• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar

Status
Not open for further replies.
RCAM said:
Another quote from the old prop days:

"As far as Charity goes. Why do people think there needs to be a charity component? This is, after all a business. Do you ask that of every company you deal with? Why shoudl MGM be any different? Do you ask your cable company if they give to charity? Do you ask a portion of your DVD purchases to go to charity? Do you ask that of every business you deal with? And do you give a portion of your salary to charity? Now I do. In fact Propworx bought a home for a homeless family last year. NBC/Universal, who we did the Battlestar Galactica auctions for, gave a portion of their proceeds to The United Way. But why should that be either a requirement or something people expect? I just find that really unrealistic. We are in business, and to automatically assume because this is an auction, a portion of the $ should go to charity baffles me."

What are the odds that happened?
Click to expand...

PropWorx bought a house for someone? And couldn't pay their MGM bill? I thought he had said he personally bought the house, after the PropWorx bankruptcy. Whatever. One more thing raised by him but left ambiguous.
 
Lynsioux said:
I don't think this was linked to in this thread, but everything else has been, so maybe I just missed it. Here is an example of Alec Peters in action, going back to 2009.

http://www.sideshowcollectors.com/f...rning.html?s=5877bd6c3961b088b9c7241fc807285b
Click to expand...
And just a page or so in is a real kicker, and an indication of how Mr. Peters has been BSing customers (again, I guess he would say 'technically as he did create it as a separate business, but again, no mention of the fact HE OWNS the business and the domain; just that:
"None the less, they are much cheaper than many of the auction house shipping services we checked out." - Alec Peters)
http://www.sideshowcollectors.com/f.../48973-bsg-auction-warning-3.html#post1433751
Again, I wish I'd done just a bit more research into Mr. Peters business practices before pledging a dime (in for $75 - the Blu Ray Tier) to what I can only describe as a true grifter.

RCAM said:
Another quote from the old prop days:

"As far as Charity goes. Why do people think there needs to be a charity component? This is, after all a business. Do you ask that of every company you deal with? Why shoudl MGM be any different? Do you ask your cable company if they give to charity? Do you ask a portion of your DVD purchases to go to charity? Do you ask that of every business you deal with? And do you give a portion of your salary to charity? Now I do. In fact Propworx bought a home for a homeless family last year. NBC/Universal, who we did the Battlestar Galactica auctions for, gave a portion of their proceeds to The United Way. But why should that be either a requirement or something people expect? I just find that really unrealistic. We are in business, and to automatically assume because this is an auction, a portion of the $ should go to charity baffles me."

What are the odds that happened?
Click to expand...

One wonders if that was the house where Mr. Peters himself stated his godchildren are now living?
 
Last edited:
Jay said:
I'd imagine the home it bought for the homeless family is the one he self-doxxed that's still in his company's name and supposedly belongs to the family of his godsons'. If they even exist.
Click to expand...
Yes, they do exist, and that is the home in question. It is his old girlfriend who has mad graphic design skills and did some of his catalogs, and her kids by her ex (Alec is their Godfather). But Propworx and himself are all the same to him. He IS the company. I'm surprised he still owns the house--he said he bought it for her. But now it makes sense--he needs to keep her quiet is my guess.
 
Last edited:
Lynsioux said:
Yes, they do exist, and that is the home in question. It is his old girlfriend who has mad graphic design skills and did some of his catalogs, and her kids by her ex (Alec is their Godfather). But Propwork, him, are all the same to him. He IS the company. I'm surprised he still owns the house--he said he bought it for her. But now it makes sense--he needs to keep her quiet is my guess.
Click to expand...

This just gets better and better..........
 
1.jpg

"Who Wouldn't Donate for one of these harmless, gentle creatures."
 
Pretty Funny, I have been banned from Alec's Star Trek Props, Costumes, and Auctions forum, but I still get the emails. Remember, BID AT YOUR OWN VERY CONSIDERABLE RISK.

Hello Bidders!

Our next Star Trek auction will be THIS SATURDAY! The auction will start at 10am PST on March 26, 2016, and will feature over 90 original items including props, costumes, models, set dec, crew gifts and production material. There is something for everyone, including items from the collection of Joe Longo, Gary Hutzel, Ron Moore and Robert Blackman!

LAST WEEK TO REGISTER TO BID!

You can view the live listings and start bidding right now via the link below:

https://www.liveauctioneers.com/catalog/85559_propworx-star-trek-auction-vii/

And you can also download a exclusive PDF version of our catalog here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/id7com5oy5gwiuc/Propworx%20Star%20Trek%20Auction%20VII.pdf?dl=0

For any questions regarding the auction, Liveauctioneers, or registering please feel free to email us at Auctions@propworx.com. See you on March 26th!
Sincerely,
The Propworx Staff

Remember, this is FYI ONLY. BIDDING IS NOT RECOMMENDED.

1x1-trans.png
 
Last edited:
Just when you think you've heard it all, something else pops up!

The possibility that he may have alledgedly misused admin privileges I find underhanded, even if it was strange that people on the particular forum may have discussed possible maximum bids with each other, which seems counterproductive.

By the way, what business is it he supposedly sold for $16 if Propworx went bankrupt?
 
These past practices don't have much to do with the IP infringement case, and intent doesn't have to be proven there, anyway. Still, it goes to truthfulness, which comes in handy when taking a deposition (sworn statement, subject to perjury, yo') and using it to try to settle/build a case for trial.

Of course these statements are hearsay but if they are not being used to prove the veracity of the statement, then they can potentially be admissible at trial. E. g. if plaintiffs use these statements as an indicator of a pattern of making contradictory statements (in particular, self-serving ones), then that would be germane to the matter at hand.

But again, a word to the donors.

Hi, donors! :)

The IP case is not for you. You are not a party to it, and you are not going to benefit if plaintiff wins. But the truth is, you might not benefit much if defense wins, seeing as, by their own admission, Axa does not have enough funds to complete the project. And even the real estate mishigas being proposed with a secret investors group does not appear to be for enough cash to complete the project. Hence the project will either -
  • never be completed (not what you paid for)
  • be completed at a reduced extent (also not what you paid for)
  • be completed as a generic science fiction film (again, not what you paid for) or
  • Axa (in whatever its future form is, if anything) goes to the crowdfunding or investor or even bank loan well to try to make up the shortfall. So, yeah, you'd probably be asked to open your wallets. Yet again.
Given all of this, and what seems to be the building of an established pattern of, at best, contradictory misspeaking, you might want to rethink what is going on here. Don't like it? Aren't sure about it? Then the fine folks at the California Attorney General's Office would be more than happy to help you with your concerns.
 
jespah said:
Hi, donors! :)

The IP case is not for you. You are not a party to it, and you are not going to benefit if plaintiff wins. But the truth is, you might not benefit much if defense wins, seeing as, by their own admission, Axa does not have enough funds to complete the project. And even the real estate mishigas being proposed with a secret investors group does not appear to be for enough cash to complete the project. Hence the project will either -
  • never be completed (not what you paid for)
  • be completed at a reduced extent (also not what you paid for)
  • be completed as a generic science fiction film (again, not what you paid for) or
  • Axa (in whatever its future form is, if anything) goes to the crowdfunding or investor or even bank loan well to try to make up the shortfall. So, yeah, you'd probably be asked to open your wallets. Yet again.
Given all of this, and what seems to be the building of an established pattern of, at best, contradictory misspeaking, you might want to rethink what is going on here. Don't like it? Aren't sure about it? Then the fine folks at the California Attorney General's Office would be more than happy to help you with your concerns.
Click to expand...

I sense a new after school special in the works!! LOL

P.S. I need to run a Kickstarter drive to fund the after school special. Perks TDB. Just an FYI. ;)
 
Last edited:
Admiral Cain said:
There's no allegations. Alec openly admitted to using a proxy bidder in his 2009 BSG live auctions. He justified it by saying essentially "Hey, I could have just bought the items I wanted outright from NBC/Universal, but I wanted the fans to have a crack at it."

Well, yeah but...

1. Alec knew how many other copies of the item were in his inventory, and which ones were in the best condition. He also knew if an item was one of a kind. He never disclosed how many copies he had in his warehouse, we found out as more and more of the items popped up in the eBay auctions held after the live auctions. When questioned in the prop forum, Alec ignored the post. Question too much? Get called a troll, hater, loser, cheapskate and banned.

2. Alec created and had full admin access to the BSG prop forum, where he could see people chatting about how high they were going to go, and presumably could read our PM's to each other about our limits.

3. Alec could afford to bid higher than most of his customers. If Alec won, he didn't have to pay himself the 20% buyer's premium or the shipping costs. On large items the shipping costs were hundreds of dollars.

4. Alec bid on and won the original Cylon War oil painting at $15,000. He saved $3000 on the buyer's premium, and avoided the shipping costs. He knew NBC/Universal wanted a copy as a cast and crew gift. Alec made 100 copies for N/U of the large painting on giclee, then promptly proceeded to churn out an additional 250 paintings, putting them up for sale to fans at $199 each - much to the consternation of N/U. There were rumors they were very pissed off at Alec for doing this without permission. $199 x 250 = $49,750. Makes his original investment of $15,000 look like chump change.

There are many, many, many more "Misdeeds of Propworx" out there in forumland. I just don't know how many people are wanting to dredge it all up again. People generally don't like to admit publicly that they were taken advantage of. I'm still on the fence if I want to reveal all the gory details of my years of prop collecting with Propworx. Stay tuned.
Click to expand...


He admitted it in public at the 2015 Vegas auction - when I asked in front of the audience.
 
I think the company that sold for $16 million was Marketworks, an eBay processing system. I don't know all the details, but he was probably not the only beneficiary of that sale. Or maybe it was the fantasy sports business. He puts his sticky fingers in lots of pies.
 
Search4 said:
He admitted it in public at the 2015 Vegas auction - when I asked in front of the audience.
Click to expand...
Alec posted on the Star Trek Props forum more than once how he justified bidding in ALL his auctions. There was a whole thread along the lines of "Well, we know our dear Alec wouldn't cheat but it looks bad." Anyone remarking further than that would have been banned. He will countenance no "betrayals".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top