Open Letter to AFA and UKG

[finestcomics]

While I'm not certain whether the individual at the center of this controversy has ever dealt in MEGO, the fact AFA grades MEGO's prompted me to communicate this matter with this community, as I feel this is situation has placed the reputation of toy certification under siege, requiring a timely and appropriate response.

To Chad Thompon and Stephen Ward:

On December 5th, a bombshell was dropped on the collecting community when a Star Wars collector with a checkered past alleged he had lost out on a deal involving 25,000 cardbacks that were originally acquired when the Palitoy factory had been closed. The dealer who ended-up with the cardbacks has since been the topic of great controversy, which includes the allegations and photographic evidence that have raised considerable doubt and concern amongst collectors who have either dealt directly with Antoni Emchowicz (Toytoni and Zoomertoys), or indirectly with goods deriving from this source that have changed hands since first being introduced in the market sometime in the early 90's.

The main reason for addressing this directly to both your companies is that the actions of Jason Joiner, and the allegations against Antoni Emchowicz have essentially burdened the collecting community to prove these allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. The fallout from this is a level of distrust which hasn't been felt since my time as a SW toy collector, and the distrust continues to escalate as people are feverishly trying to dump suspect items from the toy lines in question in various online marketplaces and eBay.

While some members both on SWFUK and RS have worked hard to try to uncover tells which might help us better understand and possibly prove that modern seals were used on Toni's MOC's, this has placed an unfair onus on the community to keep everyone honest. We simply cannot keep up with the cat and mouse game, initiated by Toni if these allegations turn out to be true, and continued by collectors dumping AFA/UKG graded suspect items.

I would ask that effective immediately, both AFA and UKG ban Antoni Emchowicz from being able to submit any toys to either of you. This is not a suggestion without precedent as CGC had banned Danny Dupcak (Fantasia owner who was recreating comics using unused covers from the Eastern Colour Printing) and Jason Ewert (for micro-trimming hundreds of comics using methods that CGC was not able to detect). Assuming he was a high volume submitter, given he was sending toys over the pond and was very likely economizing on shipping costs, cutting him off or agents acting on his behalf may require acting with a merchant who is validating transactions to refute any credit transactions tied to him or any familial variation. To further eliminate the possibility he is crafty enough to find an unrelated agent to submit on his behalf, you need to put out a statement immediately putting a hold on any items from being eligible for grading that appear on this list.

Secondly, I would ask that if neither of you has commenced such actions, to begin backtracking any/all invoices that came from Antoni Emchowicz and to produce a list of serial numbers which the community can cross-reference. At this point, while these are still allegations, I believe requesting this information from both your companies will help the community remain vigilant in tracking potential submissions that are circulating online and help consumers avoid being unnecessarily embroiled in acquiring potentially tainted samples floating around in the wild.

Moreover, if you do find submission patterns, or tells to distinguish modern seals as you investigate this matter further from your end, it would be particularly helpful to report them to the community. You may use this thread to respond to the above, or to update the community on other ways you are responding to this matter.

As a matter of public awareness, I have been in contact with Antoni Emchowicz and while he barely abided by my deadline to respond, through his curt response to my request for a refund, he has demonstrated himself as an individual that is untrustworthy, unprofessional, and who is ready and willing to use whatever stalling tactics available to him. It is for this reason that I urge you both to act in a matter which clearly demonstrates there are consequences for individuals who act irresponsibly, and this extends to the criminal allegations of a cheater trying to use certification as a method to circulate counterfeit goods.

I would urge you to consider these suggestions carefully and with priority as the negative trickle effect on your reputations is inevitable, and will be greatly aggravated or minimized by your in/actions and timeliness in issuing a response. Regardless of what pans out, his silence, behaviour and attitude towards customers seeking refunds has itself caused enough doubt in collectors minds to forever avoid him, and that may possibly extend to purchasing any certified Palitoy line items floating around in the market.

However, as I have experienced and seen first hand for over 30 years, and when the Eastern "file copies" first began to hit the back-issue comic market, individuals who have demonstrated the capacity to rip collectors off will not abate their pursuits. When caught, they need to be constantly reminded their activities aren't going unnoticed. While this situation may call upon the community a tremendous burden to unravel this mess to come to the truth, the inspiration to post this open letter is found in my belief you both have otherwise acted as hobby stewards, and that this situation, while difficult for all involved, presents an opportunity to not only demonstrate it to a community still reeling from this revelation, but hopefully to put this individual and any accomplices out of business for good.

Joe

P.S. While there are numerous threads on this matter, this blog summarizes and posts link for those interested in learning more about the situation

[mikeMc6]

I probably shouldn't even pipe in here as I do not collect SW but this sounds beyond ugly. I hope planet Mego doesn't end up like Bespin and gets discovered by the Empire.

And on a more serious note, I believe most die hard members have never embraced these professional grading companies, no? I do not envy the sincere SW vintage collector and the obstacles before them in gauging authenticity. I do not recognize any of these names, heck I don't know any of the real names of these boards!

[skid14]

ouch! that pretty much sucks the golden egg.

[VintageMike]

That's one huge positive with Mego AFA grading has never caught on like it was for SW. Also yet another reason I like price tags on my vintage items.

[MIB41]

I've never been a fan of these self-proclaimed grade certification companies and what substantiates the merits of one over the other to be given such a distinction. So this situation pretty much underscores my concerns, because it proves they are no less susceptible to scams as anyone else.

[Hedji]

Blecch. It really takes the fun out of collecting toys. This is not where the hobby is supposed to end up, but greed and the pursuit of toy profit, along with certain egos, has completely soured what ought to be enjoyable leisure time.

I am a huge SW collector, but I want no part of this. I don't even want to wallow in the drama. I am much happier lately at the MegoMuseum, where the vibe is more fun and breezy.

[raycastile]

Monster collectors tend to vomit at the mention of AFA. Definitely a different culture than Star Wars collectors.

[enyawd72]

AFA is a joke. How someone can possibly determine the condition of a sealed item is beyond me. Does the back of that figure have horrible paint apps or melt marks? Does that Mego have broken limbs? Is that playset or game complete?
They ASSUME everything is mint/complete, charge you for it, and the item costs a premium.
Well, that's like paying MORE for a used car and having the dealer tell you, we assume there's an engine in there, but don't ever look under the hood or try to drive it.

[sprytel]

AFA is a joke. How someone can possibly determine the condition of a sealed item is beyond me. Does the back of that figure have horrible paint apps or melt marks? Does that Mego have broken limbs? Is that playset or game complete?
They ASSUME everything is mint/complete, charge you for it, and the item costs a premium.
Well, that's like paying MORE for a used car and having the dealer tell you, we assume there's an engine in there, but don't ever look under the hood or try to drive it.

Yeah! Or saying a supermodel is hot without looking at her spleen!

[finestcomics]

Hi everyone, first off Happy New Year!

I also want to thank your for taking the time to read this letter. I personally believe this is an important development that effects the entire toy hobby.

While this does dish a severe blow to toy certification companies, the revelation reveals a dark and shady aspect of the hobby. One which has resulted in two very significant activities to occur. The first being the abhorrent attitude of a dealer who lost out on a deal and decided to keep quiet about the existence of the unused cardback stock for some 30 years. This also include him admitting he knew Toni was doing this, but that he thought "everyone already knew" - a shameful display of conduct in any collectible market, and a reminder of how important it is to act responsibly when this type of information is kept from being known by the community at large.

The rest are allegations at this time, however it disgusts me to think that this dealer spent 66 cents on each cardback, and could easily have made $250,000 if he had doled them out slowly over the past 30 years at a mere $10. Especially considering they probably have a value range of $50-$300 depending on the character - selling them slowly to achieve a little more for prized pieces might well have meant making a staggering amount of money if sold as a piece of history "as is" and not what we believe has happened instead.

The act of reassembling vintage parts which include those "unused" cardbacks, blisters and loose figures using a modern seal method is sickening, and should give us all pause that all it takes is the activities of one individual to decimate the reputation of an entire toy line. It is my personal opinion that the Palitoy line of ESB and ROTJ will not recover from this regardless of what is uncovered.

On the point about asking AFA/UKG to respond, there is a hope of a silver lining in this mess. I do hope they listen to the suggestions, and respond in a manner appropriate to the seriousness this situation deserves.

[MEGOMAN]

WOW!!! This is pretty screwed up. Thank God it is out in the open.

[raycastile]

Maybe this would be more appropriate for a separate thread, but the most interesting aspect of this controversy to me is the question of what part "assemblage" plays in the authenticity/value of a collectible.

I agree that what was allegedly done with these Star Wars figures was unethical. I would compare it to selling a carded Mego that you know has been resealed, claiming it is the original factory seal. But that is a little different from this idea of "assemblage."

Let's say you have a boxed Mego Thor. The box is nice, the figure is unplayed with. But he is missing his hammer. So you buy a vintage Thor hammer and put it in the box. Not a repro hammer, not a scratched up hammer, but a nice, clean, vintage Mego Thor hammer. If you then sell this boxed Mego Thor, should you advertise that it has a "replacement" hammer? The same goes for a missing Iron Man belt, Batman glove, Supergirl shoe, etc.

What if you have a boxed board game, opened, but in virtually unplayed with condition. But you discover it's missing a spinner or a game piece or whatever. Later, you buy a beat up example of the same board game. It's also incomplete, but it is missing different pieces. So you can take pieces from the beat up box and add it to the minty box to make one complete board game. When you sell it, do you have to tell the story of how you took pieces out of one incomplete game and added it to another incomplete one to make one complete game?

Maybe you have a toy that should come with an instruction sheet, but the instructions are missing. You obtain an original, vintage instruction sheet and add it to the box to complete the toy. It is the exact same instruction sheet the toy should have, but it did not come from that particular box. Do you have to reveal this when you sell it?

In every case, I would say the answer is:

N

O

NO

But I would be interested in what others think.

[enyawd72]

^VERY good point.

[finestcomics]

Maybe this would be more appropriate for a separate thread, but the most interesting aspect of this controversy to me is the question of what part "assemblage" plays in the authenticity/value of a collectible.

I agree that what was allegedly done with these Star Wars figures was unethical. I would compare it to selling a carded Mego that you know has been resealed, claiming it is the original factory seal. But that is a little different from this idea of "assemblage."

Let's say you have a boxed Mego Thor. The box is nice, the figure is unplayed with. But he is missing his hammer. So you buy a vintage Thor hammer and put it in the box. Not a repro hammer, not a scratched up hammer, but a nice, clean, vintage Mego Thor hammer. If you then sell this boxed Mego Thor, should you advertise that it has a "replacement" hammer? The same goes for a missing Iron Man belt, Batman glove, Supergirl shoe, etc.

What if you have a boxed board game, opened, but in virtually unplayed with condition. But you discover it's missing a spinner or a game piece or whatever. Later, you buy a beat up example of the same board game. It's also incomplete, but it is missing different pieces. So you can take pieces from the beat up box and add it to the minty box to make one complete board game. When you sell it, do you have to tell the story of how you took pieces out of one incomplete game and added it to another incomplete one to make one complete game?

Maybe you have a toy that should come with an instruction sheet, but the instructions are missing. You obtain an original, vintage instruction sheet and add it to the box to complete the toy. It is the exact same instruction sheet the toy should have, but it did not come from that particular box. Do you have to reveal this when you sell it?

In every case, I would say the answer is:

N

O

NO

But I would be interested in what others think.

Assemblage is a very complex topic, and I want to point out, while there are aspects of this situation which lend itself to the discussion, it is very different than the attempts a collectors makes to achieve "completeness." To make that distinction clear, what this individal did is take vintage parts (cardback, blister, and authentic loose figure with accessories) and produced an MOC using a modern seal method. Now, where this gets complicated is that while we are assuming from the allegations these were "unused" cardbacks, there isn't as much clarity on the subject of where the blisters derived from. The person who outed this dealer suggests the deal involved "unused" blisters as well, but there are different versions of blisters, and some have suggested there might be reproduction blisters used in the mix. He also was actively buying loose figures through eBay - the common thread here is that all the ones showing up on his eBay activities are high grade, near perfect examples. It also didn't help his case that he changed his eBay profile to "private" and changed the names 30 times from the time it was created:



So to repeat, he was taking these parts and combining them to create the appearance of an authentic "factory sealed" example. The fact graders were unaware these "unused" cardbacks existed perhaps didn't allow them to assess these cards any further than the seal. What would be the purpose for instance of checking the actual figure, the accessories or weapons when there is reason to believe they are factory sealed?

Now, onto the subject of assemblage, the slippery slope is that the act of completeness needs to source period accurate, authentic parts. The fact repro's and period inaccurate pieces have found themselves in a wide range of collectible items makes it important to tease this topic out more clearly than suggesting its not something that should be disclosed. Furthermore, in cases where reissues have been released into the market which are produced using a replica template need to be brought into the discussion. While the reissues always have some disinguishing feature, the parts are a lot more affordable, accessible because they are modern day, and that includes things such as inserts which can add a significant premium to mint in box examples.

The other important consideration is on more obscure items, or those which fall into the range of antiquities. Many pre-war pieces are getting harder and harder to find complete, and even experts sometimes have trouble determining the authenticity of parts. A good example of this is the gambling sets (one was seen on Pawn Stars). A lot of these 19th century sets have so many parts in them that unless an expert properly assesses them, you really have no way of arriving at the claim it's complete. It may not even be the fault of the seller as the original owner may not have liked one of the parts in the set and replaced it with a better close to period item.

All in all though, if "completeness" somehow deviates by using close/but not period accurate pieces, or reproductions, it must be disclosed. And I would say that most collectible items from the past 50 years fall under this category, but for those that are circa 1950's or earlier, a little more thought and effort has to go into disclosing any deviations from the originality of the pieces.

[raycastile]

If we remove the "mint in package" aspect of this, it gets even more slippery. When people sell loose, complete Mego figures, do buyers assume all the accessories and costume pieces originated with that particular figure? But I'm not sure that loose figure collectors are as persnickety about these things.

If you read the threads on the Star Wars groups that detail this whole mess, the idea of "assemblage" comes up again and again as one of the important issues in this case. I'd never heard the term "assemblage" before in this context, so that discussion interested me, as it had much broader implications than the issue of creating faux vintage sealed cards. Not many collectors are going to get their hands on unused cards and unused bubbles, but practically all modern toy collectors at some point encounter issues involving "assemblage" and completeness.