Jump to content
IGNORED

Heritage Auctions Thread


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ferris Bueller said:

A new one, holy shnikes!

This quote is amazing:

"Why do I mention this? Because by selling only Atari games—if in fact what Haspel is selling now, which comprises exclusively second-generation Atari games, is indicative of what he typically sells—he ensures that most or perhaps even all of his business on eBay escapes the notice of U.S. journalists"

He's arguing Mark's doesn't attempt to hide his sales (which he presumably wants to hide) because no one would find them anyway, because no one cares about Atari games. Excellent.

  • Haha 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Administrator · Posted

I think he would do himself better service by being quite a bit more concise, and also by limiting the discussion points to the more concrete items and less speculative ones.  One can make many assumptions about someone else not having a LinkedIn account, but trying to tie to everything and prove reasoning, is a big stretch in my opinion that can't really be proven, and that merely serves as a distraction.  Just like with Karl's video, any time there are little 'pieces' of your reporting that can be challenged, it can actually serve to lessen the impact of your report.

I have a hard time following these 'Proof' articles because they are quite lengthy, and almost seem desperate and reaching - even if some of the items contained within are legitimate, they can almost be overshadowed by the immense amount of speculation, stretching, and insinuation.

I'm not saying he's wrong about all the allegations, but these reports seem almost written intentionally to be as dramatic as possible.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, spacepup said:

I think he would do himself better service by being quite a bit more concise, and also by limiting the discussion points to the more concrete items and less speculative ones.  One can make many assumptions about someone else not having a LinkedIn account, but trying to tie to everything and prove reasoning, is a big stretch in my opinion that can't really be proven, and that merely serves as a distraction.  Just like with Karl's video, any time there are little 'pieces' of your reporting that can be challenged, it can actually serve to lessen the impact of your report.

I have a hard time following these 'Proof' articles because they are quite lengthy, and almost seem desperate and reaching - even if some of the items contained within are legitimate, they can almost be overshadowed by the immense amount of speculation, stretching, and insinuation.

I'm not saying he's wrong about all the allegations, but these reports seem almost written intentionally to be as dramatic as possible.

Yes these articles are hard to read. I feel like I'm reading an old time news bulletin! 🤣

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Administrator · Posted

Will the lonely but hard-headed plumber finally save the princess?  Will We ever learn the story of Lakitu and why he has taken vengeance on lands below?  Will the overshadowed brother ever make his stamp on the world?  FIND OUT NEXT TIME on The Mysterious Mario, a new special airing every Tuesday night at 9pm eastern/8pm central!

  • Love 1
  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, karljobst said:

First thought: dear God, this guy's wife is a saint

Second thought: I don't think Seth understands how SEC form Ds work. As discussed earlier in this thread, they don't have to file new ones when people's roles change, only if a new issuing of stock happens. So the lack of SEC forms since 2018 does not, by itself, imply that Mark's role hasn't changed since then, as he seems to think it does.

Still, third thought: on the whole, looks pretty bad. There seems to be kind of a very technical butt-covering line WATA could take. On the SEC filings (which are only relevant up to 2018 in any case), Haspel's listed as a "promoter", which isn't the same as being an employee or officer. SEC's definition (from https://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/formddefinitions.htm ) :

"Promoter" includes:

(i) Any person who, acting alone or in conjunction with one or more other persons, directly or indirectly takes initiative in founding and organizing the business or enterprise of an issuer; or

(ii) Any person who, in connection with the founding and organizing of the business or enterprise of an issuer, directly or indirectly receives in consideration of services or property, or both services and property, 10 percent or more of any class of securities of the issuer or 10 percent or more of the proceeds from the sale of any class of such securities. However, a person who receives such securities or proceeds either solely as underwriting commissions or solely in consideration of property shall not be deemed a promoter within the meaning of this paragraph if such person does not otherwise take part in founding and organizing the enterprise. Securities Act of 1933, Rule 405, 17 C.F.R. § 230.405.

The article Seth cites refers to Mark as "one of WATA's principals", which is again a pretty vague term. And WATA's site calls him the "Chief Advisor", which could I guess mean he heads the advisory board, rather than being an actual WATA employee. So WATA could take the line that he is/was never an actual employee or officer of WATA and therefore this is okay.

Still, he was indeed clearly on the website under the heading Executive Team with a watagames.com email address at the time some sales happened, unless Seth is completely making things up (which I don't believe). In the court of public opinion that does indeed smell pretty bad, however they might try to spin it in a legal context.

Edited by AdamW
goddamn autosmilies
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, spacepup said:

I think he would do himself better service by being quite a bit more concise, and also by limiting the discussion points to the more concrete items and less speculative ones.  One can make many assumptions about someone else not having a LinkedIn account, but trying to tie to everything and prove reasoning, is a big stretch in my opinion that can't really be proven, and that merely serves as a distraction.  Just like with Karl's video, any time there are little 'pieces' of your reporting that can be challenged, it can actually serve to lessen the impact of your report.

I have a hard time following these 'Proof' articles because they are quite lengthy, and almost seem desperate and reaching - even if some of the items contained within are legitimate, they can almost be overshadowed by the immense amount of speculation, stretching, and insinuation.

I'm not saying he's wrong about all the allegations, but these reports seem almost written intentionally to be as dramatic as possible.

By the standards of his two previous articles, this one was positively concise and dripping in hard factual reportage 😄

I do love to dunk on Seth's utter inability to self-edit and his relentless hyperbole, but this story does definitely seem to have an actual new fact in it which he did a pretty decent job of establishing.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, spacepup said:

I have a hard time following these 'Proof' articles because they are quite lengthy, and almost seem desperate and reaching - even if some of the items contained within are legitimate, they can almost be overshadowed by the immense amount of speculation, stretching, and insinuation.

My hope would be that @karljobst would take any factual information from these long winded articles and include it in his next video in a more concise fashion.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, AdamW said:

By the standards of his two previous articles, this one was positively concise and dripping in hard factual reportage 😄

I do love to dunk on Seth's utter inability to self-edit and his relentless hyperbole, but this story does definitely seem to have an actual new fact in it which he did a pretty decent job of establishing.

The most amazing thing is that Seth both posted picture proof and the name of the still-existing Ebay account instead of saying something like "We now bring to you that Proof has determined via concrete physical evidence that Mark Haspel, Chief Advisor of WATA per their own website (See "Executive Team", third picture from the left) is sending WATA graded video games (mostly Atari) via the United States Government Postal Service, headed by Louis DeJoy appointed in May 2020 by the Board of Governors, to unknown buyers in exchange for United States Dollars, a fiat currency controlled by the Federal Reserve System, a sham institution with no place in the United States Constitution"

  • Haha 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, captmorgandrinker said:

andersson_silver.gif

 

It doesn't show up that well in the .gif, but Andersson took off his silver medal and hucked it over the glass into the crowd.

He also wasn't gonna take it in the first place.  He shook the guy's hand, turns to leave, and the guy's like "hey, you're forgetting something" 😛

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hammerfestus said:

Im gonna be honest.  That shit was too long.  Did not read.  I’ll just let you fine upstanding citizens do the work for me.

The executive summary is: Mark Haspel sold Seth some WATA-graded games, and has an eBay store where he's listing a lot more. Mark Haspel is listed under "Executive Team" on the WATA site, with a watagames.com email address. Deniz told the New York Times in 2019 that WATA employees can't grade games or sell WATA-graded games.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AdamW said:

The executive summary is: Mark Haspel sold Seth some WATA-graded games, and has an eBay store where he's listing a lot more. Mark Haspel is listed under "Executive Team" on the WATA site, with a watagames.com email address. Deniz told the New York Times in 2019 that WATA employees can't grade games or sell WATA-graded games.

Did anyone actually ever believe that though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AdamW said:

The executive summary is: Mark Haspel sold Seth some WATA-graded games, and has an eBay store where he's listing a lot more. Mark Haspel is listed under "Executive Team" on the WATA site, with a watagames.com email address. Deniz told the New York Times in 2019 that WATA employees can't grade games or sell WATA-graded games.

Christ are you STILL defending Wata/HA? 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...