When they can stay in business, it makes them an authority IMHO---the more successful they are, the more authoritative they are ---simply because collectors say so with their wallets/behavior.
You ever see Gleason/Pryor/Donner's THE TOY film? I'm about to have Ned Beatty take his pants down.
If you haven't seen the film, the essence of my point here is that you and Brian and any toy collector can relate any facts you'd like----but that doesn't change the reality of AFA's recognized authority.
It's a glaring oversight.
"Oversight"---a word that in another context I could use to describe T-Bolt, your, and others' assessment of my Museum posts and their motives here, by the way.
Case in point, and more directly ON point----when did I ever say that AFA's cited mistakes weren't problematic?
Observe that I noted AFA made MISTAKE. I said in one of my posts that drew your attention
"A mistake doesn't suddenly negate recognized authority."
Yet the AFA organization has, at the moment, an indisputable foothold in defining prices for toys. And that's a fact.
And it's a fact that has bearing in the context of my (simple) point. You guys aren't getting my point, I assume, because your frustration over AFA's shortcomings have affected you the point to where if I point out that AFA is an authority, you feel like I'm attacking you and/or supporting AFA's shortcomings in spite of me never posting that I DID support them.
If, for some reason, you have been missing my point because of a personal long-running MM community frustration with me as a MM poster...well, I'm sorry that's occurring, but I humbly ask you to please try to keep your vendettas on a case-to-case (i.e. thread-to-thread) basis. If my "agitator" reputation precedes me so much that I begin to become the topic of the thread despite me not saying anything particular in that particular thread to deserve it---well, to analogously quote a wise old ghost "The Emperor has already won."
But, apparently, not ENOUGH of a joke to take them down a peg in the community as far as being leading authorities in the field of grading figures.
You're using those quotation marks as if to imply they AREN'T a recognized authority? Well, if so, see above.
But if you're using those quotes to emphasize their shortcomings at recognizing fakes---well, yeah, you're right, grading fakes as if they were the real deal is not very becoming of a recognized authority. I feel kinda insulted you'd think I'd ever disagree with that if that was your implication. But if it was, it's ok, I'll get over it.
I am also interested at continuing our discussions and debates----I also apologize in advance for my Net-posting mannerisms---it's just my way of having fun---but I don't want to alienate myself here....so, I'll do my best not to sound too jerky too much of the time. But I WILL sound like a jerk somewhat, regardless, as I'm very passionate and not so socially tactful---Amen.
Leave a comment: