Movie Prop Collecting with Jason DeBord's Original Prop Blog Film & TV Prop, Costume, Hollywood Memorablia Pop Culture Resource

The Red Flags of Authenticity

By

Article Summary: A discussion and analysis of various seller tactics I’ve witnessed over the years, and my names for them and reactions.  These are all potentially problematic marketing techniques that should not be dismissed by the discerning original prop collector.

The Red Flags of Authenticity

One thing original prop hobbyists encounter frequently, in the pursuit of original props, is what I call “The Red Flags of Authenticity”.

What are the red flags? A variety of techniques and tactics used by the sellers of purportedly “original” items in order to bolster authenticity, supplant it, or manufacture it wholesale. Of course, the motives range from puffing to innocent misrepresentation to negligent misrepresentation to fraud [see article Fraud, Misrepresentation, Puffing].

In some instances, the piece might actually be an authentic and legitimate “original” piece [see articles What is “Original”? for the tests of originality and Original Prop Provenance and Authenticity, Part I for a primer on authenticity].

But these techniques and tactics I am outlining are generally irrelevant to the actual tests of originality and don’t substantively address provenance and authenticity. More, in my opinion, they make the piece questionable overall, in that if such tactics as necessary, the piece must be lacking in provenance.

THE RED FLAGS OF AUTHENTICITY

Star Owned It

  • The Tactic: A claim is made that the piece in question is brokered for or was formerly owned by the star or principal from the film or television show in question.
  • Reality Check: This frequently is paired with the “Story Time” tactic. If true, prior ownership, exclusive of other information and facts, does not mean that the piece is original or authentic. The tests of originality are very specific, and prior ownership from a person from the production does not alone guarantee it is original. Stars and principals of the production own replicas, crew gifts, etc.
  • Example: A prop maker in the industry just this week told me he worked on the action film of the spring, _________, and he is making prop _______ masks, post production replicas (i.e. not original) which are exactly like the originals for the director of the film and others. Now, down the line, said director might look to sell his masks – replica masks – and what is to stop the future potential broker/seller from marketing these exact replicas as original, by virtue of the fact that they came directly from the director of the film? [see article The Dirty Little Secret of the Hobby]

Star Touched It

  • The Tactic: The item offered includes a photo of a star or principal from the film or television show literally touching or holding or standing adjacent to the piece.
  • Reality Check: This plays on the collector’s attraction to original props in that they are “used” by the stars in the production (i.e. here is proof that the piece is being used by the star). Just because someone was able to obtain access to a star at a convention or other gathering and got him or her to hold or pose with a piece does not guarantee it is original.

Star Autographed It

  • The Tactic: The piece in question has the signature(s) of a star/stars/principals from the film or television show. Typically done with black Sharpie or silver metallic pen. It is implied that the star himself/herself has authenticated the piece by signing it.
  • Reality Check: As with all Star Power tactics in this series, a star autographing a piece does not in any way prove that a piece is authentic. Stars sign most anything you put in front of them – replica props, posters, napkins… And, funny enough, many original prop collectors feel autographs actually devalue original props, especially if it is prominently seen on the piece. But, in talking with collectors who have shown original or suspected original pieces to the stars that used them, more often than not they remember next to nothing meaningful about the piece. You could just as easily hand them a replica and get a false positive in regards to authenticity. But then again, people “want to believe”… [see article Trend: “I Want to Believe”]

The Look

  • Tactic: The offering looks like anther one that is original, therefore, this one is original too.
  • Reality Check: Obviously faulty logic, but it sounds good. And people love photos. This tactic is frequently employed by eBay sellers.
  • Example: Last week there was an auction in which a dealer purchased a knife for $15 that was “used in stage plays” and relisted it himself a few days later as “used in the Harrison Ford movie Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom” and sold it for $825. I did correspond with the dealer (buyer and reseller) to see if there were any elements of authenticity apart from the fact that it looked like authenticated daggers used in the film, and received no compelling information that confirmed provenance.

Name Dropping

  • Tactic: Name Dropping is when the seller of a piece tells you with whom he is acquainted and/or of activities in the entertainment industry – either or both as evidence that the piece is authentic. It does not go beyond name dropping, in that if he tells you the VIP owned it, it would fall under “Owned It” or if the VIP is somehow incorporated into an actual “story” about the piece, it would default to “Story Time”. In this case, the mere mention of a star is considered enough.
  • Reality Check: Well, name dropping could speak to sources, but usually, sellers are fairly private about such information in that, unless it was a one time opportunity, revealing a source opens the possibility of other competitors or collectors contacting the source directly to acquire pieces and thus circumvent the seller in question [see article The Dirty Little Secret of the Hobby]. As is typical, names are dropped to bolster the importance and connections and access of the seller. But, as noted, it usually has little to nothing to do with the authenticity of the piece.

Adoption (Grapevine/Finger Pointing/Hold Blameless/Pass The Buck)

  • Tactic: The seller presents himself as overly forthcoming in noting that someone else sold him the piece as original – or – an unidentified third party authenticated the piece as original.
  • Reality Check: Assume the worst scenario outlined is the best possible outcome. In some cases, it is likely the “previous seller” or unnamed third party authenticator doesn’t exist, doesn’t have the necessary expertise, or didn’t have possession of sufficient facts and information to determine the piece authentic. However, since the seller puts the authentication on a third party, he essentially puts the prospective buyer on notice that it may not be legitimate – he is simply passing on what has (supposedly) been explained to him. Sometimes this is the result of the new seller being a previously burned buyer, passing on his own misfortune to a new undiscerning collector. So, while in some ways consistent with “Story Time”, it has it’s own category because of these variables.

Story Time (Original Storyteller)

  • Tactic: The seller weaves a tale of epic proportions, and the prop actually becomes a prop of the story about the prop, as well as whatever it is supposed to actually be from.
  • Reality Check: This is my personal favorite. It requires some actual creativity on the part of the seller, so it’s interesting to see what they come up with. Of course, it rarely speaks to actual provenance and authenticity, but is mere window dressing and distraction [see article Trend: “I Want to Believe”]. It of course frequently borrows from one or more of the “Star”-related tactics, in that many times it involves and incorporates a star from the production in some way. However, it can just be a story about ownership, which isn’t as entertaining as the”Star”-based variety of Story Time, but is Story Time none the less.

Story Time 2: Revenge of the Story (Second Hand Storyteller)

  • Tactic: The same as Story Time, but one storyteller removed. The story is passed down from seller to buyer, transforming buyer himself into a seller. Such is the power of Story Time.
  • Reality Check: Story Time 2 can in many ways be more entertaining than Story Time, in that it is never as polished as the original, and elements get changed and/or left out, so it’s typically even more nonsensical and irrelevant to the actual prop.

Dumpster Provenance (Diving for Props)

  • Tactic: This piece was “rescued” from the trash on site at the shoot/production.
  • Reality Check: This is a very useful tactic, in that it is versatile. Not only does it implicate a “voiceless” source (i.e. the trash), it concurrently (theoretically) absolves the seller of any charges of the property being stolen – the studio threw it away. Further, it presents the seller as the savior of a film artifact that the evil studio simply tossed away. This is a tactic frequently employed in high profile pieces in public auctions as a preemptive defense against studio claims that the piece is stolen. Frequently paired with “Story Time”.

Looking Backward (I Sold Something Real Once)

  • Tactic: The seller points to other past successes to serve as proof that the current offering, too, is authentic.
  • Reality Check: To become a seller of any repute, it helps to periodically sell something absolutely authentic. Sometimes a seller will point to past impressive pieces sold as evidence that the current offering and all offerings are authentic. Every truly authentic original prop or wardrobe should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Just because a seller sold something impressive, it shouldn’t distract from the matter at hand, and certainly shouldn’t be THE criteria for accepting any unrelated piece as authentic at face value.

Charity Pricing

  • Tactic: The seller claims the item is offered as an opportunity (sometimes for “serious collectors” only) to buy it for much lower than the seller can get at another time and place – one would be foolish not to buy it. Note: Not to be confused with Charity Marketing, which relates to actual charity organizations.
  • Reality Check: If the seller truly believes a significantly higher value can be realized via a different venue, why is it being sold for less in the venue he has chosen and why has he chosen it?

Charity Marketing

  • Tactic: This tactic plays on people’s sympathy and emotion. If the seller is giving a portion of the proceeds to charity, it is assumed he is only capable of selling original pieces described accurately and truthfully. Note: Not to be confused with Charity Pricing, which relates to “charity” in relation to price offered to the potential buyer, not actual charity organizations
  • Reality Check: In the practice of selling questionable pieces, since the profit margins are so high, it’s likely that Charity Marketing

The Guarantee Arsenal (Lifetime Guarantees, Money Back Guarantees, COAs, LOAs, Stamped, Notarized, Delivered)

  • Tactic: The seller “guarantees” his pieces via inclusion of a Certificate of Authenticity, Letter of Authenticity, and/or other vague, boilerplate, or non specific paperwork (stamped, signed, notarized, etc.). Some sellers also offer a “money back” guarantee and/or a “lifetime” guarantee and/or an unspecified “guarantee”.
  • Reality Check: In other hobbies, sometimes COAs can mean something. In original props, it is in most cases not the end all, be all of authenticity. Rather than an outline of provenance, many buyers are quick to accept any variety of “official sounding” documents that can be produced with a PC and an inkjet printer in a matter of minutes, and are often of no substance. In addition, I’m always amused at the notion of a “lifetime” guarantee. Who’s lifetime? As well as money back guarantees. If authenticity were certain, why would it be necessary?

Misleading COA

  • Tactic: Writing something so carefully that is factual but is easily misinterpreted in a trumped up manner; it makes the piece itself transcend it’s actual history to become the trumped up piece without careful reading and consideration of other factors.
  • Reality Check: Careful and deliberate use, combination, and the order of words is constructed to confuse potential buyers and/or trump up the piece. In other words, at first blush, to make it sound like it is more than it is. In my opinion, this is often outright misrepresentation, but one has to be able to prove the intent of the seller to show it is purposeful and to what degree [see article Fraud, Misrepresentation, Puffing].

Logo Waving (Group Joining, Fancy Acronym Citing, Authenticity by Association)

  • Tactic: This is a highly popularized tactic among professional dealers. Fund and/or join a “group” with lofty, ethically sound goals and objectives. Create a cool name with a clever acronym and a spiffy logo. Talk about how you are anti-fraud, the group has oversight over bad dealers, etc. Essentially conveying the message: I’m a good guy – I’ve got the logo and I’ve joined the group – all I can do is sell legitimate pieces.
  • Reality Check: These various groups hold no weight among many seasoned collectors. A few are invented by the more questionable dealers in the hobby, and usually have “members” I’d never personally buy from. Instead of elevating the bad, in my view, the bad drags any legit dealers down a few notches by association. Anyway, generally a marketing gimmick, and of no substance nor action. I’ve never heard of a single instance in which such an organization has acted in a specific way to promote authenticity or curb fraud or police fellow dealers. Case study? Example? Moreover, in other professions, oversight is provided by a body independent of and apart from those whose activities are monitored and reviewed. Who watches the watchmen and all that…

Crime Fighter

  • Tactic: Akin to “Logo Waving”, but in this case, the seller has gone solo/vigilante. The seller makes general remarks upon the issue of fakes and frauds in his marketing description, as though such conviction must mean his offerings are legitimate by default – he’s just not going to stay silent any longer.
  • Reality Check: Some toothless and vague raging against the machine is not compelling and often a self serving advertisement to trust in his pieces. Again, as with all of these tactics, it does not speak to the actual authenticity of the piece offered.

The Golden Touch

  • Tactic: The seller is ________ and his reputation proceeds him. Everything he sells is good, because he is the seller. The marketing description is typically “selling” the seller, and it is nearly all about him or his company, not the piece.
  • Reality Check: It is, essentially, an attempt to manufacture credibility and reputation, under the principle of saying something often enough, loud enough, and with enough confidence, that it just might be true. If someone has to tell you how great they are, it probably isn’t the case, and it certainly doesn’t equate to blanket authenticity as a given on any piece he may offer to sell.

Beyond Reproach (The Prop Demigod)

  • Tactic: Of course, this is getting a bit more into nuance, and often the Beyond Reproach seller incorporates many of the Dealer Power tactics in a multifaceted display of gross distraction from the piece under consideration (the magnitude of the claims, arrogance, and tactics is often in direct relation to the hoped for high value sale and resultant from the complete lacking of believability in the authenticity of the piece). This seller is so beyond reproach that questions are unwarranted and will not be addressed in any fashion; in fact, the seller reserves the right to retaliation by lawsuit and is suggested as a consequence for any public discussion of the offering. Similar to “Golden Touch” but more concerted and aggressive.
  • Reality Check: This is probably the number one red flag in the hobby. Authenticity through ego, aggression, and threats.
  • Example: One dealer has at times posted preemptive legal threats for merely discussing their offerings on discussion forums. The following are actual excerpts from the marketing descriptions in past eBay auctions:

“FOR THOSE OF YOU GETTING ALL HOT AND BOTHERED ON THE FORUM’S, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, DIRECT THEM TO US, WE ARE WATCHING AND ANY LIBELLOUS POSTS WILL BE ADDRESSED!”

“We expect this to end up around all the usual forums which we do monitor, so if you have any doubts about the originality or our reputation, email us first, libellous posts will be dealt with firmly!”

Consider this a “working draft”. I’m sure over time I will add to and enhance this list. Feel free to use it as reference material in talking about new offerings that pop up every day. These tactics are named and defined as a result of having seen them employed countless times over the years. In fact, I’m fairly certain I’ve seen one dealer in particular use all of them.

Jason De Bord