karljobst

I agree that my first video sold that the entire market was a scam etc. I don't believe that to be the case now (though I totally did at the time). I wonder though if I could have done the video a different way and gotten a similar response. I think I could have, and if I were to do it again I'd focus way more on just the select few people who I take issue with. Also side note. The only reason I even mentioned NA, or the database was because of Jeff Meyer's connection with Wata. I honestly don't care that much about what happened to NA. Things are just escalating now because Jeff totally deflected that point from the first video so I felt compelled to bring it up again.

From everything I've heard and seen I totally believe that Wata produces a better product. However, the first and foremost job of a grading company is to provide accurate and consistent gradings. I don't believe an auction house like Heritage would or should partner with a brand new grading company that had no track record. It just makes absolutely no sense. At best, HA should have waited for a couple of years to establish that Wata were legit and it had credibility. As experts you might be able to tell that a case is good and is a better product, but I don't think that's enough to warrant this relationship unless there was something less than reputable going on. When you partner this with the conflicts of interest, lying to the public, Halperin's personal stake, I just can't believe this is anything other than people with power using their own companies as tool for there own profit.

BTW, full transparency. After my first video I received messages from people telling me about much worse things than I bring up in the video. I don't talk about them because they are confidential and also because I can't prove them. But some of the characters I talk about in the video I go a bit hard on because there are other things I know (that you wouldn't get just from the video itself). I totally get that sometimes I say things that seem like complete assumptions but generally they are based on testimony I have, I just don't expressly mention it. I do strongly believe that people such as Halperin helped create Wata for direct personal gain. And I feel like that's why these investments weren't made public when they legally should have been.

The one thing in my video that I actually would like your opinion on, is what I say at the end about these investors only buying the rating. I have a feeling there will be something that I'm missing, but what's your opinion on the VGA mario selling for $240k, vs the Wata one for $800k.

I didn't have to bring in an outside source. I did not dictate or have any control over what she said. I gave her the info and asked for her opinion. This was done just to see if I was completely wrong and to get a 2nd opinion. But lawyers aren't experts in everything, and when it comes to these matters they will look at the same resources and statutes anyone else would. I didn't rely on anything she said, it was really a separate thing just to see what a lawyer would say. I still have my own opinion based on my experience as an influencer and the fact that I've been tracking these issues for years.

Btw, since our conversation I have become more open and positive with the market in general. But on the flipside since then I have become much more negative about Wata and Heritage (especially in the formative periods).

The NA conversation arose only in this 2nd video because Jeff lied about what NA was in response to my first video. The point of the statement wasn't to label NA as this or that, but to illustrate that Jeff was being deceptive. NA was a forum, marketplace and a database. From what my research established, NA was created as a database. Then over time the forum grew. However I still see the website as a database, with a forum feature. Either way, I don't really care about arguing about those details because they are so irrelevant to anything. The database is gone, Jeff completely misdirected in his response. I believe he was deceptive. I've spoken with many lawyers, there very rarely speak concretely. They will say "A court might find this" etc. I'm pretty strong in my own opinion on this one either way. If I dismiss inaccuracies (which there will be, you have more expertise than me) it isn't because I disagree. It's just because I find it not impactful to my overall message in the video. I tried to stay more away from the collecting side in this video and focus more on just the marketing. But I did throw in my own opinion at the end for sure, which I know some collectors will disagree with.

You are the expert when it comes to NA. You are the expert when it comes to collecting. When it comes to marketing, endorser obligations. I am an expert. And on top of that, I've spoken with lawyers about it and done a lot of research. When it comes to my analysis on the legality of Wata and Heritage's actions I'm very confident. I'm happy to concede any less important point (i.e What NA was) because ultimately I don't really care about that. I brought it up in the video because I believe that Jeff was lying, and it was just to point that out.

I am dismissive of your points because they are irrelevant in relation to the legality of Wata's actions. It doesn't matter if Kahn valued the game in the millions (which he did) or in the hundreds of thousands. Doing it for investors in his company without disclosing that is illegal. Wata's actions in relation to the Carolina Collection was illegal. I don't need to speak to Jeff about that. Me speaking to Jeff is a courtesy, not a requirement for me 'getting to the bottom' of anything. In my opinion the difference between you and I is that I'm focusing on companies breaking the law, and your focusing on quibbling over the fact that I haven't spoken with Jeff Meyer, or whether or not Nintendoage was a forum or a database.

I do believe your bias is clouding your judgement here. You completely overlook all of the obvious illegal activity and try to scrape the barrel of potential small inconsistencies with what I'm saying. Totally ignoring the point of the video. But I'll address some of these things. 1) Kahn did imply the value of the was in the millions. On pawn stars he did not value the game at $300k, he said there were turned down offers of that much (implying the value is higher) and the value 'had no ceiling'. Besides this, what he did was illegal. But in your eyes for some reason the exact dollar amount he put on it is more important than the deceptive marketing. 2) Other users and contributors to NA disagree with you. NA was set up as a database. The forum evolved and grew over time. It seems you have more issue with my lack of expertise rather than Meyer's obvious lies about what NA was. 3) I emailed Jeff a couple of weeks ago to try and meet up. He was on holiday all week and by the time he was available it was too late. I did make an effort to catch up. My effort was late, but it was there and we would have caught up if he was available. I can't 'solve' anything. I am not the FTC, or the SEC. What I am supposed to 'solve' in your opinion? It's not my responsibility, nor my duty to solve anything. I'm calling out illegal and unethical practices. Jeff talking to me now does nothing to undo any federal regulation breaches that happened in the past. 4) Heritage and Wata had an agreement upon Wata's launch. Whatever you're talking about in regards to Wata 'capitalising' on anything has no bearing. Heritage aligned with a grading company that had no history, or track record of grading games in the market. And Halperin was an investor, and that relationship was never disclosed. I just don't believe your story. Even if your rationalisation were true (which it could be), I believe Wata would need experience in the industry to prove that the product was good over extensive testing in the actual market before its credibility could be established. And not just the case, but their rating consistency and ability to run a business well. You accuse me of just making targeted accusations, which is true because obviously I care about the illegal practices of these companies and that's the entire point of the video. But on the flipside, you don't seem to care at all about that, and just want to defend them over irrelevant, minute details.

My Wata video is my 17th most viewed video. Other videos have had far more reach, even in terms of gaming news. You don't understand how youtubers derive income from youtube evidently. I'd make far more money making several shorter videos each with sponsors than devoting a lot of time on one shorter video. Sponsors have no creative control over my videos at all, aside from what date range they can be released in.

Unfortunately the video had to come out today because of sponsor obligations. Though I would have loved to talk more about the population report release as IMO it's likely a result (at least in part) to the public's reaction to my first video. I'm not sure how it would undercut anything I said. I would celebrate and encourage any positive actions.

https://goldinauctions.com/1996_N64_Nintendo_64__USA___Super_Mario_64__Sealed-LOT107330.aspx Do these types of auctions usually see the greatest activity at the beginning? Or will we see a surge right before it ends? Also noticing the huge discrepancy with the Wata and VGA sm64's, with the VGA version still sitting at minimum bid.

https://sethabramson.substack.com/p/video-game-grading-house-wata-told Interested in hearing everyone's thoughts

Thanks for the info. I will have to ask Jeff why the Database couldn't be maintained. I've read the announcements but they all relate to the forum and nothing is said at all about everything else on the website.