[MOPO] FA: Original one sheets from 50's thru 80's, lots of exploitation
For auction on Ebay, ending Thursday night. No reserve. Seller ID: rememberwhenshop Bhowani Junction (1956) orig os. Good girl art. Ava Gardner Knights of the Round Table (1954) orig os. Ava Gardner Three Bad Sisters (1955) orig os. Exploitation This Happy Feeling (1958) orig os. Debbie Reynolds Three Little Words (1950) orig os. Fred Astaire Bitter Sweet (reissue 1962) orig os. Eddy MacDonald Black Tights (1962) orig os. Hatari (reissue 1967) orig os. John Wayne The Angel Wore Red (1960) orig os. Ava Gardner Black Eye (1974) orig os. Blaxploitation Black Fist (1975) orig os. Blaxploitation Big Bird Cage (1972) orig os. Exploitation. Pam Grier Big Zapper (1973) orig os. Exploitation Black Brother Black Sister (1976) orig os. Exploitation Countess Dracula (1972) orig os. Ingrid Pitt Black Mama White Mama (1972) orig os. Exploitation Anne of the 1000 Days (1970) orig os Andromeda Strain (1971) orig os The Bite (1975) orig os. X-rated This Is Elvis (1981) orig os Thanks for looking. Sharon Herndon Remember When Shop Dallas, TX rememberwhenshop.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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.
[MOPO] Censorship!!!
Dear MOPO: Sent the following to MPT late last night, only to have it censored and deleted (I figured it might, even though I didn't really break any of their rules - it was censored purely on content they disapproved with). Despite their official stance, a lot more is being censored than they say. Apparently, you can't criticize them (or Bruce) at all! So much for freedom ofspeech! Thank God Scott hasn't succumbed to the insanity that is spreading through our hobby! Cheers,Bob An open letter to the MPT Forum: Congratulations on destroying the best forum in the movie poster world! Strong words, but true nonetheless. You all know my feelings on censorship. And, if all my posts have to be 'approved' - then, I'm not going to be posting very much any more (I censor myself enough already). And, I know a lot of you feel the same (you'll notice that a lot of the more senior/knowledgable members haven't posted in the last couple days or have left the forum for good). In fact, the reason I never joined Style B was that I didn't like the idea that all members had to be 'approved' to join. And, the implication that this all comes about from libelous posts is pure fabrication! We were free to mention innumerable bad apples in the past. It wasn't until recent events implicated the 'biggest apple' did all this start. If fear of litigation was really behind the recent censorship (and I know of several posts that appear to have been censored - more than the singleone they officially concede) then the ABSOLUTE LAST thing Jon would have done would have been to change to a completely moderated forum. A forum owner has virtually NO liability for what a member posts UNLESS it's a completely moderated forum (the owner then becomes the publisher). In fact, he did the very worst thing he could have done from a liability standpoint!!! THE VERY WORST! Think about it. If you were afraid of being sued, would you do the one thing that would open you up to MORE liability? Of course not. He would have incorporated, so that there was no personal liability (and that only costs a few hundred dollars to insulate yourself completely). So, we can safely assume that the recent fiasco is a direct result of a very small handful of dealers complaining to Jon, not from any threat of litigation (that would certainly fail). Or, more specifically, it probably came from BH (judging by the timing and content of the recent posts and the personalities involved)... As we've said before, if you are a public figure, you open yourself up to comment/criticism (go ahead, say whatever you want about me). But, BH obviously doesn't like that (remember his innumerable exits from MPT and Mopo). That's too bad! Deal with it! Jon needs to tell him (or whoever else is complaining) to take a pill and leave him alone. If you can't stand the heat - get out of the kitchen. You can be a big dealer OR you can be anonymous, NOT BOTH. Pick one. No offence, but people who are trying to restrict a free and open discourse on this site (there has not been even a single truly libelous post on this site that I can remember) are no better than Fascists. You are not in favor of free speech, if you are only in favor of free speech for people who agree with (or say only nice things about) you. And, despite what you say, a completely moderated forum IS NOT the same thing as what we had before - it's a farce. It's one of Bush's 'town hall' meetings - untrustworthy by definition... If we aren't free to comment on the bad dealers (as well as the good), then we run the risk of becoming the internet version of one of Bruce's email club messages (only without the giveaways) - nothing but bland praise and useless discourse... And, in this industry, being able to call out the bad dealers is of utmost importance, as most of the wholesalers can't be trusted to deliver 'original' posters when that is what is ordered... Now, don't get me wrong. I have absolutely nothing against Bruce or Jon. In fact, I like both of them and would have absolutely no qualms about dealing with either of them. But, I tell my friends when they are wrong - and in this case BOTH of them are wrong! Dead wrong! At times like these, it is often easiest to curtail people's human rights (remember the Patriot Act) than to do what's right. You are putting your own needs and desires in front of several thousand others, and that isn't right. And, you are doubly wrong if the offending posts happen to have a basis in truth... Pease, please, please return MPT to what it once was - the best place on the net to talk about what we all love. Otherwise, prepare to become irrelevant... Sincerely, Bob Brooks 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
Re: [MOPO] Censorship!!!
I am in complete agreement. The forum has completely fallen apart the last few weeks. The most important aspect of a forum is knowledge sharing and now that some may get their toes stepped on, many important topics are now taboo. Everyone has an opportunity to respond to anything written to defend themselves. Several of the more outspoken or entertaining members have dropped off completely. What once was a website hit on every couple hours through the day is now a once a day casual glance or not even visited at all. Truly a sad state. Dale From: MoPo List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert D. Brooks Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 7:47 AM To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Subject: [MOPO] Censorship!!! Dear MOPO: Sent the following to MPT late last night, only to have it censored and deleted (I figured it might, even though I didn't really break any of their rules - it was censored purely on content they disapproved with). Despite their official stance, a lot more is being censored than they say. Apparently, you can't criticize them (or Bruce) at all! So much for freedom ofspeech! Thank God Scott hasn't succumbed to the insanity that is spreading through our hobby! Cheers, Bob An open letter to the MPT Forum: Congratulations on destroying the best forum in the movie poster world! Strong words, but true nonetheless. You all know my feelings on censorship. And, if all my posts have to be 'approved' - then, I'm not going to be posting very much any more (I censor myself enough already). And, I know a lot of you feel the same (you'll notice that a lot of the more senior/knowledgable members haven't posted in the last couple days or have left the forum for good). In fact, the reason I never joined Style B was that I didn't like the idea that all members had to be 'approved' to join. And, the implication that this all comes about from libelous posts is pure fabrication! We were free to mention innumerable bad apples in the past. It wasn't until recent events implicated the 'biggest apple' did all this start. If fear of litigation was really behind the recent censorship (and I know of several posts that appear to have been censored - more than the singleone they officially concede) then the ABSOLUTE LAST thing Jon would have done would have been to change to a completely moderated forum. A forum owner has virtually NO liability for what a member posts UNLESS it's a completely moderated forum (the owner then becomes the publisher). In fact, he did the very worst thing he could have done from a liability standpoint!!! THE VERY WORST! Think about it. If you were afraid of being sued, would you do the one thing that would open you up to MORE liability? Of course not. He would have incorporated, so that there was no personal liability (and that only costs a few hundred dollars to insulate yourself completely). So, we can safely assume that the recent fiasco is a direct result of a very small handful of dealers complaining to Jon, not from any threat of litigation (that would certainly fail). Or, more specifically, it probably came from BH (judging by the timing and content of the recent posts and the personalities involved)... As we've said before, if you are a public figure, you open yourself up to comment/criticism (go ahead, say whatever you want about me). But, BH obviously doesn't like that (remember his innumerable exits from MPT and Mopo). That's too bad! Deal with it! Jon needs to tell him (or whoever else is complaining) to take a pill and leave him alone. If you can't stand the heat - get out of the kitchen. You can be a big dealer OR you can be anonymous, NOT BOTH. Pick one. No offence, but people who are trying to restrict a free and open discourse on this site (there has not been even a single truly libelous post on this site that I can remember) are no better than Fascists. You are not in favor of free speech, if you are only in favor of free speech for people who agree with (or say only nice things about) you. And, despite what you say, a completely moderated forum IS NOT the same thing as what we had before - it's a farce. It's one of Bush's 'town hall' meetings - untrustworthy by definition... If we aren't free to comment on the bad dealers (as well as the good), then we run the risk of becoming the internet version of one of Bruce's email club messages (only without the giveaways) - nothing but bland praise and useless discourse... And, in this industry, being able to call out the bad dealers is of utmost importance, as most of the wholesalers can't be trusted to deliver 'original' posters when that is what is ordered... Now, don't get me wrong. I have absolutely nothing against Bruce or Jon. In fact, I like both of them and would have absolutely no qualms about dealing with either of
Re: [MOPO] Censorship!!!
Hi Bob Bravo! In addition, I know of one individual who has been 'booted' off MPT in the last few days. I wonder if anyone else has suffered the same fate. Perhaps, some deluded people believe that all these wrongs may one day add up to make a right? Shelly Original Message Follows From: Robert D. Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Robert D. Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Subject: [MOPO] Censorship!!! Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 05:47:15 -0700 Dear MOPO: Sent the following to MPT late last night, only to have it censored and deleted (I figured it might, even though I didn't really break any of their rules - it was censored purely on content they disapproved with). Despite their official stance, a lot more is being censored than they say. Apparently, you can't criticize them (or Bruce) at all! So much for freedom of speech! Thank God Scott hasn't succumbed to the insanity that is spreading through our hobby! Cheers, Bob An open letter to the MPT Forum: Congratulations on destroying the best forum in the movie poster world! Strong words, but true nonetheless. You all know my feelings on censorship. And, if all my posts have to be 'approved' - then, I'm not going to be posting very much any more (I censor myself enough already). And, I know a lot of you feel the same (you'll notice that a lot of the more senior/knowledgable members haven't posted in the last couple days or have left the forum for good). In fact, the reason I never joined Style B was that I didn't like the idea that all members had to be 'approved' to join. And, the implication that this all comes about from libelous posts is pure fabrication! We were free to mention innumerable bad apples in the past. It wasn't until recent events implicated the 'biggest apple' did all this start. If fear of litigation was really behind the recent censorship (and I know of several posts that appear to have been censored - more than the single one they officially concede) then the ABSOLUTE LAST thing Jon would have done would have been to change to a completely moderated forum. A forum owner has virtually NO liability for what a member posts UNLESS it's a completely moderated forum (the owner then becomes the publisher). In fact, he did the very worst thing he could have done from a liability standpoint!!! THE VERY WORST! Think about it. If you were afraid of being sued, would you do the one thing that would open you up to MORE liability? Of course not. He would have incorporated, so that there was no personal liability (and that only costs a few hundred dollars to insulate yourself completely). So, we can safely assume that the recent fiasco is a direct result of a very small handful of dealers complaining to Jon, not from any threat of litigation (that would certainly fail). Or, more specifically, it probably came from BH (judging by the timing and content of the recent posts and the personalities involved)... As we've said before, if you are a public figure, you open yourself up to comment/criticism (go ahead, say whatever you want about me). But, BH obviously doesn't like that (remember his innumerable exits from MPT and Mopo). That's too bad! Deal with it! Jon needs to tell him (or whoever else is complaining) to take a pill and leave him alone. If you can't stand the heat - get out of the kitchen. You can be a big dealer OR you can be anonymous, NOT BOTH. Pick one. No offence, but people who are trying to restrict a free and open discourse on this site (there has not been even a single truly libelous post on this site that I can remember) are no better than Fascists. You are not in favor of free speech, if you are only in favor of free speech for people who agree with (or say only nice things about) you. And, despite what you say, a completely moderated forum IS NOT the same thing as what we had before - it's a farce. It's one of Bush's 'town hall' meetings - untrustworthy by definition... If we aren't free to comment on the bad dealers (as well as the good), then we run the risk of becoming the internet version of one of Bruce's email club messages (only without the giveaways) - nothing but bland praise and useless discourse... And, in this industry, being able to call out the bad dealers is of utmost importance, as most of the wholesalers can't be trusted to deliver 'original' posters when that is what is ordered... Now, don't get me wrong. I have absolutely nothing against Bruce or Jon. In fact, I like both of them and would have absolutely no qualms about dealing with either of them. But, I tell my friends when they are wrong - and in this case BOTH of them are wrong! Dead wrong! At times like these, it is often easiest to curtail people's human rights (remember the Patriot Act) than to do what's right. You are putting your own needs and desires in front of several thousand others, and that isn't right. And, you are doubly wrong if the offending posts happen to have a basis in truth...
[MOPO] FA silk screened Mexican posters PLUS US LCS GUNFIGHT AT OK CORRAL +++++
Some wonderful Mexican silk screened rerelease posters closing today, also coming up very soon are some great US items including: LCS of 8 for JAM SESSION, a great set in NM cond featuring Ann Miller and Louis Armstrong. LCS of 8 for REDHEAD FROM MANHATTAN, featuring Lupe Velez. LCS of 8 for GUNFIGHT AT OK CORRAL EITH Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas FRENCH LINE one sheet with a hot image of Jane Russell 2 great JUDGEMENT AT NUREMBERG 1 sheets. single lobby cards from ROCK, ROCK , ROCK and GERONIMO!! CHECK IT ALL OUT! FLASHBACKS MEMORABILIA'S EBAY ITEM FOR SALE eBay item 7510332390 (Ends Apr-28-05 19:28:49 PDT) - JUDGEMENT AT NUREMBERG 1S eBay item 7510329921 (Ends Apr-28-05 19:16:45 PDT) - GUNFIGHT AT O.K. CORRAL L eBay item 7510323575 (Ends Apr-28-05 18:44:11 PDT) - THE FRENCH LINE JANE RUSS eBay item 7510343425 (Ends Apr-28-05 20:30:44 PDT) - JAM SESSION 1944 LCS ANN ETC. Thank for looking., Evan 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.
[MOPO] Ebay help. Buyer claims MO sent not recieved. What to do?
Anyone have any suggestion as what to do when a buyer claims a money order was sent and say he checked on it and it was cashed, but I never recieved it? I have little experience with money orders. Anyone know how to actually check if one is cashed or how to request a copy of a signature? I would hate to get negative feedback for something like this and not sure what to do. Thanks to anyone for help. Evan 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.
Re: [MOPO] Ebay help. Buyer claims MO sent not recieved. What to do?
Evan, Id suggest the following: Double or Triple check that you really didnt receive the MO and deposit it with some other checks/MOs. I know when I receive multiple items for deposit that I have to itemize them outside the deposit slip or I lose track of what was deposited. The institution behind the MO should be able to determine the status of the MO assuming that he still has the receipt. It sounds like he has already done this (or at least says he did). They should also be able to provide a copy of the cancelled MO or at least the name of the institution where it was deposited in the short term. He needs to provide you with evidence that the payment was processed by you. I wouldnt ship the item unless you actually received the payment just to avoid a negative. The guy could very well be scamming you. Assume youre going to get a negative anyway, and try to work out of it the best you can. You might be successful but you might not. Its one of the problems with doing business in this manner. Good Luck, Bill From: MoPo List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 10:07 AM To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Subject: [MOPO] Ebay help. Buyer claims MO sent not recieved. What to do? Anyone have any suggestion as what to do when a buyer claims a money order was sent and say he checked on it and it was cashed, but I never recieved it? I have little experience with money orders. Anyone know how to actually check if one is cashed or how to request a copy of a signature? I would hate to get negative feedback for something like this and not sure what to do. Thanks to anyone for help. Evan 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. 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.
Re: [MOPO] emovieposters.com website hijacked?
At 09:01 PM 4/26/05 -0600, Cindy Nemeth-Johannes wrote: Has this happened to anyone else? I wanted to see what Bruce has been putting up and amazingly enough it kept sending me to allmovieposters.com I had it happen to me and discovered that Bruce Hershenson's site is www.emovieposter.com, the other site is plural. It redirects you to www.allpostersonline.com. It would seem that it's a deliberate attempt to hijack buyers, since there's nothing on the site with the one-letter-off name and there's no logical reason for it otherwise. But I suppose there could be some other explanation... Craig. ~ Craig Miller Wolfmill Entertainment[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ 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.
[MOPO] WTB Philedelphia Story
I need Lobby Cards or posters Original or re-releases. Anyone? Adrian 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.
Re: [MOPO] Censorship!!!
Anyway, we're in complete agreement on the big lawsuit bogeyman that some people have been using lately to scare other list owners with. I must admit I've been surprised that Jon Warren, who should certainly know such threats are empty, has given in to them in the past. I don't believe that fear of possible litigation is the actual reason for the recent drama and clampdown on open discussion over at Movie Poster Talk. This is simply another case of misdirection, to keep people focused on a non-issue. The nearly universal opinion of those with credible knowledge of libel and slander laws is that the risk to an owner of an unmoderated forum with respect to statements made by individuals therein is negligible, essentially limited to providing information about the offending speaker, and even then only on presentation of a court order. IF Warren were primarily interested in maintaining an open forum while minimizing his risk, he would have sought legal counsel or just done some online research himself, and then acted appropriately, adding disclaimers to the website or having new members sign a waiver of liability; something of that nature. Several people have made this very suggestion in the past on MPT, but to the best of my knowledge Jon has not explored this approach. Forget the liability question; it's not a real issue at all. There is, I would like to suggest, a far more persuasive reason for the recent changes at MPT. Jon Warren has publicly indicated that his goal is to create a poster marketplace on his I Collect Movie Posters website. Setting up MPT and especially linking it to LAMP was a brilliant way to attract collectors and some dealers to the site. But now, he needs to court more sellers and dealers, if his marketplace is going to hit the ground running. And, not surprisingly, most dealers would rather not be part of an operation that allows open criticism of them. Here, I think, is the true basis of Jon's decision to ban all aggressive criticism of dealers and sellers from MPT. And honestly, I'm not sure that this is the wrong decision, from Jon's perspective. Or that I would act differently, were I in his position. The fact is that he CAN'T be an unbiased observer and not have it impact his business or bottom line. However, IF this is the truth of the situation, I for one would rather see an honest statement of this, rather than under the camouflage of fear of possible legal liability. Just acknowledge that MPT is now a multi-sponsored, fully moderated forum. Participation will plummet, but it's doing that already anyway. The reality is that a sizable number of poster collectors need and want a more-or-less totally open discussion forum, and if MPT no longer fits that need, a new forum will appear sooner or later. (Again, nothing against MoPo, just that some of us prefer the dynamic of a discussion forum over a mailing list.) Also, I have a SUSPICION that I would like to share with the MoPo audience. Last week, Jon and I made a public bet over whether Hershenson would ever leave ebay, now that he was reinstated. I said no way, Jon said absolutely he'll leave before the end of the year. Just after the MPT 'lockdown' happened, I got a private note from Jon. Amoung other things, he mentioned that he wouldn't hold me to our bet, as he had definite inside information that Bruce would in fact be moving his operation off of ebay. Now the question is, How would he know that? My logical conclusion: that Jon and Bruce are already in discussions regarding moving eMovieposter off ebay and over to the soon to be a reality ICMP marketplace. Of course I have no proof of this, but if true, consider the ramifications for MPT. Consider the influence BH would have on ICMP site content, and especially on MPT, under these circumstances. The MPT crackdown occurred basically because I posted some accusations about Hershenson to the forum. Compounding this was the fact that I was a forum moderator! (Emphasis on 'was'.) I would also again note that such draconian measures like shutting down the forum were not taken in response to many previous posts by other members critical of other sellers. Also, I find myself wondering about the method by which Jon took MPT to full moderation. Here's the scenario: Announce that you're leaving and exit abruptly, only to return after a brief hiatus, to wails of anguish from a group of people happy to accept your return under any conditions. Does this modus operandi sound familiar? RK 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.
Re: [MOPO] Censorship!!!
At 12:59 PM 4/27/05 -0700, Randall Petersen wrote: for the recent drama and clampdown on open discussion over at Movie Poster Talk. This is simply another case of misdirection, to keep people focused on a non-issue. The nearly universal opinion of those with credible knowledge of libel and slander laws is that the risk to an owner of an unmoderated forum with respect to statements made by individuals therein is negligible, essentially limited to providing information about the offending speaker, and even then only on presentation of a court order. The universal opinion of who? I don't think there's been much in the way of test cases of this but I know of a number of attorneys who do not hold to your universal opinion. I know of at least one system that shut down for fear of this. And not simply because the owner got nervous and figured it was safer that way. Very expensive attornies were consulted and advised against the liability. Also, just because you might not end up paying in the long run, if you get sued you have to spend money fighting it. And the cost in legal fees (which may or may not be reclaimable against the litigant), time, effort, emotional stress, etc. can be quite high, even if you prevail. Craig. ~ Craig Miller Wolfmill Entertainment[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ 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.
Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today
Gary, Now see, this is what I mean. I have no reason to doubt what you just said --it's not uncommon for sellers to make up provenances --but you offered absolutely no details or "evidence" to support your charge. Not long ago a buyer discovered that Heritage had used a digitally-doctored photo for an auction -- and was able to prove it beyond a doubt by showing the poster he won side-by-side with the doctored photo used in the auction that he bid on. Thiswas proof. With that evidence people on MOPO were able to confront Grey Smith here publicly and he really had no choice but to respond with a public explanation, admit that this had accidentally happened with "several" auctions in the past, and take action to insure that this kind of thing never happened again. That's getting somewhere. Thatis an effective use of a public forum to shed light on a problem and advocate change. But if you just say "When Bruce is unknowledgeable about a posters provenance he makes it up. I've seen him do this several times" WITHOUT citing specific examples... well, you are making what is known as an "unsubstantiated allegation" and that gets us nowhere. I mean, ifas you say, you've "seen him do this several times" then you should be able to give us specific examples. If you didn't happen to save suchevidence the last few times you saw him do this, then you should start gathering evidence now from current and future auctions and THEN make the accusation when you can back it up with something. If we don't apply standards like this then anyone can accuse anyone of anything. I can say, for instance "When Gary doesn't like how much a dealer is asking for a poster, he just breaks into his house and steals it. I've seen him do this several times." You see what I mean? You need to have something to back up anaccusation or you will be labeled with as a member of the "lunatic fringe" or "x-person hater" and most people won't give much credence to whatever charge you are making. -- JR - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 9:49 Subject: Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today "and i can always buy from him with confidence."Well, I can't. When Bruce is unknowledgable about a posters provenance hemakes it up. I've seen him do this several times. Of course, these arenot "facts" because I have been deemed a "Bruce Hater," which is complete B.S.Whatever.G 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.
Re: [MOPO] Ebay ripoff. What to do?
Tom, Sorry, but under the circumstances youseem toout of luck and have, in fact, been ripped off by a criminal. Even though I don't like the fees PayPal charges, there is one advantage to using it -- if something like this happened to you and you file a buyer complaint within 30 days, PayPal will make an effort to recover your funds for you. Of course, if the guy has already closed his PayPal account there won't be much they can do either. This kind of danger isalwaysinherent in buying "mail order" as opposed to retail where you can actually pick up the item and walk off with it when you hand over payment. Luckily, at least in the US, this kind of event is still relatively rare compared to the millions of daily mail order transactions, but it is a growing problem as more and more criminals realize that unless the amount stolen is over $10,000 that no one in the police, the courts, the FBI or postal enforcement is going to do anything about it (they have their hands full investigated crimes where the amount is way over $10,000). That's why it is best to spend big money only with reliabledealers who have been auctioning or sellingfor many years and built up a lot of positive feedback with a score of at least 99.5% positive. The chances of someone like that stealing your money is much smaller (although not impossible). And insuring your package does help -- but only if the seller actually sends you a package and takes out the insurance and provides you with the number on the insurance certificate. So, again, in the end you have to rely on working with long-time sellers who have a business and reputation to maintain. On www.MoviePosterBid.comwe would continue to try to help you in a situation like this even if the seller has closed his account. Just because he was no longer a member of MPB would not mean we would stop trying to get him to make good with you. But, of course, we can't do much more than you could -- if the guy has changed his email address and refuses to respond, we couldn't go to Oregon any easier than you can. Still we do try to be better than eBay about something like this and would not just blow you off with "sorry, this person is no longer a member". Also, we do try to check out our sellers on MPBas much as possible before allowing them to sell, but with the internet there is only so much anyone can do in that regard. Luckily, we have only had two cases in the past year where a seller didn't deliver in a timely fashion and bothcaseswere resolved to everyone's satisfaction. -- JR - Original Message - From: Eyssell, Thomas H. To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 10:08 Subject: Re: [MOPO] Ebay help. Buyer claims MO sent not recieved. What to do? -Original Message-From: MoPo List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of PlanetbizSent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 9:56 AMTo: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDUSubject: Re: [MOPO] Ebay help. Buyer claims MO sent not recieved. What to do? I have a different but related question -I sent a personal check to an eBayseller and never received the item.Foolishly, I didn't insure it. The check was cashed - I have a copy of the cancelled check. Unfortunately, the signature on the back is unreadable, and the name on the eBay listing is bogus (not available thru directory information).The seller closed his eBay account shortly after I sent the funds, and eBay's response to me was "the seller no longer has an account with us, so there's nothing we can do." Does anyone on this listserve have any suggestions (short of flying to Oregon and banging on the guy's door, since, presumably the address I have is valid)? Tom Eyssell 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. 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.
Re: [MOPO] Ebay help. Buyer claims MO sent not recieved. What to do?
Evan, Although it doesn't help you with this case, I have started recommending to seller that they no longer accept money order for this very reason. At least with a personal check the buyer would be obligated to present a copy of the back of the check showing who cashed it and what bank it was process through. In the case of money orders, you have no real evidence like this (at least, I'm not aware of how you could get it). Also, there have been more and more cases of fake money order being passed off lately. Once again, this is where PayPal comes in handy, despite their fairly stiff processing fees. At least with PayPal you know the payment you receive is real money and you don't have to wait for anything to clear. Yes, there is the remote possibility that a buyer will institute a charge-back or "buyer complaint" against you and that you will have to hassle with PayPal about that, but those cases are much more rare than the cases of checks/money orders bouncing or disappearing in the mails. -- JR - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 9:07 Subject: [MOPO] Ebay help. Buyer claims MO sent not recieved. What to do? Anyone have any suggestion as what to do when a buyer claims a money order was sent and say he checked on it and it was cashed, but I never recieved it? I have little experience with money orders. Anyone know how to actually check if one is cashed or how to request a copy of a signature? I would hate to get negative feedback for something like this and not sure what to do. Thanks to anyone for help. Evan 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. 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.
Re: [MOPO] Censorship!!!
All this talk about lawsuits and libel. Seems a bit of a straw man to me. Doesn't the plaintiff have to pay for an attorney, as well? How many lawyers are going to take cases like this on a contingency, particularly when this is not settled law? Henry The Poster Mint
Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today
JR, Of course you make a good point JR; perhaps the following might illustrate. Some time ago I related an experience(on MOPO) I had as a kid back in NH, running 35mm projectors at my Dad's theatre. After the last show of the night and the closing of a given film, I used to run the film cans down two flights of stairs for the film truck. I would also on many occasion put the paper adv.(whatever it might be; certainly 1sheets, lobby sets, stills etc.) with the film to either be taken to the next theatre in the small theatre circuit to be used there or.to go back to National ScreenDon't ask me how the sub=contracted film Truck would get the material back to NSS, but..it did. I was immediately challenged and believe it was Bruce that told me I must be confused because material did not go back to NSS.I, quite frankly, let the issue drop, however., just to illustrate a point .I still have material from those days, that probably should have gone back to NSS, but remained in the theater. One of the one sheets has the following stamped on the backPlease click on the Link below: http://home.earthlink.net/~vmann1/ROCKETSHIPXMS1S.JPG I guess this is probably not the best example, but...it does illustrate the point you were making, right? Have a good night allVaughn Mann At 03:50 PM 4/27/2005 -0500, JRS wrote: Gary, Now see, this is what I mean. I have no reason to doubt what you just said -- it's not uncommon for sellers to make up provenances -- but you offered absolutely no details or evidence to support your charge. Not long ago a buyer discovered that Heritage had used a digitally-doctored photo for an auction -- and was able to prove it beyond a doubt by showing the poster he won side-by-side with the doctored photo used in the auction that he bid on. This was proof. With that evidence people on MOPO were able to confront Grey Smith here publicly and he really had no choice but to respond with a public explanation, admit that this had accidentally happened with several auctions in the past, and take action to insure that this kind of thing never happened again. That's getting somewhere. That is an effective use of a public forum to shed light on a problem and advocate change. But if you just say When Bruce is unknowledgeable about a posters provenance he makes it up. I've seen him do this several times WITHOUT citing specific examples... well, you are making what is known as an unsubstantiated allegation and that gets us nowhere. I mean, if as you say, you've seen him do this several times then you should be able to give us specific examples. If you didn't happen to save such evidence the last few times you saw him do this, then you should start gathering evidence now from current and future auctions and THEN make the accusation when you can back it up with something. If we don't apply standards like this then anyone can accuse anyone of anything. I can say, for instance When Gary doesn't like how much a dealer is asking for a poster, he just breaks into his house and steals it. I've seen him do this several times. You see what I mean? You need to have something to back up an accusation or you will be labeled with as a member of the lunatic fringe or x-person hater and most people won't give much credence to whatever charge you are making. -- JR - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 9:49 Subject: Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today and i can always buy from him with confidence. Well, I can't. When Bruce is unknowledgable about a posters provenance he makes it up. I've seen him do this several times. Of course, these are not facts because I have been deemed a Bruce Hater, which is complete B.S. Whatever. G 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. 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.
Re: [MOPO] Material did indeed return to NSS
Dear Vaughn, You are absolutely correct. Material did indeed go back to NSS. When several of the NSS locations closed in the mid 70's or thereabouts they sold off their paper stock. I know several people that bought that material. They said the paper was laid out on pallets and sold by the pound. The material they bought was in all conditions, some never used and some used extensively. As you aptly pointed out with the NSS stamp on the back of your poster, material was to be returned to NSS after the screening. Almost every vintage movie poster that I own has that statement clearly printed at the bottom of the poster. Now, of course, much of the material was never returned for various reasons and, in part, that is why so many of us own vintage movie posters. We have a longtime dealer, right here on our group, that amassed an enormous collection from traveling the country and going into little towns across America and asking the local real estate agent if he could look for materialin the manager's offices of the many closed down little theaters he found. Many times they just gave it to him to clear it out. This was in the 60's. Those are my kind of finds. Sue Heim - Original Message - From: Vaughn K. Mann To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 2:32 PM Subject: Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today JR,Of course you make a good point JR; perhaps the following might illustrate.Some time ago I related an experience(on MOPO) I had as a kid back in NH, running 35mm projectors at my Dad's theatre. After the last show of the night and the closing of a given film, I used to run the film cans down two flights of stairs for the film truck. I would also on many occasion put the "paper adv.(whatever it might be; certainly 1sheets, lobby sets, stills etc.)" with the film to either be taken to the next theatre in the small theatre circuit to be used there or.to go back to National ScreenDon't ask me how the sub=contracted film Truck would get the material back to NSS, but..it did.I was immediately challenged and believe it was Bruce that told me "I must be confused" because material did not go back to NSS.I, quite frankly, let the issue drop, however., just to illustrate a point .I still have material from those days, that probably should have gone back to NSS, but remained in the theater. One of the one sheets has the following stamped on the backPlease click on the Link below:http://home.earthlink.net/~vmann1/ROCKETSHIPXMS1S.JPGI guess this is probably not the best example, but...it does illustrate the point you were making, right? Have a good night allVaughn MannAt 03:50 PM 4/27/2005 -0500, JRS wrote: Gary,Now see, this is what I mean. I have no reason to doubt what you just said -- it's not uncommon for sellers to make up provenances -- but you offered absolutely no details or "evidence" to support your charge. Not long ago a buyer discovered that Heritage had used a digitally-doctored photo for an auction -- and was able to prove it beyond a doubt by showing the poster he won side-by-side with the doctored photo used in the auction that he bid on. This was proof. With that evidence people on MOPO were able to confront Grey Smith here publicly and he really had no choice but to respond with a public explanation, admit that this had accidentally happened with "several" auctions in the past, and take action to insure that this kind of thing never happened again. That's getting somewhere. That is an effective use of a public forum to shed light on a problem and advocate change. But if you just say "When Bruce is unknowledgeable about a posters provenance he makes it up. I've seen him do this several times" WITHOUT citing specific examples... well, you are making what is known as an "unsubstantiated allegation" and that gets us nowhere. I mean, if as you say, you've "seen him do this several times" then you should be able to give us specific examples. If you didn't happen to save such evidence the last few times you saw him do this, then you should start gathering evidence now from current and future auctions and THEN make the accusation when you can back it up with something.If we don't apply standards like this then anyone can accuse anyone of anything. I can say, for instance "When Gary doesn't like how much a dealer is asking for a poster, he just breaks into his house and steals it. I've seen him do this several times."You see what I mean? You need to have something to back up an accusation or you will be labeled with as a member of the "lunatic fringe" or "x-person hater" and most people won't give much credence to whatever charge you are making.-- JR
Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today
When I ran movie theatres in New York, we used to put out the show' (the cans of film) when the run was over and place the movie paper between the cans. The film transport truck would pick it all up. Since I ran off-beat revival houses, 99.99% of the time the films and paper weren't going to another theatre so they would be returned to the Film Center building.. The film would go into the distributor's vault and the paper would go to National Screen or some other poster/advertising distributor such as Donald Velde. Regards, rudy franchi, Nostalgia Factory JR, Of course you make a good point JR; perhaps the following might illustrate. Some time ago I related an experience(on MOPO) I had as a kid back in NH, running 35mm projectors at my Dad's theatre. After the last show of the night and the closing of a given film, I used to run the film cans down two flights of stairs for the film truck. I would also on many occasion put the paper adv.(whatever it might be; certainly 1sheets, lobby sets, stills etc.) with the film to either be taken to the next theatre in the small theatre circuit to be used there or.to go back to National ScreenDon't ask me how the sub=contracted film Truck would get the material back to NSS, but..it did. I was immediately challenged and believe it was Bruce that told me I must be confused because material did not go back to NSS.I, quite frankly, let the issue drop, however., just to illustrate a point .I still have material from those days, that probably should have gone back to NSS, but remained in the theater. One of the one sheets has the following stamped on the backPlease click on the Link below: http://home.earthlink.net/~vmann1/ROCKETSHIPXMS1S.JPG I guess this is probably not the best example, but...it does illustrate the point you were making, right? Have a good night allVaughn Mann At 03:50 PM 4/27/2005 -0500, JRS wrote: Gary, Now see, this is what I mean. I have no reason to doubt what you just said -- it's not uncommon for sellers to make up provenances -- but you offered absolutely no details or evidence to support your charge. Not long ago a buyer discovered that Heritage had used a digitally-doctored photo for an auction -- and was able to prove it beyond a doubt by showing the poster he won side-by-side with the doctored photo used in the auction that he bid on. This was proof. With that evidence people on MOPO were able to confront Grey Smith here publicly and he really had no choice but to respond with a public explanation, admit that this had accidentally happened with several auctions in the past, and take action to insure that this kind of thing never happened again. That's getting somewhere. That is an effective use of a public forum to shed light on a problem and advocate change. But if you just say When Bruce is unknowledgeable about a posters provenance he makes it up. I've seen him do this several times WITHOUT citing specific examples... well, you are making what is known as an unsubstantiated allegation and that gets us nowhere. I mean, if as you say, you've seen him do this several times then you should be able to give us specific examples. If you didn't happen to save such evidence the last few times you saw him do this, then you should start gathering evidence now from current and future auctions and THEN make the accusation when you can back it up with something. If we don't apply standards like this then anyone can accuse anyone of anything. I can say, for instance When Gary doesn't like how much a dealer is asking for a poster, he just breaks into his house and steals it. I've seen him do this several times. You see what I mean? You need to have something to back up an accusation or you will be labeled with as a member of the lunatic fringe or x-person hater and most people won't give much credence to whatever charge you are making. -- JR - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 9:49 Subject: Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today and i can always buy from him with confidence. Well, I can't. When Bruce is unknowledgable about a posters provenance he makes it up. I've seen him do this several times. Of course, these are not facts because I have been deemed a Bruce Hater, which is complete B.S. Whatever. G 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. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing ListSend a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] the BODY of your message
Re: [MOPO] Material did indeed return to NSS
Hi Sue, Thank you; I feel exonerated; haha That's why this hobby is so much funBack in the 70's; about the time I started realizing I should be pulling some of the paper out of the back of the theatre(your right; it didn't always go back)...a young man happened to walk into the theatre as I was talking to my Dad.I'd since left Keene, NH, but was up for the weekendI'll bet the young man that came in looking for any old one sheets that might be around is on MOPO as we talk.and he remembers that chance meeting! Might even be the person you were referring to I will never forget it, because, I remember thinking at the time.and telling my father; Don't let this paper go anywhere .except, of course, to me.haha In any event, Sue, appreciate the comments..Vaughn At 03:51 PM 4/27/2005 -0700, Susan Heim wrote: Dear Vaughn, You are absolutely correct. Material did indeed go back to NSS. When several of the NSS locations closed in the mid 70's or thereabouts they sold off their paper stock. I know several people that bought that material. They said the paper was laid out on pallets and sold by the pound. The material they bought was in all conditions, some never used and some used extensively. As you aptly pointed out with the NSS stamp on the back of your poster, material was to be returned to NSS after the screening. Almost every vintage movie poster that I own has that statement clearly printed at the bottom of the poster. Now, of course, much of the material was never returned for various reasons and, in part, that is why so many of us own vintage movie posters. We have a longtime dealer, right here on our group, that amassed an enormous collection from traveling the country and going into little towns across America and asking the local real estate agent if he could look for material in the manager's offices of the many closed down little theaters he found. Many times they just gave it to him to clear it out. This was in the 60's. Those are my kind of finds. Sue Heim - Original Message - From: Vaughn K. Mann To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 2:32 PM Subject: Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today JR, Of course you make a good point JR; perhaps the following might illustrate. Some time ago I related an experience(on MOPO) I had as a kid back in NH, running 35mm projectors at my Dad's theatre. After the last show of the night and the closing of a given film, I used to run the film cans down two flights of stairs for the film truck. I would also on many occasion put the paper adv.(whatever it might be; certainly 1sheets, lobby sets, stills etc.) with the film to either be taken to the next theatre in the small theatre circuit to be used there or.to go back to National ScreenDon't ask me how the sub=contracted film Truck would get the material back to NSS, but..it did. I was immediately challenged and believe it was Bruce that told me I must be confused because material did not go back to NSS.I, quite frankly, let the issue drop, however., just to illustrate a point .I still have material from those days, that probably should have gone back to NSS, but remained in the theater. One of the one sheets has the following stamped on the backPlease click on the Link below: http://home.earthlink.net/~vmann1/ROCKETSHIPXMS1S.JPG I guess this is probably not the best example, but...it does illustrate the point you were making, right? Have a good night allVaughn Mann At 03:50 PM 4/27/2005 -0500, JRS wrote: Gary, Now see, this is what I mean. I have no reason to doubt what you just said -- it's not uncommon for sellers to make up provenances -- but you offered absolutely no details or evidence to support your charge. Not long ago a buyer discovered that Heritage had used a digitally-doctored photo for an auction -- and was able to prove it beyond a doubt by showing the poster he won side-by-side with the doctored photo used in the auction that he bid on. This was proof. With that evidence people on MOPO were able to confront Grey Smith here publicly and he really had no choice but to respond with a public explanation, admit that this had accidentally happened with several auctions in the past, and take action to insure that this kind of thing never happened again. That's getting somewhere. That is an effective use of a public forum to shed light on a problem and advocate change. But if you just say When Bruce is unknowledgeable about a posters provenance he makes it up. I've seen him do this several times WITHOUT citing specific examples... well, you are making what is known as an unsubstantiated allegation and that gets us nowhere. I mean, if as you say, you've seen him do this several times then you should be able to give us specific examples. If you didn't happen to save such evidence the
Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today
In a message dated 4/27/2005 7:49:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marty wrote: "and on a regular basis, collectors and/or dealers withspecialized knowledge have informed him that he has inaccurately described aposter...I know he does this on a routine basis, as I have received many suchemails telling me that the listing description has been altered."Uh...isn't that what I just stated? Since BH is so highly respected in thehobby don't you think he should be held to a higher standard? No, I don't think he should be held to a higher standard. I think he should be held to the same standard as every seller should be held to. That is, posters should be described accurately and honestly, and if errors are found they should be promptly corrected. Furthermore, if a buyer is unhappy if a purchase it should be returnable. For example, ifhe does not know the provenance he should wait until he does before listingit. I watched him auction a Jimi Hendrix "special" or "polish" poster a whileback that turned out to be a commercial release, but he incorrectly related tothe Jimi Plays Berkeley film - yes, he did email folks as I received one aswell, but, the poster eventually sold for between $200-$300 (if memory serves)-that never would have happened IMHO if it had been described accurately inthe first place. If BH, or any bigtime seller is uncertain he should not callit "special" or "???" just to get it listed. Am I wrong in this? Bruce doesn't claim to know everything. It is completely unreasonable to suggest he research and independently verify every item he sells. I do the same thing. I sell a large number of original Spanish posters from the 1940s through the 1970s. I use my knowledge and experience to determine the originality of these posters. When I err in my description, Julian Iglesias, a prominent poster dealer in Barcelona, is kind enough to email me, and I make the correction. This happens perhaps, with one poster out of one hundred. (I've erred in both directions, calling a SEVEN SAMURAI 1-sheet, a re-issue, when in fact it was the first Spanish release). I'm not going to spend my time verifying 100 posters, to possibly find an error, or two. Multiply these numbers by20 and apply them to Bruce. This is theexample that comes to mind. But, as Marty stated he does this on a "routine"basis. BH sold me a "Valley: Obscurred by Clouds" that is a repro (I own twooriginals from original release) - I called him and he refunded the purchaseprice only - I was out the $18.00 in shipping for a poster I sent back. Hecontinues to sell this poster as an "advance." (see ebay #7510500661). I don't know the poster. If Gary informed Bruce, that he thought the poster was a reproduction, and Bruce continues to sell the poster as an original, my guess is that Bruce doesn't think much of Gary's opinion. He refunded the payment because he has an unconditional guarantee. (If you had purchased from me, I refund all shipping fees as well). Iagree that BH is not necessarily being crooked, and he can be a nice andreasonable guy, but he should not be protected from negative opinions based onpersonal experiences of members of the community - and THAT is what happenedon MPT, IMHO. It has been MY CHOICE to stop buying from him based on personalexperience - so, when I read glowing recommendations about BH I feelthe "other" side is being totally ignored and disallowed as appropriateconversation. If we can criticize TLoce, BradBuried, etc. we should also beable to state opinions regarding BH - and, as we have seen that cannot be donewithout being met with harsh criticism, denial, and/or disbelief becausethe "facts" are not "good enough." Funny thing is - I used to fiercely defendBH when the bashers bashed - it was only after I was stung that I changed mystance, why should others have to be stung to learn their lesson? Anyway, Iwent way longer than I wanted to, sorry. Best regards. Bruce is the person least "protected from negative opinions" that I know. Critics of Bruce should just boycott his auctions and give MoPo readers a break! Bruce doesn't need your business, or my defense. Please,nobody respond to this. This is my last "Bruce" post. I need to get back to my work! Marty DavisVintage Film PostersP.O. Box 998Avon, CT 06001860/673-2012[EMAIL PROTECTED]OneSheet (eBay Screen Name)www.vintagefilmposters.com 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.
[MOPO] WANTED: AN AFFAIR TO REMEMBER US ONE SHEET
Title: AOL Email please email me if you have this with price, condition, and photo. thanks, David LiebermanCineMasterpieces.com480 607 9700480 607 9424 fax 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.
[MOPO] Fw: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today
- Original Message - From: deball.oh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 9:05 PM Subject: Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today Gary, To me, you sound like a person who believes in a certain political party, you believe in that party and for what ever reason you want everyone else to believe in your opinions. Most of us, if not all of us, have dealt with Bruce either personally or professionally...we are all big boys or girls nowwe all have our opinion about Bruce either positive or negative. To make a point about him because of a few listing were wrong out of hundreds of thousands tells me your just to perfect for all of us! I've dealt with just about every dealer on this list and I can find something negative on every one! They're positives outweigh their faults, and most will admit their mistakes...Bruce has many times, in public! . Like in politics, I wish you and others would quite trying to change our minds. Doug Ball - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 7:42 PM Subject: Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today Marty wrote: and on a regular basis, collectors and/or dealers with specialized knowledge have informed him that he has inaccurately described a poster...I know he does this on a routine basis, as I have received many such emails telling me that the listing description has been altered. Uh...isn't that what I just stated? Since BH is so highly respected in the hobby don't you think he should be held to a higher standard? For example, if he does not know the provenance he should wait until he does before listing it. I watched him auction a Jimi Hendrix special or polish poster a while back that turned out to be a commercial release, but he incorrectly related to the Jimi Plays Berkeley film - yes, he did email folks as I received one as well, but, the poster eventually sold for between $200-$300 (if memory serves)- that never would have happened IMHO if it had been described accurately in the first place. If BH, or any bigtime seller is uncertain he should not call it special or ??? just to get it listed. Am I wrong in this? This is the example that comes to mind. But, as Marty stated he does this on a routine basis. BH sold me a Valley: Obscurred by Clouds that is a repro (I own two originals from original release) - I called him and he refunded the purchase price only - I was out the $18.00 in shipping for a poster I sent back. He continues to sell this poster as an advance. (see ebay #7510500661). I agree that BH is not necessarily being crooked, and he can be a nice and reasonable guy, but he should not be protected from negative opinions based on personal experiences of members of the community - and THAT is what happened on MPT, IMHO. It has been MY CHOICE to stop buying from him based on personal experience - so, when I read glowing recommendations about BH I feel the other side is being totally ignored and disallowed as appropriate conversation. If we can criticize TLoce, BradBuried, etc. we should also be able to state opinions regarding BH - and, as we have seen that cannot be done without being met with harsh criticism, denial, and/or disbelief because the facts are not good enough. Funny thing is - I used to fiercely defend BH when the bashers bashed - it was only after I was stung that I changed my stance, why should others have to be stung to learn their lesson? Anyway, I went way longer than I wanted to, sorry. Best regards. Gary http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItemcategory=2322item=7510500661; 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. 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.
Re: [MOPO] my conversation with bruce, today
Marty wrote: my guess is that Bruce doesn't think much of Gary's opinion. (re: the Valley poster) Well, obviously BH's opinion doesn't matter to me in the least. And to clarify, it was a combination of My research and Dan Rickard's input regarding the originality of the poster that led me to the FACT (not opinion) that it is a Reproduction. Marty, Bruce is your friend - why don't you just say that instead of trying to defend him, your positive relationship is just as biased as my negative personal experiences. Marty: No, I don't think he should be held to a higher standard Why? Most think he can do no wrong no matter what and defend him unconditionally - that alone holds him to a higher standard than a small-time seller. Marty: Bruce doesn't claim to know everything. Maybe he himself does not, but his outspoken protectors do all the time. Marty: It is completely unreasonable to suggest he research and independently verify every item he sells REALLY?!?! Are you HIGH??? ANY seller has a RESPONSIBILITY to Know what the hell they are selling - to say otherwise is not only irresponsible - it underscores a valid reason NOT to buy from that seller. Marty: Bruce is the person least protected from negative opinions that I know HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH - you ARE HIGH! ROTFLMAO! Sorry Marty - but Bruce has had MPT and MoPo wrapped around his finger when it comes to negative opinions. When you point out a criticism re: TlLoce everyone nods affirmative, if you do the same to BH you are deemed a trouble maker - why the difference? Marty: Critics of Bruce should just boycott his auctions and give MoPo readers a break! I agree - but, only if the critics can be heard to allow MoPo members to make up their own mind - unfortunately, at least on MPT, this will never happen. So, why don't the Bruce lovers keep their praise to themselves and give MoPo a break?? BTW - do not expect to be able to crticize my post/opinion and not hear from me, I speak my mind, when I feel it is necessary and/or appropriate, on whatever topic I wish. Anyone who knows me knows I am a reasonable guy that speaks his mind - AND, I will always admit I was wrong if I was, unlike others we all know. Peace. Regards, Gary 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.
[MOPO] And speaking of Bruce ...
And speaking of Bruce, NOT, does anyone on MOPO collect original Rock Concert posters? I'm interested in obtaining some names of reputable dealers if anyone can make any suggestions. Thanks. Saul 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.
Re: [MOPO] Valley Obscured by Obfuscate Claims
Okay ignoring Bruce as an issue any issue, how or where Gary is it determined that this particular piece is a repro? I say that because I happened to have overseen the marketing at The CINEMA III in NYC located in the basement of The Plaza which in its finalthree years where in fact itmade more money renting to the Plaza for meeting space than the films playing. But in its day when indeed specialized films played exclusively in one house for all of Manhattan. independents and at times some of the larger studios would create special runs of posters just for that market. Their primary use, wild-posting. Barbet Schroeder's trippy, excursion to Papau New Guinea with lots of pig clubbing (that's all I remember save for the bursts of laughter speckled through out audience at times uncontrollable,no doubt due tothe shrooms mixed in with their Snow Caps) opened in latespring of I thought '72 some have it as '77 anyway I have never heard this poster questioned especially in view of the fact it was printed. I still have several examples of onesheets that actually measure 27 x 43 or 44 where along top or bottom Coming Soon To The Baronet/Coronet, (Mommie Dearest) or ZIEGFELD (Barry Lyndon). To make the special printings affordable, it was actually more cost effective to print up a set standard amount which was I believe 1500 or 2500 so obviously hundreds could be left over.Case in point, while in DC and working for Circle Theatres and Circle Films.who were also the major partners behind CINEMA 5years earlier,I threw out at least 800 onesheets for THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH, and hundreds of SEVEN BEAUTIES, JABBERWOCKY, GREASER'S PALACE AND f*ck merunning whoknew.. the black versions ofGIMME SHELTER. All had theatre ID's so not much use in sending anywhere else unless out of standard posters and we needed the closet space..o the horror. freeman fisher8601 west knoll #7west hollywood, CA90069 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.
Re: [MOPO] Rock And Roll Ephemera
Saul The best in the country for RR concert posters,frequently mentioned as one of the founders of its escalation into gallery and collectible art pieces in several of the most respectedpublished reference books onthe topicis none other than MOPO's DebiJacobson at Limagerie Gallery in Studio City. She is the Big Kahuna Mama of all things RR paper and can set you on an informed path and sensible collecting choices at any price level. Contact her at [EMAIL PROTECTED] freeman fisher8601 west knoll #7west hollywood, CA90069 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.
Re: [MOPO] Ebay help. Buyer claims MO sent not recieved. What to do?
Postal money orders are treated like cheques and must be endorsed by the payee to be cashed and if the payor wants to find out if the MO was lost or cashed by the seller, a trace for it by the PO can be asked for usually by filling out a trace form using the number from the receipt /flimsy (that's one reason why there is a cost for buying it) and the postal service will send advice it has not been returned (so a refund is made) or willsend a copy showing the front and back. Postal MOs are cashable at the main POs in virtually every town. They are quite servicable provided everyone is operating on good faith. Unless there is some postalemployeewho is tracking the envelopes to a person and assuming that there are some with money in them or cheques or MOs, the automated sorting systems mean there is very little touching of the envelopes and a properly wrapped MO would be impossible to "find". So it's much less likely there is theft by PO employees, that is compared to unscrupulous sellers who pretend they didn't get the MO. Even if the buyer fails to send payment the seller always still has the item, even if out a small amount of money. Of course the scam that the item was "sent" is still a favourite of bad sellers. And the buyer is always out a substantial sum by comparison. Craig, Vancouver - Original Message - From: Movie Poster Bid To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 2:13 PM Subject: Re: [MOPO] Ebay help. Buyer claims MO sent not recieved. What to do? Evan, Although it doesn't help you with this case, I have started recommending to seller that they no longer accept money order for this very reason. At least with a personal check the buyer would be obligated to present a copy of the back of the check showing who cashed it and what bank it was process through. In the case of money orders, you have no real evidence like this (at least, I'm not aware of how you could get it). Also, there have been more and more cases of fake money order being passed off lately. Once again, this is where PayPal comes in handy, despite their fairly stiff processing fees. At least with PayPal you know the payment you receive is real money and you don't have to wait for anything to clear. Yes, there is the remote possibility that a buyer will institute a charge-back or "buyer complaint" against you and that you will have to hassle with PayPal about that, but those cases are much more rare than the cases of checks/money orders bouncing or disappearing in the mails. -- JR - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 9:07 Subject: [MOPO] Ebay help. Buyer claims MO sent not recieved. What to do? Anyone have any suggestion as what to do when a buyer claims a money order was sent and say he checked on it and it was cashed, but I never recieved it? I have little experience with money orders. Anyone know how to actually check if one is cashed or how to request a copy of a signature? I would hate to get negative feedback for something like this and not sure what to do. Thanks to anyone for help. Evan 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. 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 Anti-Virus.Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.3 - Release Date: 25/04/05 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.
