However, if the seller said
to Ron, who did buy the Frankenstein 1
sheet in question from the barn (or safe deposit box, I've heard it
both ways) "I'll take $500 for it".. Then the buyer has no legal
position to tell the seller "No, I have to give you $50,000"
Rich,
If you're referring to Ron Moore who bought the Frankenstein one sheet for $500. it wasn't that Ron.
First of all, there were two Near Mint to Mint one sheets which were found lining the bottom of a drawer in a chest of drawers. They were sold in a public auction and Ron Janis bought one and John Antosiewicz bought the other. It wasn't for $500. either. They both sold for approximately $2,800.00 a piece, still an incredible deal, even at that time. The one that Ron Janis bought ended up selling for $198,000.00 at auction and I sold the other one for $200,000.00 for John.
Best,
Todd
sheet in question from the barn (or safe deposit box, I've heard it
both ways) "I'll take $500 for it".. Then the buyer has no legal
position to tell the seller "No, I have to give you $50,000"
Rich,
If you're referring to Ron Moore who bought the Frankenstein one sheet for $500. it wasn't that Ron.
First of all, there were two Near Mint to Mint one sheets which were found lining the bottom of a drawer in a chest of drawers. They were sold in a public auction and Ron Janis bought one and John Antosiewicz bought the other. It wasn't for $500. either. They both sold for approximately $2,800.00 a piece, still an incredible deal, even at that time. The one that Ron Janis bought ended up selling for $198,000.00 at auction and I sold the other one for $200,000.00 for John.
Best,
Todd
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Halegua Comic Art" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 6:15 PM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] Grand Hotel re-surfaces as
restored
> >Dealers have an obligation to behave ethically and offer fair prices
> >for things. The courts have ruled as much. They are not supposed
> >to use their professional expertise to defraud or chisel. Of
> >course, we know that all dealers are not necessarily dying to prove
> >that they are Mother Teresa. At the same time, not all dealers are
> >rapacious either.
>
>
> Kirby is sooooo right... We have knowledge, as such any attempt by us
> to "chisel" someone out of something can only be explained in one
> way.. dishonesty.
>
> Also, as I have stated in numerous posts over the years, making an
> offer, is not the same as being offered an item for a price.
>
> If the guy who found teh Frankenstein 1 sheet offered the guy $500..
> he was being dishonest based on what he knew, and as Kirby says &and
> as I have stated before), the courts have ruled on this subject to
> the seller's favor.
>
> However, if the seller said to Ron, who did buy the Frankenstein 1
> sheet in question from the barn (or safe deposit box, I've heard it
> both ways) "I'll take $500 for it".. Then the buyer has no legal
> position to tell the seller "No, I have to give you $50,000"
>
> This was exactly the case when the woman who sold Mile High Comics
> the most incredible comic collection ever found when her husband of
> 60 years passed away. Chuck Rozanski of Mile High went to the woman's
> house & was so flabbergasted he didn't know what to say to her. She
> however said (sic) "Well the cover prices are 10 cents.. how about 10
> cents apiece". To which Chuck said he'll be right back. She had
> plenty of time in between to find true values on her own as it took a
> couple days for Chuck to conclude the sale and he paid HER ASKING
> PRICE, which is the distinction. By the way, Chuck was subsequently
> sued by her months after the sale when she found information, and the
> courts did rule in Chuck's favor when she admitted he paid her price.
>
> Rich=================
>
> 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.
>
