Seller sues dealer/buyer for a high flip

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

lol. In the end I'd probably come out the same way though. Now if I found one on the sidewalk....

Maybe I’d sell it for $5 million and stop by and give the book store guy $1 million to retire on. That would be cool.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I do like you though. I just think you aren't in a position to call me a liar when I speak the truth about my personal morals, or to paint everyone in the hobby with the broad brush you did.

If men’s actions were as good as their words, we would all of us be angels. One is either a man of exceptional virtue to turn down the proffered scenario, or dishonest. I do not see a real third option.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

If men’s actions were as good as their words, we would all of us be angels. One is either a man of exceptional virtue to turn down the proffered scenario, or dishonest. I do not see a real third option.

I would turn it down but I don't claim to have exceptional virtue, nor do I judge anyone who would take the offer. I think there are a lot more like me out there than you may believe.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Maybe I’d sell it for $5 million and stop by and give the book store guy $1 million to retire on. That would be cool.

That's a reasonable approach.

[Centauri]

I dabble a little in game used memorabilia, and have had a couple of finds where the day of the authentication was unimportant, but a previous game or 2 was a big one, and I was able to photo match to the previous game. If my leg work increases the value 4-5 times, am I cool to keep it?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Centauri

I dabble a little in game used memorabilia, and have had a couple of finds where the day of the authentication was unimportant, but a previous game or 2 was a big one, and I was able to photo match to the previous game. If my leg work increases the value 4-5 times, am I cool to keep it?

Seems similar to getting a card graded which can make it much more valuable. I can't imagine an issue.

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by G1911

I am sure many will say it. But life teaches that very very few would actually choose the moral horse over hundreds of thousands of dollars when offered directly to them without any coercion or illegalities or proposing it themselves.

Congratulations to those of you who are paragons of human virtue and would never take such an offer.

There are many who would say, if only to themselves, they would hand over the cash and take the card. I'm fairly certain, though, even some of those folks would change course at the moment of truth.

It's really not a moral high horse or some "perfect man or a liar" situation. It's just one possible course of action. For me, and others I'm sure, it's the one that makes the most sense.

And sure, there are some who would profess (publicly or otherwise) they'd do the right thing. Then, when the opportunity arose, they would silently grab the card and high-tail it out of there.

Like many "big" decisions in life, we don't really know what we'll do until confronted with the choice. I believe, however, it would be folly to think everyone would make the same choice when presented with a situation like this.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I would turn it down but I don't claim to have exceptional virtue, nor do I judge anyone who would take the offer. I think there are a lot more like me out there than you may believe.

It would not be very reasonable of me to believe there are a great or significant number of people who will turn down hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars offered to them on a silver platter. Experience suggests people do far worse for far less with great frequency. One who would decline such an example as the one I offered (without using any coercion, with it being directly offered to them, and without any illegalities making the buyer have to do nothing more than say “okay” as a nearly passive participant) is clearly in a minority. I might agree if the variables had been different, people generally do good things when their is incentive to do so or no incentive at all, but it is very hard to postulate many people will sincerely trade retirement and financial security for a relatively minor moral point. Nothing in human history suggests to me this is how anything remotely approaching how a majority actually works.

[timn1]

I agree, the "knee-jerk piece of $&@*" comment is not productive

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

That's the sort of response I was hoping we would not have in this thread. I don't think there is a specific price point or percentage at which you can just say that the buyer is "one of those scumbag pieces of $#!t that gives the hobby a bad name" without a lot more information, and when you take that sort of attitude right off the bat, you kill off any conversation about it. I think there is room for reasonable people to differ on the issue. I could point out myriad real-world examples, from the entire web sites dedicated to thrift store finds, to the many transactions we see every day at shows and on eBay, to the guy who buys a raw card and gets a 10 from PSA on it. Everyone who buys a card thinks he got a deal and everyone who sells a card thinks he got a deal. They can't all be right. Every transaction is a zero-sum one: somebody wins, somebody loses. The nature of the win and loss depends on the metrics by which you measure. I've overpaid for the last card I needed to finish a tough set. It was worthwhile to me, even if, financially speaking, it was not an objectively "good" deal. It was a good deal for me so I can enjoy the set.

Not directed at you, but more generally, I don't get the knee-jerk hostility to someone seeing and making a great deal. This is a hyper-capitalist society and economy: the whole point of trade is to make money, to get the advantage. Excluding criminality or fraud--which no one thinks is OK--why is there a tendency to attack people who do it? I bought an item from a walk-in at a show and paid his ask because I thought it was really special. I put it into an auction, and it sold for 17X what I paid. Does that make me a scumbag piece of crap? At the same show, I picked up a card that later sold for a third of what I paid. Should I sue the seller? Not as far as I am concerned. That's how it goes.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Well you're now down to talking about a majority and a minority. I might agree with you there, but before you were suggesting no one would turn it down. I believe a very sizeable minority would.

I don't know what your experience of the world has been, but mine apparently is otherwise.

[Snapolit1]

My mom has a condo down in Vero Beach. I thought it would be really cool to take out some classified ads in the local papers (see them all the time) about how I am buying cards, sports memorablia, Dodgers stuff, etc. Would be fun to pop into people's homes and check stuff out. But ultimately I don't run an auction house, and the business model would basically be premised on me fleecing ignorant widows of what they have. No. Not how I see my life playing out.

If Rick Probstein misprices something, that's one thing. If Mary O'Ryan, age 90 does, that's a totally different story.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

My mom has a condo down in Vero Beach. I thought it would be really cool to take out some classified ads in the local papers (see them all the time) about how I am buying cards, sports memorablia, Dodgers stuff, etc. Would be fun to pop into people's homes and check stuff out. But ultimately I don't run an auction house, and the business model would basically be premised on me fleecing ignorant widows of what they have. No. Not how I see my life playing out.

If Rick Probstein misprices something, that's one thing. If Mary O'Ryan, age 90 does, that's a totally different story.

Is there some profit margin where you would still make enough to justify your effort, but not so much that you felt like you were shearing the sheep?

70%? 50%? 30%? 10%?

Seems like somewhere in that range you probably find you can sleep at night. But maybe the margins would drift down to the point where it no longer made sense.

[Exhibitman]

Eric, I don't expect everyone to agree with me or for people I disagree with not to voice their views. I want to hear those views, but I also want to hear the rationales behind the views. These are difficult subjects and people hold a variety of views. My point is that when you come out of the box condemning anyone who doesn't agree with you, it replaces a discussion with a fight. The same is true when anyone labels a position as "the right thing" or as "the ethical thing". That's the end of the discussion too, because any other position is "the wrong thing" or the unethical thing, by definition.

I appreciate any heartfelt point of view. I may not agree with a position, and I certainly won't accept it if that is the case, but as long as it is offered in good faith, I want to hear it and bat it around with everyone.

[Snapolit1]

Good question.

I guess my answer to a friend or family member would be "It depends. Speak to Al at Love of the Game Auctions." And if I didn't say that to someone else it would probably be a little disengenous at best.

Originally Posted by raulus

Is there some profit margin where you would still make enough to justify your effort, but not so much that you felt like you were shearing the sheep?

70%? 50%? 30%? 10%?

Seems like somewhere in that range you probably find you can sleep at night. But maybe the margins would drift down to the point where it no longer made sense.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Eric, I don't expect everyone to agree with me or for people I disagree with not to voice their views. I want to hear those views, but I also want to hear the rationales behind the views. These are difficult subjects and people hold a variety of views. My point is that when you come out of the box condemning anyone who doesn't agree with you, it replaces a discussion with a fight. The same is true when anyone labels a position as "the right thing" or as "the ethical thing". That's the end of the discussion too, because any other position is "the wrong thing" or the unethical thing, by definition.

I appreciate any heartfelt point of view. I may not agree with a position, and I certainly won't accept it if that is the case, but as long as it is offered in good faith, I want to hear it and bat it around with everyone.

How about:

"I can't believe I'm typing this..."

Not because they're surprised at their own position. But because they can't believe that anyone in their right mind would ever disagree with them.

[D. Bergin]

I like to think I’m pretty savvy at stuff like this, but if I found that mask among my grandparents belongings, I’d probably be the idiot who’d be happy to get $157 for it.

Not my wheelhouse man…not my wheelhouse.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Well you're now down to talking about a majority and a minority. I might agree with you there, but before you were suggesting no one would turn it down. I believe a very sizeable minority would.

I don't know what your experience of the world has been, but mine apparently is otherwise.

I stated in favor of "very few" (40), that it would be "exceptional" (52), that there are not a "great or sizable number" (58), "in a minority (58), and against "many people" (58) or "anything even approaching a majority" (58), since you so strongly objected to it being "exceptional"; which would necessitate a large number of people.

Perhaps one day I will find this idyllic Utopia where a great many people reject instant wealth to make a point not to benefit from a stupid seller, but I think we all must know deep down that the odds of that are about 0%.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I stated in favor of "very few" (40), that it would be "exceptional" (52), that there are not a "great or sizable number" (58), "in a minority (58), and against "many people" (58) or "anything even approaching a majority" (58), since you so strongly objected to it being "exceptional"; which would necessitate a large number of people.

Perhaps one day I will find this idyllic Utopia where a great many people reject instant wealth to make a point not to benefit from a stupid seller, but I think we all must know deep down that the odds of that are about 0%.

I am sorry you have such a jaded view. I suspect you're already in that utopia, as I believe a great many of us would feel it was the right thing not to buy a Wagner for a hundred bucks.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Many years ago, I sold a PSA 9 worth several K to a dealer. He was able to bump it to a 10, and when he sold it at a huge profit, he sent me part of his take. When I said you didn't have to do that, he said for him it was the right thing to do. That's how people should be.

Was his name Gary Moser by chance?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Was his name Gary Moser by chance?

LOLOL good one. No, no "work" done to the card, just a friendly bump.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Was his name Gary Moser by chance?

Only half that story works for Moser. Hint, it's not the part where he shares the money lol.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Only half that story works for Moser. Hint, it's not the part where he shares the money lol.

Actually I don't think 9 to 10 was his thing, more a 5/6/7 to 8/9 guy.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I am sorry you have such a jaded view. I suspect you're already in that utopia, as I believe a great many of us would feel it was the right thing not to buy a Wagner for a hundred bucks.

A great many of you certainly will feel this way. I would probably agree even. But not many of you will pass up a free million bucks if offered on a silver platter. People lie, cheat and steal for $1,000 or less frequently; when offered a cool million plus without having to even lie, cheat or steal almost all of us will take it.

I find it exceedingly difficult to believe any collector in the hobby for a significant amount of time has not gotten a bargain in their favor at some point and benefited from a sellers lack of knowledge.

If I list $100 card for $1 in the BST it will be gone in 1 minute. People will take this offer for a few bucks; there is no way many are turning it down for instant wealth. I'm sorry, but this utopia is pretty obviously not how the world works.

[Peter_Spaeth]

There's a difference between making a good deal and making an unconscionable one. Perhaps it's hard to define precisely where the line is, but not at the extremes.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

There's a difference between making a good deal and making an unconscionable one. Perhaps it's hard to define precisely where the line is, but not at the extremes.

I'm going to have a hard time buying an argument that taking advantage of a sellers bad offer and lack of knowledge for $100 is something people will do, but doing the same for $1,000,000 isn't.

In reality, it usually works the exact opposite way here. When I leave a $20 bill on the table at the diner as the tip, the odds it is stolen if the waitresses back is turned is pretty low. If I left $20,000 on the table, the odds it will be stolen is extremely high. A wrong act (we'll just assume accepting a low offer is a wrong act) is more likely to be performed the greater the reward for doing so. If one is happy to accept a bad offer from a seller for $99 profit, I find it extremely difficult to believe they will not do so for $1,000,000.

I get this argument has to be made after the previous claims because nobody can credibly claim to be a long time collector and have never taken advantage of a seller in a realistically sized deal, but it is a rather absurd argument.

We can virtue signal and wring our hands, but we all know damn well that almost everybody is handing over the $157 as fast as they can possibly get it out of the wallet and taking that Wagner, and that the $100 card I list will be gone in a flash. Many might feel bad about it, and some might come back and give the original seller a small slice of the profits, but we all know that card is being sold in seconds.

[Exhibitman]

Does Moser really exist or is he a boogeyman?

[raulus]

Originally Posted by G1911

I'm going to have a hard time buying an argument that taking advantage of a sellers bad offer and lack of knowledge for $100 is something people will do, but doing the same for $1,000,000 isn't.

In reality, it usually works the exact opposite way here. When I leave a $20 bill on the table at the diner as the tip, the odds it is stolen if the waitresses back is turned is pretty low. If I left $20,000 on the table, the odds it will be stolen is extremely high. A wrong act (we'll just assume accepting a low offer is a wrong act) is more likely to be performed the greater the reward for doing so. If one is happy to accept a bad offer from a seller for $99 profit, I find it extremely difficult to believe they will not do so for $1,000,000.

I get this argument has to be made after the previous claims because nobody can credibly claim to be a long time collector and have never taken advantage of a seller in a realistically sized deal, but it is a rather absurd argument.

We can virtue signal and wring our hands, but we all know damn well that almost everybody is handing over the $157 as fast as they can possibly get it out of the wallet and taking that Wagner, and that the $100 card I list will be gone in a flash. Many might feel bad about it, and some might come back and give the original seller a small slice of the profits, but we all know that card is being sold in seconds.

I see both sides to this argument. And I’d like to think that it’s possible to agree with both of you, without seeming like I’m completely full of inconsistencies.

If you want an example that cuts the opposite of Greg’s assumed outcome, I give you the example of my friend Fred McKie and the dice game find from last year.

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...st-cards-find/

[Seven]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Something very similar came up here a couple years ago and I remember arguing with people about this. I was saying that the original owners should be able to seek damages and others were saying, "nope, a sale is a sale" and that the buyer has no responsibility to inform an ignorant seller of an item's value. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Originally Posted by Seven

Travis,

I'm interested to see what you are referencing, in terms of the post. Was it a hypothetical situation, or a transaction that actually occurred, here on the board?

- James

I'm still interested to see what this was referencing, as it has gone unanswered. Was it a hypothetical scenario, or something that actually occurred here on the board?

I haven't been in the situation myself, but I would hope human decency would prevail. If a little old man/old lady was attempting to sell me a Cracker Jack Joe Jackson for $100, I would be honest with her. I would hope most of us would do the same.

[packs]

Is that what happened though?

It's more like if someone said I've got a baseball that might be signed by Christy Mathewson. You buy it for the price of a theoretically signed baseball rather than an authentic one, invest your own money to determine authenticity, and then sell it for max profit after you paid all the fees.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Saying you had hoped we wouldn't have a response like mine, because it kills off any conversation, doesn't sit quite right with me.

Are you saying we should only write things in line with your beliefs and expectations? I don't think so. I've been on this forum for over a decade, and I've read many of your posts. I really don't have that image of you in my mind.

It wasn't a knee-jerk response, nor was it the issue of somebody making money. In your 17X example, I see nothing wrong with that. No, in my opinion, it doesn't make you a scumbag piece of crap. However, in this case, we're talking about a 28,000X flip. It's like finding a way to buy somebody's house for less than twenty bucks.

I wouldn't want to be the one who determines the line of demarcation between good deal and scumbag POS. However, this is definitely across any line I would consider reasonable.

So how many X does a flip change from good to scumbag? And are there other factors that change that?

I've had one that was more than 2400x,

Saw a plate in a thrift shop, priced at 25 cents (typical at the time)
It was restaurant china, with a named restaurant, and a cactus motif. Looked pretty cool, and I figured as a random restaurant china plate maybe $10 on ebay. Apparently it was a rare pattern from Fred Harvey restaurants. Total surprise to me once I started looking it up. The small size was the only other one I could find, and that went for $50. Put it on Ebay, and it sold for over 600...

Plenty of other examples of stuff like this.

Dealer I know bought a postcard from a dollar box. Thought it was designed by Mucha. It was.
It was also not listed in the book about his postcards.
He sold it to a guy he knew who collected them for 500. (Buyers price, this dealer often does that, just hands you stuff he got for you and asks how much you'd pay.)
That guy sold it to a bigger dealer for 1000....
It ended up in a major european auction and sold for 10,000.

Should eveyone all the way back to the dollar box guy get a bigger cut?

I have a lot of stuff in my collections that were things dealers and others didn't recognize as anything at all special.

Of course, I also have a bunch of stuff that I took a chance on that isn't anything special.

[drcy]

French law and views may be different than American. This case may have no bearing on that Honus Wagner bought in Iowa City.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by steve B

So how many X does a flip change from good to scumbag? And are there other factors that change that?

I've had one that was more than 2400x,

Saw a plate in a thrift shop, priced at 25 cents (typical at the time)
It was restaurant china, with a named restaurant, and a cactus motif. Looked pretty cool, and I figured as a random restaurant china plate maybe $10 on ebay. Apparently it was a rare pattern from Fred Harvey restaurants. Total surprise to me once I started looking it up. The small size was the only other one I could find, and that went for $50. Put it on Ebay, and it sold for over 600...

Plenty of other examples of stuff like this.

Dealer I know bought a postcard from a dollar box. Thought it was designed by Mucha. It was.
It was also not listed in the book about his postcards.
He sold it to a guy he knew who collected them for 500. (Buyers price, this dealer often does that, just hands you stuff he got for you and asks how much you'd pay.)
That guy sold it to a bigger dealer for 1000....
It ended up in a major european auction and sold for 10,000.

Should eveyone all the way back to the dollar box guy get a bigger cut?

I have a lot of stuff in my collections that were things dealers and others didn't recognize as anything at all special.

Of course, I also have a bunch of stuff that I took a chance on that isn't anything special.

What if the market moved because I got lucky when I bought it?

Real life example: I bought a 1951B PSA 8 Mays for $48k in June 2020. A few months later, another example sold at auction for $300k+. If I sold mine a few months later, should I go back to the seller and share some of the sales proceeds?

[jlehma13]

A huge story from my neighborhood card shop during the heyday of my childhood collecting (we were all jealous). It was a kid in the know who bought it and a woman filling in for the owner for a short time who had no clue. As far as I remember, the card ended up being signed by Nolan and auctioned off for charity. The card shop got publicity and a charity got the proceeds. We also got a kick out of it because it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy...

Originally Posted by ALBB

Yea, the Ryan rookie card story,..I recall young kid working behind the counter of a card shop misread the price $1200...as $12.00, the buyer an adult Im sure knew it should have been 1200..but didnt say anything.

I think a judge ruled in the case -

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Maybe I’d sell it for $5 million and stop by and give the book store guy $1 million to retire on. That would be cool.

I love this idea...theoretically.

Somehow I feel it would quickly turn into a situation where a family member of the store owner or the owner themselves wrap me into a lingering lawsuit for the full amount and it sits in litigation for years.

It's sad, but often doing the right thing backfires in a spectacular way. Perhaps, one could use a legal intermediary to provide a gift with no additional information as to why. These situations often remind me of the commonality of lawsuits when a lottery group wins the prize. Sometimes the holder of the tickets wins on one that was bought individually or falsefully states it was, or in the other couple cases where someone did not put in their share the week it won and still wants the winnings?

I remember one in which that happened and the winners still gave them a substantial amount but they still sued. So hard to judge how a person will respond to this situation.

This specific instance that the thread was based on does seem ok to me IF indeed the gardener story is untrue. If that pans out then it would show an intent to defraud.

The part about offering 300k plus would be more than honorable for the dealer if this is a case of them just completing due diligence to get the best price. How many others would have enlisted carbon-14 dating to find the truth? Based on the initial estimates of the first two auction houses prior to the dealers additional work, the buyer had provided a far more than fair purchase price.

It's now the kids seeing green and wanting a piece of something they never wanted in the first place that now defers back to why the prior imaginary bookstore owner payment would blow up in someone's face.

[bmattioli]

Caveat Emptor..

Nuff said..

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by raulus

What if the market moved because I got lucky when I bought it?

Real life example: I bought a 1951B PSA 8 Mays for $48k in June 2020. A few months later, another example sold at auction for $300k+. If I sold mine a few months later, should I go back to the seller and share some of the sales proceeds?

Plainly no. You paid an appropriate price at the time.

[Shemp]

Nobody seems to have brought up the biggest issue.....was this mask stolen from Gabon years ago? If so, shouldn't this mask be returned to the rightful owners?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Shemp

Nobody seems to have brought up the biggest issue.....was this mask stolen from Gabon years ago? If so, shouldn't this mask be returned to the rightful owners?

I'll bet the original owners are dead.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Shemp

Nobody seems to have brought up the biggest issue.....was this mask stolen from Gabon years ago? If so, shouldn't this mask be returned to the rightful owners?

Only if you want to give back this country to the people who were conquered by the English/Americans.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Only if you want to give back this country to the people who were conquered by the English/Americans.

Don’t forget the Dutch, the Spanish, and the French!

Probably a few others mixed in too.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by raulus

Don’t forget the Dutch, the Spanish, and the French!

Probably a few others mixed in too.

Not to mention, long before Europeans came to this continent, the various Native American tribes were routinely attacking and stealing land from each other.

[Prof]

Originally Posted by Shemp

Nobody seems to have brought up the biggest issue.....was this mask stolen from Gabon years ago? If so, shouldn't this mask be returned to the rightful owners?

I'm glad someone brought finally brought this up. Regardless of whether you think the guy who spent $157 on it did so un/ethically, the macro ethics angle is very interesting to me.

Although the 'owners' would be long dead, it sure sounds like an extremely significant cultural relic that would be best to sell to/return to Gabon for display in a museum... especially since the article mentions that the French guy's relative was a freaking colonialist governor.



The couple claims this guy essentially stole the mask from them, and then they turned down 300k from the guy after the sale, presumably because they want all of the money for themselves.

Man, that's a startling amount of hypocrisy to me when your ancestor most likely took it himself as a spoil of oppressive colonialism.

If anyone deserves the money or mask, it'd be the people of Gabon.

Sounds like a bit of Gabonese karma finally swinging back to the family to me.

[parkplace33]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Only half that story works for Moser. Hint, it's not the part where he shares the money lol.

Is he even still around?

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Prof

I'm glad someone brought finally brought this up. Regardless of whether you think the guy who spent $157 on it did so un/ethically, the macro ethics angle is very interesting to me.

Although the 'owners' would be long dead, it sure sounds like an extremely significant cultural relic that would be best to sell to/return to Gabon for display in a museum... especially since the article mentions that the French guy's relative was a freaking colonialist governor.



The couple claims this guy essentially stole the mask from them, and then they turned down 300k from the guy after the sale, presumably because they want all of the money for themselves.

Man, that's a startling amount of hypocrisy to me when your ancestor most likely took it himself as a spoil of oppressive colonialism.

If anyone deserves the money or mask, it'd be the people of Gabon.

Sounds like a bit of Gabonese karma finally swinging back to the family to me.

This chapter seems like a bit of a leap.

The mask is stated to be from the nineteenth century and used by a secret society that functioned until 1920, acquired by an 88 year old man's grandfather likely during the late 19th century. It's the obscurity of the origin and the materials causing value here, not age. It was likely damn near new when he received it.

Why to do we have to place an imaginary story of an oppressive Indiana Jones in a pith hat burning the village and children for their prized good luck charm when a more likely story was he probably bought it at a street market as souvenir junk at the time? Also, Gabon is easily one of the richest countries in Africa due to an incredible wealth of rare resources, it is not a bad place to be and rather lovely. If they felt in the slightest that they wanted the item, they could easily add a legal team that was outstanding...they don't give a flying f.

This is one of those rewrites in history that we love to do in modern times. Perhaps we don't assume the great evils of everyone and instead think progress would have never happened if not for the actions of the past, both good and bad.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by raulus

What if the market moved because I got lucky when I bought it?

Real life example: I bought a 1951B PSA 8 Mays for $48k in June 2020. A few months later, another example sold at auction for $300k+. If I sold mine a few months later, should I go back to the seller and share some of the sales proceeds?

Having bought most of my good cards back in the 1980's, I'd be in serious trouble.

[D. Bergin]

“Secret Society”?

Maybe not so secret. Collectors must have put a great deal of faith in the “ethnologist”, who authenticated this piece.

Anybody else getting Dead Sea Scroll, Morman Bible, Barry Halper collection vibes from this story?

As in, maybe the mask really only is worth a few hundred bucks…but the piece of historical fiction that the last niche auction house crafted around the piece, is what is actually worth millions.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Anybody else getting Dead Sea Scroll, Morman Bible, Barry Harper collection vibes from this story?

I like where your head is at!

I promise I’m not trying to make this religious, but one small request - if you’re going to refer to us, make sure to spell our pejorative yet ubiquitous nickname correctly. Mormons.

Bonus endorsement from South Park: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jbNnsiP4Rhg

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by raulus

I like where your head is at!

I promise I’m not trying to make this religious, but one small request - if you’re going to refer to us, make sure to spell our pejorative yet ubiquitous nickname correctly. Mormons.

Bonus endorsement from South Park: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jbNnsiP4Rhg

Apologies sir. "Mormon Bible".

...but since it WAS a hoax, maybe my typo (ie. horrible spelling) was more apt.



edited to add, for those not in the know, I'm referring to a fabricated document that was the subject of a Netflix documentary series recently......not the actual religious denomination.

[Yoda]

Wasn't Gabon part of French West Africa?

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Does Moser really exist or is he a boogeyman?

Gary is a zombie and living in your basement.