[FEB 12 UPDATE] !RETURNED! - Dell’Otto
5 5

211 posts in this topic

50 posts
53 minutes ago, Khazano said:

According to his FB page, the buyer is a kid (looks very early 20s) who recently started working at In and Out Burger.  That doesnt really strike me as the type of collector buying $4k+ Del Otto paintings... 

I was going to say that, but didn't want to sound negative on someone working at a fast food restaurant. It would be possible to save up for such things if working at fast food place, but there probably are other priorities. I know if I was working at a Burger King I wouldn't be trying to be Dell'Otto painting - it would be more about trying to afford a car or save up money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 posts
1 hour ago, Blastaar said:

Sure hope he does the right thing and doesn't toss it in the trash. Would you consider letting him know that no charges will be filled if he cops to it and returns the art? 

Id really like for him to do the right thing, and return the art.  I understand that people make mistakes, and some situations are more desperate than others.  It's a great hobby, and I'd hate for a decision made in his early 20's to rule him out for life.

I'm upset, don't get me wrong, but I can forgive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,768 posts
3 minutes ago, RS88 said:

Id really like for him to do the right thing, and return the art.  I understand that people make mistakes, and some situations are more desperate than others.  It's a great hobby, and I'd hate for a decision made in his early 20's to rule him out for life.

I'm upset, don't get me wrong, but I can forgive.

Make sure he knows that, and that you will not pursue any legal charges if he returns the art promptly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
990 posts
6 minutes ago, RS88 said:

Id really like for him to do the right thing, and return the art.  I understand that people make mistakes, and some situations are more desperate than others.  It's a great hobby, and I'd hate for a decision made in his early 20's to rule him out for life.

I'm upset, don't get me wrong, but I can forgive. 

spoken like a true canuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532 posts
2 hours ago, Dokstarr said:

I was going to say that, but didn't want to sound negative on someone working at a fast food restaurant. It would be possible to save up for such things if working at fast food place, but there probably are other priorities. I know if I was working at a Burger King I wouldn't be trying to be Dell'Otto painting - it would be more about trying to afford a car or save up money.

Its more the combination of youth + fast food, which was a relatively new job too.  He hasnt even had time to squirrel the money away.  I wasnt making great money in 2006 when at age 24 I dropped 4k on a cover. (The most Id ever spent on a singular piece at that time by a mile.) But I had a track record of a few years in this hobby under my belt, a pile of art that lucky matured nicely,  and I was damn good at playing the flipping game. So I made due and knew what I was doing.  This guy is literally someone straight outta left field without a drawing to his name. The only way I can see him affording this, is because he sells a fair bit of books online that he gets signed at cons. I guess it is possible if over the last few years he was REALLY disciplined to save up the dough... But n'ah... My opinion after a deep dive into his FB. (Cause clearly, who needs to work right now? (:) This is some dumb kid, who got a hairbrained idea, and thought he could pull off the hustle of his life. The law should hopefully put enough fear into him to do the right thing.  

Edited by Khazano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 posts
2 hours ago, Khazano said:

Its more the combination of youth + fast food, which was a relatively new job too.  He hasnt even had time to squirrel the money away.  I wasnt making great money in 2006 when at age 24 I dropped 4k on a cover. (The most Id ever spent on a singular piece at that time by a mile.) But I had a track record of a few years in this hobby under my belt, a pile of art that lucky matured nicely,  and I was damn good at playing the flipping game. So I made due and knew what I was doing.  This guy is literally someone straight outta left field without a drawing to his name. The only way I can see him affording this, is because he sells a fair bit of books online that he gets signed at cons. I guess it is possible if over the last few years he was REALLY disciplined to save up the dough... But n'ah... My opinion after a deep dive into his FB. (Cause clearly, who needs to work right now? (:) This is some dumb kid, who got a hairbrained idea, and thought he could pull off the hustle of his life. The law should hopefully put enough fear into him to do the right thing.  

I think this is absolutely correct.  And I remember being dumb when I thought I was smart around that age.  My fingers are crossed,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,712 posts
15 hours ago, Khazano said:

This is some dumb kid, who got a hairbrained idea, and thought he could pull off the hustle of his life. The law should hopefully put enough fear into him to do the right thing.  

This is how i read the situation as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
272 posts

 

If you don't receive the CAF Weekly Newsletter, Bill Cox mentioned this transaction and provided 2 links.

@RS88's

https://www.comicartfans.com/galleryroom.asp?gsub=195772

and a new pinned CAF forum topic, Best Practices When Buying/Selling/Trading Original Comic Art

https://www.comicartfans.com/forums/comic_art_collecting/CAF_announcements/threads/4346

 

Edited by Will_K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27,441 posts
54 posts
4 minutes ago, mister_not_so_nice said:

I wonder if mom & dad know what jr has been up to?

Amazing question! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,186 posts
3 minutes ago, RS88 said:

Amazing question! 

Might be worth doing some research and sending a few letters.    I'd be pretty sure he'd at least brag at home of his new purchase.  "What did is cost?  Not much. $300."   But if they saw the original, they'd know you were telling the truth and may help make things right.  

And he works at a LCS or does sig witnesses?   Do we know which comic shop?  Is he authorized to witnessing by CGC? Do they know about this?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
990 posts

you can find him on the 'gram under king_collectables 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
384 posts
18 minutes ago, Sideshow Bob said:

He is putting up a little bit of resistance, using the "friends and family" option on paypal as the red herring.

https://insta-stalker.com/post/BtVB9XdB9yo/

Someone should bring up the fact on one of his accounts that he originally purchased the item for $4,500 and if they think it is out of character for that individual to make such a HUGE purchase. Calling that out might get the folks on his side talking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
149 posts
1 hour ago, Sideshow Bob said:

He is putting up a little bit of resistance, using the "friends and family" option on paypal as the red herring.

https://insta-stalker.com/post/BtVB9XdB9yo/

That's apparently a week old. I hope seeing Bill Cox on CAF believe RS88 has made it sink in for the buyer that his story doesn't hold water, and this is going to hang over him unless he owns up to what really happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,708 posts

Something just occurred to me. (I feel like Michael Corleone when he saw the rebel blow himself up with a captain of the Cuban military command in Godfather II.) Why would the "buyer" in this case ship back the 8-1/2" x 11" color photo copy of the art back via a giant package designed to fit the original larger painting? He's literally overpaying postage to ship back the art in a larger package to trick the seller into accepting it so as to complete the Paypal refund process. (Unless Paypal requires you to ship it back in the same package, in which case never mind!). That piece of information, alone, would be enough for me to believe the seller over the buyer in this dispute. There would be absolutely no reason in the world to ship the piece back in the larger package, unless you were trying to scam the person on the other end.

UPDATE:

If, on the other hand, the buyer did ship the 8-1/2" x 11" print/copy back in a regular, appropriate-sized package, why would the seller accept it if he knew who it was from, and knew it was supposed to be the returned art? (It was tracked, right?). It would seem pretty easy to verify the package sizes, and shipping labels, etc. (By the same token, it would make no sense for the seller to send a smaller print vs the larger painting in a larger package that fits the painting. He gets no benefit out of it, because the buyer would find out it's not the painting and have the ability to ship it back via the Paypal case process.)

 

Edited by PhilipB2k17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,758 posts
58 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

There would be absolutely no reason in the world to ship the piece back in the larger package, unless you were trying to scam the person on the other end.

Such silliness. Apply that statement to the "seller" on the first trip out, works both ways and is thus meaningless in isolation. Silliness.

That notwithstanding, I believe OP on general principle unless other corroborated contrary facts come to light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 posts
5 hours ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

Something just occurred to me. (I feel like Michael Corleone when he saw the rebel blow himself up with a captain of the Cuban military command in Godfather II.) Why would the "buyer" in this case ship back the 8-1/2" x 11" color photo copy of the art back via a giant package designed to fit the original larger painting? He's literally overpaying postage to ship back the art in a larger package to trick the seller into accepting it so as to complete the Paypal refund process. (Unless Paypal requires you to ship it back in the same package, in which case never mind!). That piece of information, alone, would be enough for me to believe the seller over the buyer in this dispute. There would be absolutely no reason in the world to ship the piece back in the larger package, unless you were trying to scam the person on the other end.

UPDATE:

If, on the other hand, the buyer did ship the 8-1/2" x 11" print/copy back in a regular, appropriate-sized package, why would the seller accept it if he knew who it was from, and knew it was supposed to be the returned art? (It was tracked, right?). It would seem pretty easy to verify the package sizes, and shipping labels, etc. (By the same token, it would make no sense for the seller to send a smaller print vs the larger painting in a larger package that fits the painting. He gets no benefit out of it, because the buyer would find out it's not the painting and have the ability to ship it back via the Paypal case process.)

 

One of the first thing that PayPal checks in a dispute is if the original weight of the package matches the weight sent back.  Any difference I could claim that he sent back a dead fish if it was heavier than what was sent down - or lighter I could say he sent packaged air.  This guy knew what he was doing and has likely heard how the scam works and tried it for the first time, sadly, on me.

In all honesty, I did accept the package back in the thought that maybe I wasn’t experiencing my first screw job in OA trading/buying/selling.  I could have refused it but I didn’t know if he was actually sending back the original.

Edited by RS88

Share this post


Link to post
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
5 5