All-mana mania

Honestly, what Bravado said in his two posts is pretty much right on. Almost word for word what I was going to say on the 2nd. The only thing I really need to add is that there will be no jail time or felony charges - let's not get carried away. Not nearly enough was collectively taken to total values high enough to reach grand theft (felony) level. But that's a lot of possible civil suits, and if each one charges the defendant with court costs and fees, that can add up to an absurd amount of money.

That all being said, I'm still willing to give additional guidance on where their best place to start is.

And finally, I truly, truly hope that it doesn't come down to all of that. All-Mana, PLEASE send those cards out, and I highly recommend for your own sake to pay the .90 cents (or whatever it is) to include tracking on your envelopes. that would let you prove you sent them (to the recipient and to a lawyer if you ever have to).

He has previously lied to me about putting tracking on his envelopes.

Nice info. Thanks to all concerned about this. This is a unique and useful community we have here and trust and security keeps it more than just a database. Peace

I totally agree! I think this community we have in the collective is great! Everyone has some knowledge for something that they can add to pretty much any situation. We have a great family here.

Only $400 or more is considered GT... Gotta be careful out there Tarmys, voices, snapcasters and shocks add up quickly.


Met someone who got charged with 60 days minimum for stealing a few DVDs 😵

Only $400 or more is considered GT... Gotta be careful out there Tarmys, voices, snapcasters and shocks add up quickly.


Met someone who got charged with 60 days minimum for stealing a few DVDs 😵

GT depends on the statute of the state. Here in NY it's $1,000 I believe.

Quote from: Muggywuggy on July 30, 2013, 01:19:22 PM

Only $400 or more is considered GT... Gotta be careful out there Tarmys, voices, snapcasters and shocks add up quickly.


Met someone who got charged with 60 days minimum for stealing a few DVDs 😵

GT depends on the statute of the state. Here in NY it's $1,000 I believe.

Correct. Most states are in the $1000 - $2000 neighborhood. And as far as I'm aware, nowhere even close to that kind of value was involved.

Ok i think this kid deserves punishment as much as anyone else, but let's sit back and be realistic.

We arent going to legally pursue a minor for stealing pieces of paper...
Just think about what was actually stolen. No matter how much starcity or tcgplayer values them at, they are still pieces of paper.

Just thought i'd throw that out there seeing all the extensive legal research some of you have put into this.

Ok i think this kid deserves punishment as much as anyone else, but let's sit back and be realistic.

We arent going to legally pursue a minor for stealing pieces of paper...
Just think about what was actually stolen. No matter how much starcity or tcgplayer values them at, they are still pieces of paper.

Just thought i'd throw that out there seeing all the extensive legal research some of you have put into this.

Is this really your argument? It isn't always about the value of what was lost, it's the principle of feeling cheated, the wasted time, etc. besides, going by what you said a $100 bill is just a paper, who cares what the FED values it at, it's still a piece of "paper"

And offer $50 prizes to contest winners.

50$ prizes and he can't come through on his trades? He obviously doesn't plan on sending

Quote from: Slenderbro on July 30, 2013, 10:47:10 PM

Ok i think this kid deserves punishment as much as anyone else, but let's sit back and be realistic.

We arent going to legally pursue a minor for stealing pieces of paper...
Just think about what was actually stolen. No matter how much starcity or tcgplayer values them at, they are still pieces of paper.

Just thought i'd throw that out there seeing all the extensive legal research some of you have put into this.

Is this really your argument? It isn't always about the value of what was lost, it's the principle of feeling cheated, the wasted time, etc. besides, going by what you said a $100 bill is just a paper, who cares what the FED values it at, it's still a piece of "paper"

Wow, that comparison is awful. $100 bill is legal tender that has been assigned a value by the government. It's worth $100, that will not change until the Feds say otherwise.

Magic cards are trading cards. They don't have a set price. They certainly get an MSRP, but it's up to the retailer/owner to decide what they seling price is. In theory, each card is worth about 20 cents (packs are $3.50/15).

Side note, legal US tender is made of "paper" perse, but a blend of cotton and linens!

Quote from: EvACiDe on July 31, 2013, 12:18:38 AM

Quote from: Slenderbro on July 30, 2013, 10:47:10 PM

Ok i think this kid deserves punishment as much as anyone else, but let's sit back and be realistic.

We arent going to legally pursue a minor for stealing pieces of paper...
Just think about what was actually stolen. No matter how much starcity or tcgplayer values them at, they are still pieces of paper.

Just thought i'd throw that out there seeing all the extensive legal research some of you have put into this.

Is this really your argument? It isn't always about the value of what was lost, it's the principle of feeling cheated, the wasted time, etc. besides, going by what you said a $100 bill is just a paper, who cares what the FED values it at, it's still a piece of "paper"

Wow, that comparison is awful. $100 bill is legal tender that has been assigned a value by the government. It's worth $100, that will not change until the Feds say otherwise.

First of all it's the FED not the Feds, the FBI has nothing to do with it. And second, yes it has been assigned a value but so have the magic cards and those also don't change until wizards says otherwise. so that seems like an accurate comparison to me.

P.S. I know money is made out of cotton that's why paper was in quotes.

I didn't think wizards set the price of cards. I thought it was set by people buying them up more than they could get supply for

I didn't think wizards set the price of cards. I thought it was set by people buying them up more than they could get supply for

They don't set the price of cards but can easily affect them by hording cards or only printing a limited amount of cards.

Quote from: Birdbrain on July 31, 2013, 05:42:59 PM

I didn't think wizards set the price of cards. I thought it was set by people buying them up more than they could get supply for

They don't set the price of cards but can easily affect them by hording cards or only printing a limited amount of cards.

Bingo.

EDIT: lol someone gave me -karma for that statement, really? All I was doing was showing how it was an accurate comparison

Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on July 31, 2013, 05:47:29 PM

Quote from: Birdbrain on July 31, 2013, 05:42:59 PM

I didn't think wizards set the price of cards. I thought it was set by people buying them up more than they could get supply for

They don't set the price of cards but can easily affect them by hording cards or only printing a limited amount of cards.

Bingo.

EDIT: lol someone gave me -karma for that statement, really? All I was doing was showing how it was an accurate comparison

You didn't show anything, just your opinion. You didn't add to the discussion in valuable way. Your post was redundant. Perhaps someone Didn't like that.

Quote from: EvACiDe on July 31, 2013, 06:03:25 PM

Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on July 31, 2013, 05:47:29 PM

Quote from: Birdbrain on July 31, 2013, 05:42:59 PM

I didn't think wizards set the price of cards. I thought it was set by people buying them up more than they could get supply for

They don't set the price of cards but can easily affect them by hording cards or only printing a limited amount of cards.

Bingo.

EDIT: lol someone gave me -karma for that statement, really? All I was doing was showing how it was an accurate comparison

You didn't show anything, just your opinion. You didn't add to the discussion in valuable way. Your post was redundant. Perhaps someone Didn't like that.

Technically I did show it and as for it being redundant, how? I wasn't reiterating any other point I was making because it was the FIRST point I made. Thus according to the definition of redundancy, that post was not redundant. I didn't add to the discussion in a "valuable" way? Then I'd say about 50% of the posts here didn't either, including yours. I'm not trying to be a smarta**, just defending my position.