Jeff Lichtman Bidding Status

[Archive]

Posted By: Doug Allen

This is just to confirm that my friend Jeff Lichtman has not been banned or blacklisted in anyway from our system. He is good customer who bids well and pays on a timely basis so we have no beef with Jeff. I have communicated this fact to Jeff on more than one occasion. I don't agree with everything he says but he absolutely has a right to his own opinion.

In the future if anyone doesn't get a catalog or has trouble bidding contact me. If nothing else I am very accessible. I provide my e-mail address and have even been pretty liberal in giving out my personal cell phone number on more than one occasion. It never ceases to amaze me when people would prefer to make assumptions and post inaccurate information on a public forum when I am literally a phone call away.

All the best,
Doug Allen
President
Mastro Auctions

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Doug,


That was very nice and very well said. Just so you know, most of the rest of us would be perfectly OK if Jeff were banned from bidding, at least against us.

[Archive]

Posted By: B.C.Daniels

some couch potatoe Bridwell E-92s now Doug!

BcD

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Doug

This board without controversy would be so boring.

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Doug, thanks, much appreciated. I probably wouldn't have jumped to the conclusion had others not emailed me first to tell me of other instances of Mastro banning them. But I'm sure those instances were just miscommunications too.

[Archive]

Posted By: Doug Allen

No problem Jeff....btw not knowing who the other individuals were I can't tell you if they were miscommunications or not. We do ban people just not you.

[Archive]

Posted By: MVSNYC

damn, i was hoping it was true...i could do without jeff's competition...

just kidding. see ya saturday for dinner jeff.


doug- well handled.


regards,
michael sarno

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

I may not be banned but they stopped sending me their catalogue. I think I had every one back to Mastro and Steinbach. And under both my name and through dealers I have done quite a lot with Mastro over the years.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

One fine, classy post, Mr. Allen. There you go, Jeff!!! All is now again right with the world. But it won't last...

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Doug,

Here is a great opportunity.

State your former policy regarding taking creases out of cards and state what it is now.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob

well, it STARTED as a great thread ... could get ugly

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Maybe gypsies stole Jeff's catalog.
<---------

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike Pugeda

One-trick pony...

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve Murray

I think this thread has run its course. Interjecting irrelevant potentially inflamatory BS is unnecessary. If Mr. Crandell has an issue he should start his own thread and let the chips fall where they may.

Oh F@#K, just go ahead and delete this. No one here gives a S@#T.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Mr. Murray,

When we get the esteemed Mr. Allen on I think its fair to ask him questions about what he has said on the board and to explain changes in his companies policies.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian

giddy up

[Archive]

Posted By: Doug Allen

Wow I am "esteemed" that is fantastic!

Jim, I am in the office tomorrow all day so feel free to call me and I will answer any and all your questions as candidly as possible. As a matter of fact lets set up a three way call with you myself and someone else of your choosing and you can feel free to post your conclusions here. Problem is when I answer them here everything gets taken out of context.

I will actually be in New York Wednesday through Friday unfortunately my flight out Friday is before the gathering.

My office number is 630-472-1200..my assistant Sara Kraft can set up a time to talk.

All the best,
The "Esteemed" Doug Allen

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Doug,

Okay--I will try to call you today or tomorrow--Rob will be on with me.

[Archive]

Posted By: B.C.Daniels

are you going to ask him for a catalog?

BcD

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Brian,

Jim's catalog had some minor imperfections and is with Dave at SGC being reviewed for consideration for a 98.

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: Doug Allen

Jim,

That is fine all I ask is you set a time with Sara.

Regards,
Doug

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I will be in Florida for a few days without access to a computer. Judging by this thread, it may be for the better.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

For Doug Allen's sake, I hope he records the conversation.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Rob,

Why?

I have never misrepresented something anyone says. Doug is the one who first said they take creases out of cards and then no commented and then apparently rescinded that policy.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave F

Jim

It seems it would be smart for anybody to record a conversation when someone else is poking around and lifting up the rug for bugs. This is Doug's profession where he makes his living is it not? I'd damn well tape any conversation with you, Rob, or the Pillsbury Doughboy for that matter.

[Archive]

Posted By: John Basilone

"Okay--I will try to call you today or tomorrow--Rob will be on with me."


Damn Jim...I thought you meant Lifson for a second...

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

I did.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

Here's my gratuitous legal advice for the day: Don't ever record a telephone conversation (live vs. voicemail, of course)- without getting the permission of all involved parties first.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Cobby, NY is a one party consent state on recorded calls.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I recorded a conversation between myself and a DEA agent many years ago. It was admissable in Texas. My lawyer told me that anything I am allowed to hear I am allowed to record and it was in fact allowed into court.....The recording backfired but that's another story.....maybe at the NY Dinner this Saturday I will give more details...It's really sort of interesting. regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

That's good knowledge, guys. So then why is it so difficult for the gov't to wire-tap all of these suspects who have been in the news the last several years?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I am no lawyer but maybe it's because they aren't 1st party to the conversations?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Jeez, Leon, did you stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night?

For the government to wiretap a US citizen they need to follow the rules contained within 18 U.S.C. sec. 2516 et seq. And Leon is right: these rules apply to third parties taping calls, not a party to a call. Cobby, this is why cooperating witnesses can record conversations with targets and there is no real way to challenge the admissibility of the tapes -- unlike calls in which a tap is placed on a line.

[Archive]

Posted By: MikeU

Just to continue to keep this off-topic on urban legends:

1. People can not record you without your knowledge. Already discussed.
2. A law enforcement agent of any kind must tell you if asked.

During my undergraduate days, my fraternity had just gotten off 1-years probation when I joined. They had been busted by an undercover ring for preventing the serving of alchohol to 18-20 year olds. As soon as the probation ended, the parties resumed with a "Back From The Dead" bash. The implementation plan was that every person that came in was asked if they were in any way, shape or form part of or affiliated with law enforcement. Since they were binded by law to answer truthfully, the plan was pure genuis.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

People can record telephone calls and conversations without the permission of participants.

Now as to whether that act of recording violates a particular state's law, or the state's evidenciary rules as to admissibility, that may well be problematic. But to declare that it cannot be done isn't correct.


A good practice would be to advise participants in advance that you're doing it. And if you're in a situation where you want to record but not mention it up front, then you probably shouldn't be conversing with that person in the first place.


Goodness.... I'm just glad Jeff's back on the list.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Should we really be having these discussions of complicated legal theory without consulting Peter C.?

[Archive]

Posted By: Cobby33

What if one party to the conversation is in California and the other is New York. The person recording is in Louisiana. How many outs are there in an inning?

[Archive]

Posted By: B.C.Daniels

and see a recording of PSA's grading room!

BcD