Solving problems in the hobby - how?

[TK-7785]

Playing Devil's advocate for one moment... Whilst I completely agree that any proven scammers, shysters and dickheads of a faking nature should be named shamed, there is one potential downside to universally banning them and forcing them underground. A wise man once said 'keep your friends close and your enemies closer'. In one respect I like to keep these folk where I can see them.

As other's have mentioned, in regards to Toni and Billy, both have "disappeared" along with any remaining stock and info they might carry. I'm not for one moment condoning any of their actions. But if it's a choice between making a source of fakes go underground or keep them where we can see them, I'd choose the latter.

I think probably most of us would rather Toni's remaining stock of carbacks etc (if any) were recovered so they could be collected for what they are. As is stands they may well end up being passed off in bulk onto another faker.

With regards to FF i think it's a shame if anyone decides not to go due to Jeff being allowed to sell there. By all means boycott his stall and what he's selling, but without events like FF the collecting community will be far worse off. What other shows offer that much vintage under one roof? Not to mention the opportunity to meet up with friends and put forum names to faces.

 

[theforceuk]

With regards to FF i think it's a shame if anyone decides not to go due to Jeff being allowed to sell there. By all means boycott his stall and what he's selling, but without events like FF the collecting community will be far worse off. What other shows offer that much vintage under one roof? Not to mention the opportunity to meet up with friends and put forum names to faces.

You have to put yourself in the position of someone who has been conned out of a lot of money, would you still want to see him carrying on like nothing has happend. Also what's it saying to other would be scammers out there if you get to carry on as normal after shafting so many honest collectors?

 

[Stuart Skinner]

With regards to FF i think it's a shame if anyone decides not to go due to Jeff being allowed to sell there. By all means boycott his stall and what he's selling, but without events like FF the collecting community will be far worse off. What other shows offer that much vintage under one roof? Not to mention the opportunity to meet up with friends and put forum names to faces.

You have to put yourself in the position of someone who has been conned out of a lot of money, would you still want to see him carrying on like nothing has happend. Also what's it saying to other would be scammers out there if you get to carry on as normal after shafting so many honest collectors?

Wouldn't you rather him be somewhere where you can actually approach him and try and get a refund rather than him going underground and never seeing anything again? I've got no interest in defending Jeff, I don't know the bloke and it's pretty clear due to evidence that his been involved in something, but like Chris says just boycott his stall, if he's not making money attending he'll soon stop trading but pushing him into hiding doesn't actually achieve anything.

Out of interest
Edd have you banned Jeff from this forum?

 

[edd_jedi]

That's a fair question Stu. I haven't banned him, but I wouldn't allow him to sell here while questions are still being asked. I think that's the issue here - nobody is asking for Jeff to be banned from attending, it's the fact he is selling there (and according to some sources still selling suspect items.)

 

[theforceuk]

I don't think Stopping him having a stall is forcing him underground, he could still attend the event, although he probably wouldn't as there would be nothing in it for him. It would also be maintaining the integraty of the event.

Look this is just my opinion and I don't think I'm in a better position than anyone else to have this view, I'm certainly not. I can just understand the view of collectors who have been done over feeling baffled by him still being aloud to sell at FF. If I was responsable for him being aloud to sell stuff at FF, I would need him to give me a good reason to.

Letting him have the stall and leaving visitors to decide for themselves would work if you put a huge banner above his stall informing everyone what he has done. This guy has been very clever at coming out at the start when the **** hit the fan and holding his hands up, promising this and that and then slowly slipping away once the dust has settled.

I'm not having a pop at anyone involved with FF, just expressing my opinion and I respect the decisions made by the organisers. It's easy for someone like me to sit at a computer and say you should do this and that, but when your making the decision for real I can appreciate it's not easy.

I would let him have an 'ask Jeff stand'.

 

[olisuds]

Hypocrisy is one of the things that is killing this hobby for me personally. It amazes me how people can be critical of scamming, repro's, ugrading, flipping when it suits them but they''ll let it fly if it's someone well known or if there is financial gain.

 

[Frunkstar]

Hypocrisy is one of the things that is killing this hobby for me personally. It amazes me how people can be critical of scamming, repro's, ugrading, flipping when it suits them but they''ll let it fly if it's someone well known or if there is financial gain.

Wise words indeed

 

[Dannywhiteley]

Hypocrisy is one of the things that is killing this hobby for me personally. It amazes me how people can be critical of scamming, repro's, ugrading, flipping when it suits them but they''ll let it fly if it's someone well known or if there is financial gain.

Nailed it.

 

[Stuart Skinner]

Hypocrisy is one of the things that is killing this hobby for me personally. It amazes me how people can be critical of scamming, repro's, ugrading, flipping when it suits them but they''ll let it fly if it's someone well known or if there is financial gain.

I do not believe for one minute that Dave tree let's him have a table at FF for financial gain, a table is around £30 so he's not gaining a lot by letting him sell there.

 

[olisuds]

Hypocrisy is one of the things that is killing this hobby for me personally. It amazes me how people can be critical of scamming, repro's, ugrading, flipping when it suits them but they''ll let it fly if it's someone well known or if there is financial gain.

I do not believe for one minute that Dave tree let's him have a table at FF for financial gain, a table is around £30 so he's not gaining a lot by letting him sell there.

My comment wasn't directed at any specific cases but I do wonder why someone guilty of knowingly selling fakes is getting so much support and allowed a table at FF.

 

[Taffius]

As a newbie and now been on here for a few months, I am still highly reliant on others experience, opinions and ethics to ensure I get the most out of what I collect. I think so far, I get extreme value from the forum and wisdom afforded which has led to a change of my mindset and an improved ethical and caring approach when collecting Star Wars.

In order to understand the situation more and in relation to the initial start of thread, the people who have stood up, I have been very grateful for highlighting suspicions or issues. It at least makes me stop and think more as a baseline. My problem is I am not in groups that formed over years and know each other on a personal level. I am sure that will improve as my contacts and interaction improves but difficult I should think when you know people for so long.

I try to self fund my collection. I cannot justify huge outlays to get what I want when family would like other things too so I am curtailed a bit on what I spend as some see these items as just toys (and I understand that too). Their experience also shows that I am terrible for "fads". I am a "returner" after all.

So this time round, I do try to increase my collection through collective experience and hands on knowledge. I think if I purchased a fake or not as original as I assumed, unknowingly, my appetite would decrease for the reasons above. Sure it will be an experience, but for me it would be a negative one and at a cost that I would of preferred to outlay on something else deemed more value for money. I have not experienced that yet, and I truly believe my vintage items are original and untarnised. When it happens I would certainly welcome loyal support from the contacts I have made in order to highlight any issues or concerns as a collective weight.

I have not been to FF yet, but have been to an Echo Live. Such an experience is useful to me because I assumed there is a baseline of assurance due to the fact of the ethics policy I infer from an association to a respective group or supporters.

Problems in the hobby will never fade, but the ethical collecting fight experienced within this forum is clear due to strict policies/rules. Solving problems in the hobby or within collecting groups might be related to compliance and enforcement of such policies. How that is achieved is another topic I should think.

 

[Robstyley]

Interesting debate here. I think it's a matter of principles. I think all those defending ff are missing the point. It's not about having a beer with your mates or enjoying a vintage toy fair. We're adults, if you want to do that you're going to do it anyway. And it is a great event, I've been a few times. It's about someone being welcomed who's still selling and making money who has mugged off your fellow collectors and friends. You would all usually be the first to condemn anyone robbing from your mates in the hobby. It is a bit hypocritical and disrespectful to Frank and others. However, everyone does have the right to just say - I'm staying out of it. I suppose Dave just wants to give the guy a chance to make it right, face his accusers and answer questions. I can't comment on specifics cos I don't collect baggies and haven't read the whole baggiegate thread.

 

[edd_jedi]

I suppose Dave just wants to give the guy a chance to make it right, face his accusers and answer questions.

I do understand the thinking behind this, but it is flawed. Most people do not like confrontation. There is often a difference in size, confidence, physicality etc between people. Many people would find it intimidating to confront somebody who has scammed them face to face. Does that mean the person who has been scammed is not due a refund because they do not want to face up to the accused? Absolutely not! That's like saying courts are not needed because victims of crime should just stand up to the accused themselves. This is no different.

 

[Robstyley]

I don't disagree with you Edd but I think that's prob some of the reasons he's allowed there.