Stormrider wrote:Obviously we don't know each other very well; you present a decent arguement but I don't agree 100%. That's fine with me. However I do have a question... are you married, in love with her, or related to her by any chance? I don't mean that in any disrepectful way. I am just trying to understand why you feel that your claims and plausible explanations that seem to stretch just far as mine are dominantly more correct. I am not asking you to accept mine. I am asking because you continue to hound that your explanation is the only correct one. Perhaps you personally know her, which I am perfectly fine with, or perhaps I am too much of a realist with TV.
I'm not related to her in any way. However, what you call "hounding" is me doing research on a person you personally chose to assume upon. And atop of that, I reviewed the topic at hand while speaking up... As in having the actual episode be shown on my television while I was typing out the facts.
And, atop of that, I knew numerous collectors that also sold items related to their collections. I had done first hand business with some of them, with one shop alone ranging from 1991 to today. And another being Mile High Comics, which was when and where I ended my comic collecting and made a brief transition into comic reading (via my local comic shop).
So when it comes to collecting, as I have collected everything from comic books to Transformers, I can vouch for the stuff she says on the show as being valid... And not scripted. Atop of the fact that I have seen every other show she was on, as well as nearly every British auction show that was shown on BBC America.
Plus, also, I will also point out once again that you can disagree all you want. But I did my research. I watched every key point made in the episode. And while you talked about "value"... There is the difference between "emotional value" and "fiscal value."
[And note, if you watched it straight through, she said that the emotional value of a collection is completely fine as long as it does not interfere with anything else in your life.]
So the point is this: What would be the point of him having anything if he kept that Botcon exclusive and became homeless because his business dried up, his parents no longer gave him the money to pay his rent and bills, and his friends/family chose to not be part of his addiction?
That was the point of the entire segment, and I am wondering if you simply chose to not go past the idea that you cannot always stick with the emotional value of a collection when it comes to issues like his.