Doug Schmell cashing in his vaulted massive collecion. Poll: Is this the top?

[red rocks-migration]

Doug Schmell is cashing in the comics from the vault, in a heritage auction, basically the highest graded 9.8-9.6-9.4s of the first marvel age comics including keys. Doug Schmells incredible vault of comics

 

As he runs an auction house, he has superior information and can see the market trends.

 

:Poll:

 

Is this the sign of the top?

 

A: Yes: Doug is savvy and he knows a good time to cash out

 

B: No: Doug is selling cheap and doesn't know what he is doing (Mhedy thinking)

 

C: Tops only obvious in hindsight.

 

(ps. can someone please program this poll for me, it didn't appear to work)

 

 

[BlowUpTheMoon]

 

(ps. can someone please program this poll for me, it didn't appear to work)

 

[Mark 1]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=5703985&gonew=1#UNREAD

[shadroch]

Doug Schmell is a liar and a thief who stole from old defenseless ladies, amonst others. Why anyone buys from him or even gives him the time of day is beyond me.

Hopefully, the reason he is cashing out is that his victims finally are getting their long delayed restitution.

The truth is an absolute defense against liable or slander, in case anyone is wondering.

[Dr. Balls]

Doug Schmell is a liar and a thief who steals from old defenseless ladies. Why anyone buys from him or even gives him the time of day is beyond me.

Hopefully, the reason he is cashing out is that his victims finally are getting their long delayed restitution.

 

Controversy! I'm curious, why this opinion? (I know nothing of Doug Smell).

[VintageComics]

While I realize I have a vested interest in the market AND I'm relatively new compared to some I believe that tops are only tops in hindsight.

 

There can be many other underlying factors here besides just the possibility that Doug wants to cash in. Doug has sold his collection over numerous times from what I understand.

 

Most people can relate to this: there are people who don't want to cash in but NEED to cash in. That could be one factor.

 

Who knows? People have been calling for the top or crash of the market since the first comic sold over cover price, and most of the collectors that have been around here for more than 20 years will confirm that.

 

 

[BlowUpTheMoon]

Doug Schmell is a liar and a thief who steals from old defenseless ladies. Why anyone buys from him or even gives him the time of day is beyond me.

Hopefully, the reason he is cashing out is that his victims finally are getting their long delayed restitution.

 

Controversy! I'm curious, why this opinion? (I know nothing of Doug Smell).

 

Google is your friend.

 

Matter of Schmell 2006 NY Slip Op 00326 [27 AD3d 24] January 19, 2006 Per Curiam, J. Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, August, 23, 2006

[Guardian Comics]

If he's smart, he's gonna parlay his windfall into Walking Dead books

 

Jim

[sacentaur]

Doug Schmell is a liar and a thief who stole from old defenseless ladies, amonst others. Why anyone buys from him or even gives him the time of day is beyond me.

 

We unfortunately could say the same thing about several other so-called top hobbyists, as well.

 

Hopefully, the reason he is cashing out is that his victims finally are getting their long delayed restitution.

 

That would be nice.

 

The truth is an absolute defense against liable or slander, in case anyone is wondering.

 

It's a matter of public record; you're fine. (thumbs u

[VintageComics]

If he's smart, he's gonna parlay his windfall into Walking Dead books

 

Jim

 

[Dr. Balls]

Doug Schmell is a liar and a thief who steals from old defenseless ladies. Why anyone buys from him or even gives him the time of day is beyond me.

Hopefully, the reason he is cashing out is that his victims finally are getting their long delayed restitution.

 

Controversy! I'm curious, why this opinion? (I know nothing of Doug Smell).

 

Google is your friend.

 

Matter of Schmell 2006 NY Slip Op 00326 [27 AD3d 24] January 19, 2006 Per Curiam, J. Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, August, 23, 2006

 

Another interesting link from 2006 - Foolkiller's interview with him that I am currently reading.

[shadroch]

Doug Schmell is a liar and a thief who stole from old defenseless ladies, amonst others. Why anyone buys from him or even gives him the time of day is beyond me.

 

We unfortunately could say the same thing about several other so-calleed top hobbyists,

 

Then those people should be exposed at every possible juncture, as well. I find it amazing that dupchek is a pariah for trimming comics while Schmell is toasted for his collection, derived from stealing from the defenseless, and helping his clients illegally avoid child support.

 

[Dr Chaos]

 

(ps. can someone please program this poll for me, it didn't appear to work)

 

 

Shouldn't the results add up to 100%?

[shadroch]

 

(ps. can someone please program this poll for me, it didn't appear to work)

 

 

Shouldn't the results add up to 100%?

 

 

Rounding errors.

[fantastic_four]

Schmell is toasted for his collection, derived from stealing from the defenseless, and helping his clients illegally avoid child support.

 

I don't really remember--did his clients ever get their money back? I assumed they did, or there would have been a civil suit filed, not just BAR disciplinary action.

[Mark 1]

Schmell is toasted for his collection, derived from stealing from the defenseless, and helping his clients illegally avoid child support.

 

I don't really remember--did his clients ever get their money back? I assumed they did, or there would have been a civil suit filed, not just BAR disciplinary action.

 

My understanding is that he misappropriated funds and was caught. I did not see anything that stated he stole the money and never gave it back.

 

Others may know something different but I was under the impression he was disbarred for not taking care of the money in the right way. Not for stealing it.

 

I could be wrong however.

[Dr. Balls]

Schmell is toasted for his collection, derived from stealing from the defenseless, and helping his clients illegally avoid child support.

 

I don't really remember--did his clients ever get their money back? I assumed they did, or there would have been a civil suit filed, not just BAR disciplinary action.

 

My understanding is that he misappropriated funds and was caught. I did not see anything that stated he stole the money and never gave it back.

 

Others may know something different but I was under the impression he was disbarred for not taking care of the money in the right way. Not for stealing it.

 

I could be wrong however.

 

I was wondering that, too. I would assume that monies have been paid back (albeit delayed).

[fantastic_four]

My understanding is that he misappropriated funds and was caught. I did not see anything that stated he stole the money and never gave it back.

 

Others may know something different but I was under the impression he was disbarred for not taking care of the money in the right way. Not for stealing it.

 

I could be wrong however.

 

That's my understanding as well--he was holding money for clients in escrow, but spent the money himself and replaced it later. I presume he got caught by telling a client he hadn't gotten money from the source of a settlement, his client didn't believe him, and pressed the matter to find that Schmell did get the money but was holding it illegally. So it wasn't entirely theft, but illegal "borrowing"...definitely not the kind of thing that casts him in a good light given what his current business is as a consignor of comics, definitely.

[Mark 1]

If he had stolen the money, he wouldn't have just been disbarred.

 

 

[blazingbob]

Using clients money as a comic line of credit is stealing regardless of you putting it back.

 

I didn't see where there were timelines of the "borrowing" but it doesn't matter.

 

These weren't financial arrangements where the client(s) knew he was borrowing the money. There were no payments back with interest. These were brought to light by people complaining that they were not getting paid when they were supposed to.