* This latest saga explains why I, like many others perhaps, suffer from
occasional MoPo fatigue. It's too f____ draining. I have a day job totally
UNRELATED to posters. And just now, my first time online today, I discover
more than a dozen private messages in my inbox asking me to analyze what just
happened with Sean's posting of the "so-called private e-mail exchange" between
Grey and "Paul Waines." Guys, I don't have the answers nor do I understand
Sean's motives posting this (perhaps it was an accident) - nor do I understand
the motives of "Paul Waines" other than he's obviously steamed at Heritage
while presenting his "facts" in a way that's meant to be READ by the public.
Grey is an upstanding and honest guy who I PERSONALLY know and like. With his
personality and demeanor, I often wonder what could POSSIBLY make some
individuals want to drive a stake through his big Texas heart.
* Note that I put "quotes" around the name, "Paul Waines" - and also around the
word, "facts." I'm always skeptical of the credibility of people who won't
sign their names to their opinions - OR - who use an alias that sounds too
similar to a REAL person. "Paul Waines" is NOT the same Paul Waines associated
with the All Poster Forum. The real Paul Waines is in the U.K. with a
logistical inability to be "on scene" with all that's detailed in the notes
below sent to Grey. What's the fallout to signing your real name? Truth is
the best defense in a
libel case, and everything that's couched as an "opinion" is protected.
* It's my view that the "Waines" cited below is an alias for someone in the
U.S. Why? Because over the past few days, the alias "Waines" has been
blind-copying several MoPo members with his posts. He obviously feels he has
something to lose by revealing himself. I only get curious, 1) if I have time,
WHICH ON MOST DAYS I DON'T, and, 2) if I do have time, if I can substantiate
the relationship between the person "aggrieved" and his/her "target," and, 3)
if the person is "real." Failing those tests, I won't go public with anything
but my own opinions. And I sign everything that's potentially inflammatory.
* Based on the blind-copy I received from ONE of the notes I received from the
alias "Waines," its I.P. locators are firmly in the EAST COAST OF THE U.S. -
and NOT the U.K. Draw your own conclusions. That's all I plan to write on
this subject. Besides, my objectivity is already somewhat compromised when it
comes to issues that personally involve Grey - because of my personal
friendship with Grey. -d.
-----Original Message-----
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 10:25:58 -0700
From: sa...@comic-art.com
Subject: Re: METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
I really don't understand why anyone would doubt that Grey could be a neutral,
uninvolved agent in the job that was before him on 4/25
the facts are that movie posters is a very small business and that most dealers
know most other dealers, especially if you've been doing them as long as Grey
has. Who else would be up for this particular job?? Would Bruce do it? I don't
think he could take the time. Sean or Peter couldn't do it because they are (or
should I say "were") too close to Ken to be involved. Morrie Everett? I can't
see Morrie wanting to bother.. Joe Maddalena, Ron Borst, Larry Edmonds.... I
mean, who could be available, would be available for the price and be
acceptable due to the knowledge needed?? It really is a very very very short
list and considering that Grey is an extremely fair-minded person, I think it
would have been very difficult for My Mannheim to find a better suited
individual for the work.
Rich
At 09:50 AM 5/4/2012, peter contarino wrote:
Grey was there, as a top expert in the field, to authenticate the material,
plain and simple. I doubt it was pleasurable experience for him.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: MoPo List [ mailto:mopo-l@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU] On Behalf Of John Waldman
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 12:15 PM
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: Re: [MOPO] METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
Grey is indeed a class act.
Mr Schacter on the the other hand is a case of don't judge a book by it's
cover. Who would think by looking at the guy that he could put together a
$200,000. - 300,000. deal?
JW
-----Original Message-----
From: Kirby McDaniel <ki...@movieart.net>
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Sent: Friday, May 4, 2012 10:46 AM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
Agreed. Completely.
Kirby
Kirby McDaniel
MovieArt Original Film Posters
P.O. Box 4419
Austin TX 78765-4419
512 479 6680 www.movieart.net
mobile 512 589 5112
On May 4, 2012, at 7:48 AM, James Gresham wrote:
Grey Smith and Heritage auctions are NOT the bad guy here. They are one of the
primary experts in our field. Therefore, it is logical for a legal firm to
request their assistance. I can tell you for a fact that Grey was very helpful
in piecing together the Haggard plot. I am grateful for Grey's expertise in
our hobby. And, if I was having problems with someone, he is the expert I
would try to obtain to secure posters. I have no idea what the arrangement
was, but lets not villainize the guy trying to keep our hobby on track. In a
hobby that seems to have increasing problems, I can tell you Grey is one of the
good guys here. Jim Gresham
-----Original Message-----
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 01:17:04 -0700
From: davidmkusum...@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Sean, you just
forwarded a note to the MoPo group that was never posted PUBLICLY to the
MoPo group. This is the first time I've seen this exchange between
Grey and Paul Waines.
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 03:57:42 -0400
From: s...@platinumposters.com
Subject: Re: METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
I remember the last time someone around here swore
their life on a statement.
It was a restorer who swore on his life that the
1931 Dracula one-sheet then being offered by Profiles in History was an
original.
But if you like to offer 2-3x what posters are
worth, I certainly hope you will remember to check out our auctions starting
this weekend.
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Waines To: Smith, Grey - 1367 Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012
1:25 AM Subject: RE: [MOPO] METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
http://movieposters.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=695&lotNo=85729I have the correct
facts on this and would swear my life on it. The truth will eventually come
out and be told to everyone. It's just a matter of time. People already
know about it.
Prior
to last year you co-owed (w/ Heritage) or owned the paperbacked
"Phantom of the Opera" One Sheet poster above and set up the trade for
consignment plan with Ken Schacter right around the March 2011
Heritage Signature auction (he consigned many, many posters to this
auction but some included the French Horror of Dracula, Fantastic
Voyage Teaser, Vertigo 30 X 40 amongst many, many others). Many, Many
other items were taken in by Heritage Auctions from Ken Schacter in
exchange trading him “The Phantom of the Opera” One Sheet poster above.
That is a cold hard fact. In that particular signature auction and
others. Please do not try to deny this because last year you
negotiated the plan for him to acquire “The Phantom of the Opera”
poster above in exchange for consignments to Heritage Auctions (albeit
Ken may have pestered you to the point and completely dragged you
into this). The
consignment deal for "The Phantom of the Opera" went through last
year after taking many months time of Ken negotiating and speaking
with you (Grey) over the phone. The deal took months to complete but
in then end, Ken got the “Phantom of the Opera” poster from you (I
have pictures of the poster hanging on Ken’s wall taken last year on
my computer). After the deal went through you then personally flew
out to Los Angeles and hand delivered "The Phantom of the Opera"
paperbacked one sheet poster above to him. I also heard the poster
was actually sitting in a vault in Los Angeles (or the Heritage
offices) waiting on Ken to complete the deal. It went through and he got
the poster. Again that is a bonafide cold hard fact (I have photos
of Ken with the poster). Why
you were there "assisting the State of California and the trustee"
was EXTREMELY bizarre to say the least especially considering he
consigned so much poster material through Heritage over the years. I
guess this mutual relationship between you all explains why so many
times over the years he’d sell through Heritage rather than sell
directly to me even when I’d offer him 2X or 3X what a poster he was
selling was worth.
I'm
not saying by any means that Heritage or “sign on the dotted line”
Grey Smith knew what was going on, but Grey Smith representing “the
state of California and Robert C. Mannheim” presents itself as a MAJOR
conflict of interest because he took “bad consignments” from Ken
Schacter in exchange for “The Phantom of the Opera” which was not on
the truck (amongst other things) when marshalls hauled Ken’s
stolen“movie material” off last Wednesday.
----- Original Message -----
From: Smith, Grey - 1367
Sent: 05/03/12 09:16 PM
To: Paul Waines
Subject: RE: [MOPO] METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
Where ever you’re getting your facts, you should do a little bit better fact
checking!
You obviously have some very poor sources.
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Waines [mailto:pwaine...@gmx.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 8:03 PM
To: Smith, Grey - 1367
Subject: Re: [MOPO] METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
Didn't the vast majority of Heritage's movie poster consignments come from Ken
Schacter over the last few years?
http://movieposters.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=695&lotNo=85729
For
example didn't Ken swing a $200,000 or $300,000 trade with Heritage
last year in exchange for this paperbacked One Sheet for "The Phantom of
the Opera" that is shown above and was hauled off last Wednesday? I
heard Ken gave them consignments for their Signature auctions in
exchange for this one "Phantom of the Opera" poster over a gradual
period of time dating back to a least the last couple of years. That is
a fact. Another California collector told me that a motherload of
these items were in Heritage's 2011 March Dallas Signature auction.
That also is a fact.
Wouldn't this be a major confict of interest
if Heritage were given the opportunity to sell on behalf of the Trustee
if they were tied into this? That is taking in "dirty consigments"
from someone who didn't have a clean title on them or was using
laundered money?
-P
-----Original Message-----
From: Smith, Grey - 1367 <gre...@ha.com>
To: MoPo-L < MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU>
Sent: Thu, May 3, 2012 8:35 pm
Subject: Re: [MOPO] METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
Yes, this is yours truly.
There on the behalf of the State of California and its trustee.
-----Original Message-----
From: MoPo List [ mailto:mopo-l@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU] On Behalf Of lovenoir2
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 3:36 PM
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: Re: [MOPO] METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
That's what I was wondering, too. It looks like him.
-KL
On 5/3/12, Joe Burtis <jbur...@mpagallery.com > wrote:
Is that Grey standing in the background?
Please visit our website:
www.mpagallery.com
90 Oak St.
E. Rutherford, NJ 07073
201-635-1444
----- Original Message -----
From: allen day
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 10:05 AM
Subject: Re: [MOPO] METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
One heckuva way to find out.
BTW ... who owns midsystems.com?
ad
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: glenndamato < glenndam...@earthlink.net>
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2012 9:36 AM
Subject: [MOPO] METROPOLIS THREE-SHEET WHEREABOUTS!
Folks-Anyone wishing to know the whereabouts of the "Metropolis"
three-sheet (& Movie Poster Exchange's former "silent" partner) should
go to www.midsystems.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: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
