Hi JR-
I agree with your points. Maybe Profiles needs to have someone on staff
who actually knows the insides and outs of the material they are offering. I
don't want to beat a dead horse, but wasn't it Grey at Heritage who detected
something fishy in some Universal horror pieces he was offered on consignment?
That really ratchets him and his poster division up several notches in trust
for me.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: James Richard
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 1:29 PM
Subject: [MOPO] DRACULA-gate and Profile's Part in it
Steve,
While I think Profiles did a poor job of presenting the poster with their
low-quality pictures and initial sketchy description, they actually *did* take
responsibility and do the right thing prior to putting it in their catalog --
they went to one of the most respected experts in the field and paid him good
money to carefully inspect and authenticate the DRACULA poster and issue a
certificate to that effect. The fact that the expert blew it isn't really their
fault and they continued to behave responsibly once others started pointing out
problems. Well, OK, the community actually had to beat them over the head about
it, but hey, they had paid for a certificate of authenticity from a recognized
expert, so why shouldn't they have stood by it as long as they did?
I don't believe that prior to these revelations that anyone in movie poster
collecting would have had anything but high praise for John Davis and his
capabilities. So, PIH went to the best available, not some fly-by-night
so-called "expert."
This whole incident just spotlights the fact that it is getting damn near
impossible for someone to authenticate a linen-backed poster (or a card
stock-based poster that has had its original card stock backing replaced).
This is why I've been saying that the restoration and backing operations have
to police themselves, form an organization to determine standards and practices
(including identifying seals and serial numbers in ink on the back of the linen
which would be linked to public disclosure of what work is done). This
organization would then issue an "underwriters laboratory" seal which a
cooperating restoration operations would display, thus assuring their customers
that they were complying with those standards and practices.
But what about the forger who puts on a fake seal and serial number from some
reputable restoration service?
Thats why public disclosure is absolutely necessary -- because if anyone can
look at that number on the back of the linen-backed poster, call up that
operation to confirm the number and that it is the same poster they are looking
at (and what work was done to it), then putting such fraudulent identifying
marks on a fake would be useless -- and in fact would set off an immediate
alarm that someone was trying to pull a fast one.
The place to stop this fraud is on the restoration and backing tables.
-- JR
Steven F. Poole wrote:
Bang up job on the letter, Rich.
However, one area of all of this that I believe needs to be addressed is
the responsibility of Profiles itself. The auction house is not a "victim,"
really, in this fiasco. As others have pointed out previously on this forum,
the auction house which charges about 1/5 of the hammer price on an item MUST
stand in the docket when the issue of fraud is raised.
They (auction houses) wax enthusiastically about their offerings when
it comes to advertising the wares that have been entrusted with on consignment.
They (auction houses) take their pound of flesh on both ends in the form of
consignment fees and buyer's premiums. They (auction houses) must be held
accountable when they promote a poster that has a retail value of some $300 on
the cover of their prestigious catalogue and estimate that same poster to have
a possible auction value in the hundereds of thousands of dollars.
Sad, Sad, Sad. state of affairs. Proclaimed "ignorance" of printing
techniques is no excuse whatsoever as to their culpability in this thwarted
attempted massive fraud upon the hobby.
Steve Poole (
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.14.1/2407 - Release Date: 10/01/09
06:34:00
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.
