k+ if the purchasers had not bought it?  What if no one else thought it was worth that much?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted
On 8/29/2021 at 10:06 PM, Bronty said:

There was a competing offer. 

Do you know how much it was?  What if it was say 30k?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kav

kav

Posted
Posted
On 8/29/2021 at 10:13 PM, Bronty said:

There was almost no difference between the offers, which, again, is why I can say with confidence that it would have sold for six figures. 

Thx.  I'm just trying to understand.  Is there any possibility both offers were just shills with deep pockets trying to boost the value of video games, playing the long game to cash in for much more later?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 8/30/2021 at 1:15 AM, kav said:

Thx.  I'm just trying to understand.  Is there any possibility both offers were just shills with deep pockets trying to boost the value of video games, playing the long game to cash in for much more later?

The competing offer was a long established collector and someone who I suspect was more philosophically motivated to suppress than raise prices.  So no.   I don’t believe the competition  was coming from the perspective of trying to boost values at all IMO.      

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
18 18
Go to topic listing