-----Original Message-----
>From: MoPo List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Video
>Den Collection
>I have been asked by Mike Orlando of The Hollywood Canteen to forward below
>his RESPONSE to several complaints posted yesterday (Sunday).
I hope then that you will also forward this response to him.
>..I used to be a mopo member but
>politely declined after it turned into a dumping ground for people to
>complain and whine about the hobby....
Then as is frequently mentioned here, too bad you did not want to stick
around and help turn it into something better.
>things they have done that no other auction ever has done...if
>consigning...the 20 percent includes photo, insurance, commission...not
>bad ..
Where exactly are the things that "no other auction ever has done"?
Heritage includes all these things also (and at a lower commission rate) as
does Bruce.
>...now the comment on shipping is valid...but everyone knows these auction
>houses do not use there own shipping...they use outside people and they
>charge ridiculous prices...
Actually this is not valid at all. Heritage does not use outside shipping
and they don't have ridiculous charges, neither does Bruce and these two are
the 800lb gorillas of the hobby now. Any reference to the way Christie's or
Sotheby's does things is woefully antiquated.
>..I detailed the condition of the posters at this time as the items
>were right in front of me...so the descriptions are ACCURATE...
No, they aren't. Let's take lot 235 as an example. Here is the
description: "THE COLOSSUS OF NEW YORK (1958) Paramount, US one-sheet"
That's it. Where's the condition description anywhere? It's no where to be
found. If you mean the description is accurate because it is a 1-sheet,
then yes I guess technically you are correct. But this lot does not even
have a letter grade assigned to it (and letter grades themselves are another
example of how you are behind the times when it comes to grading and
describing posters - I really suggest you look at the detailed descriptions
Heritage provides for a better example of how to write a description). Is
this an isolated example? No. In fact nearly all the sci-fi/horror
1-sheets around this lot are exactly the same.
>the picture of the Invasion of the Body Snatchers set is from David...as
>are a number of others...I was excited about getting them and did not
>closely look at the detail as the thumbnail looked fine...so the items
>pictured in these cases are not the same items as I have now in my
>possession...
So basically what you are saying here is that even though you have the items
in your possession now, you felt it was fine to NOT post scans of the actual
items for sale, but rather substitute generic scans of items you are not
selling? If you have the actual items now, why haven't you been in the
process of switching out the deceptive photos you had posted for photos of
the actual items? And please note that I'm not even talking about large
hi-res scans (as is the custom with the leading auction house), but even
small low-res scans that you would see from the auction houses you clearly
try to emulate. I see you are listing these items with eBay also - I am
sure they have rules against the item being pictured NOT being the item for
sale. You are five days away from the sale date and not a single photo you
got from David has been replaced with an accurate photo of what you are
selling, a clear cut and dried case of misrepresentation.
>why go on mopo and bitch about things ...I think
>it is great that some people have given the heads up but we are not in the
>business of ripping anyone off...in fact proceeds for this auction (my
>deceased friend's 60 pieces) are going to The Heart and Stroke Foundation
By proceeds do you mean the auction house is donating it's 20% commission to
the Heart and Stroke Foundation (an admirable action if they are), or that
the will stipulates proceeds to go to this foundation (which does not
testify to your business practices at all)?
>and a special thank you to all my friends, like Dennis, who
>took the time to email me rather than jump to unfair conclusions..though in
>this case perhaps...I think all the comments were justified to a
>degree...the pictures in some cases do not match up
Unfair conclusions?
Let's look at this again. You admit that the auction has:
* Rip-off shipping charges
* Highest premium of any of the major auctions
* No condition description on many lots
* Photos of items that aren't even the items you are selling
How is any of this an unfair conclusion? And if 100 of the 337 lots are
from your friend, I would suggest that it is a tad more than "some cases"
where the pictures do not match up.
It's a shame that your friend couldn't count on you to get the word out
about this auction (and provide accurate representation of what is being
sold) to help get prices up, especially as the proceeds are being donated to
such a worthy cause.
Sean Linkenback
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
