RIP Roma?

[DonnaML]

4 hours ago, Heliodromus said:

Salman Alshdafait was previously indicted of smuggling in 2011 (at same time he was incorporating Athena with Beale), and still at it in 2017 when he appears in the BBC Gaza doucumentary as the on-site contact and go-between to Beale.

Alman Mohammed Ramdan also has a criminal record for antiquities smuggling and in 2011 was listed as a fugitive on the run, location unknown.

https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/ice-hsi-agents-bust-international-smuggling-operation

As well as all the smuggling and criminal associates, there is also the day-to-day modus operandi of Roma in habitually fabricating "From the collection of an European gentleman" (or English gentleman post-Brexit) provenance for their auction listings. I saw this myself a number of times with coins bought on eBay then flipped a month or two later in this way.

Another indication of "the Roma way" was their response when i pointed out the prior state (which in retrospect I assume they were well aware of - presumably having bought it themselves) of this coin:

No reply to me for having pointed it out - just a weasel-worded correction to the listing.

As a coin dealer you seem to have a very jaundiced view if you really think that this is typical behavior and business associates of everyone in the business.

Slightly off-topic, but I had no idea that Salem Alsh (as he signs his emails from Athena) was ever accused of anything more nefarious than applying artificial desert patina to late Roman bronze coins, and some sort of mysterious blue-tinged patina to most AR denarii.

Nor did I realize that Richard Beale was on Athena's Board, and perhaps also had an ownership interest. No longer, I assume.

 

Edited May 4 by DonnaML

[Phil Anthos]

30 minutes ago, DonnaML said:

Slightly off-topic, but I had no idea that Salem Alsh (as he signs his emails from Athena) was ever accused of anything more nefarious than applying artificial desert patina to late Roman bronze coins, and some sort of mysterious blue-tinged patina to most AR denarii.

Nor did I realize that Richard Beale was on Athena's Board, and perhaps also had an ownership interest. No longer, I assume.

 

My memory is vague, but wasn't he accused of smuggling a sarcophagus in pieces about 10-12 years ago? He and the guy who changed his company name to Windsor Antiquities? I don't remember him being convicted though.

[DonnaML]

4 hours ago, Hrefn said:

AND, the worm turns.  (Not you, Metapontius.)  Provenance is a double-edged sword.   You have a treasured coin which can be traced back to Sir Arthur Evans’ collection.  The find site is recorded in the numismatic literature.  Nothing prevents a national government from asserting a claim of ownership.  Your own government, as signatory to treaties on cultural patrimony, may actively assist in confiscating your coin and sending it back to wherever.

it is a common complaint that provenance is continually being lost, as dealers do not bother to include old tickets and similar information when reselling a coin.  How ironic if those careless dealers were doing us a favor.

(I know, I love provenance information as much as any of you.  The whole idea of cultural patrimony has numerous logical flaws.  Sadly, none of those flaws guarantee the information could not be used against us.)

When Roma began disbursing the Mare Nostrum hoard, they proclaimed future publication of a book detailing the contents, and no doubt the history and significance of the coins.  I feel confident we will never see such a book, not because of Roma’s dissolution, but because someone realized the book would serve admirably as an infallible guide to a nation bent on repatriating the coins, as well as an admission of guilt tout court.  

And once again the policies which are in place ostensibly to preserve knowledge operate to obliterate it as completely as possible.  

Regarding treaties, your assertion about this hypothetical situation is completely untrue insofar as the USA and collectors in the USA are concerned. Ancient coins are exempt from the USA treaty with Italy if they were outside Italy before 19 Jan. 2011. For Greece, the applicable  date is 1 Dec. 2011. For Egypt, 5 Dec 2016. Thus, an Arthur Evans provenance -- or any other pre-2011 or 2016 provenance depending on which country is the theoretical claimant -- can only help, not hurt, an American collector attempting to import a coin (or who has already imported it).

Of course, a different set of rules applies if the claim by a country is theft, whether from a museum or other institution, or from an illegal excavation. Here again, though, issues of proof of such theft aside, the older and more well-known a coin's pedigree, the better for the USA collector given applicable statutes of limitation -- and given the availability of laches as a defense even if a claim is made within the relevant limitations period. 

Edited May 4 by DonnaML

[John Conduitt]

53 minutes ago, Hrefn said:

There is absolutely no guarantee that will continue to be true.  A foreign government could change its laws to assert ownership of material exported 100 or 200 years ago.  After all, if it is part of the cultural patrimony, the date of its discovery has absolutely no relevance. It either is cultural patrimony, or it is not.  The date of export, and whether that export is legal, is completely arbitrary, and is unrelated to the object itself.  

As to why the Mare Nostrum hoard would need repatriating?  (Aside from the fact that I am unsure which country would get the honor,) do you think the hoard is insufficiently historic to be considered for repatriation?  I think that would be a hard case to make.  

Whether the discoverers of the Mare Nostrum hoard “took” the hoard illegally or not is an interesting question, and I suppose would apply to the laws applying to the location at the time.  For all I know, it was found in international waters.  If laws were subsequently passed to arrogate ownership of such discoveries to the state, I personally would have a difficult time accepting the validity of such an ex post facto dictat.

Not that I am advocating repatriating the Mare Nostrum hoard!  Because I disagree with the notion of repatriation entirely.  If an object is important enough to a nation that they earnestly desire it, they can buy it on the open market just as anyone else would have to do.  (Is this not in practice what the UK system does, albeit the Government does get the right of first refusal.)   

Objects which are stolen are another matter entirely.  If I burgle the British Museum, I agree the Museum has a right to recover its property.  But if an Anatolian peasant stumbles on a lost coin and sells it to a collector in Paris,  I fail to see the crime.  I think taking the coin away from the French collector without any compensation would be a crime.  

The only way repatriation schemes work is if one accepts that every undiscovered treasure in a country is the property of the government, thus its removal is theft.   Which I submit is a completely absurd notion.  By that reasoning, a gold torc excavated in southern Ireland is owned by the government in London in 1915, but in Dublin in 1925.   If the Nazis had succeeded in WWII and taken all of the British Isles (yes, I know the Irish Republic stayed neutral, but work with me here,) then newly discovered treasures would go to Berlin.  Does that not suggest a problem with this whole concept?  

My point is that governments are quite mutable.  National cultural patrimony is an absurd notion on which to assert a moral claim to property.  

What if the desire of the government is to eradicate all traces of the past?  This is not a theoretical consideration; it was actual policy in Communist China during my lifetime, and remains a policy preference amongst some more fundamentalist Islamists.  Assume your country has a cultural treaty with Afghanistan.  Do you think it would be wise to send some Buddhist sculptures illegally exported from Afghanistan back to the Taliban?  Do your notions of what is appropriate now trump the legal right of Afghanis to recover their cultural patrimony, and do with it as they wish?   Or will you return those sculptures to their certain destruction?  

The whole notion of national governments asserting ownership of every undiscovered treasure in their jurisdiction is either a medieval holdover of the rights of kings (apologies, John, but you know this is true,) or an unwarranted overreach of a totalitarian state.  There is no reason to consider the notion just, or indispensable, or even a matter of good intentions.  

If countries wish to prohibit export of certain goods, that is their right.  I would argue they are only fostering the creation of a black market, but governments are allowed to do stupid things.  But once the object has left their jurisdiction, and provided it was not a stolen good in the narrow (British Museum theft) sense, not “the government owns everything” sense, I do not believe cultural patrimony claims have any moral merit at all.  And consent to any treaties to the contrary should be withdrawn.  

 

They could, but we'd have a lot more to worry about than coins if our governments agreed to retrospective claims. A dictator could requisition all our possessions for whatever reasons they like.

No I meant that the Mare Nostrum hoard was either legally exported or it wasn't. If it was in international waters, others have already been down that route.

I also do not agree with repatriation and prefer the UK/Dutch system. I don't agree with the idea that the Anatolian peasant gets nothing if they find a coin, but even in the UK, you can't just sell what you find. The landowner is actually the person with the rights to the object, not the peasant, and it has to be reported to the government, who can buy it at a price they decide (albeit with some negotiation based on evidence). The fact that your collector in Paris would lose their money is no different to any other sale where the seller does not have title to the object. Caveat emptor. But they would still have recourse against the seller, as they would with any other transaction.

If the laws are that you cannot take coins out of a country, those are the laws. I don't like them, but anyone selling coins should not pretend they have abided by such laws when they haven't, just because they don't agree with them. In the UK, you have a right to buy from an auction house on the presumption that they have abided by the law, but if they haven't, you still lose the coin and you still need to go after the auction house for your money.

[DonnaML]

43 minutes ago, John Conduitt said:

in the UK, . . . the landowner is actually the person with the rights to the object, not the peasant, and it has to be reported to the government, who can buy it at a price they decide (albeit with some negotiation based on evidence). The fact that your collector in Paris would lose their money is no different to any other sale where the seller does not have title to the object. Caveat emptor. But they would still have recourse against the seller, as they would with any other transaction.

If the laws are that you cannot take coins out of a country, those are the laws. I don't like them, but anyone selling coins should not pretend they have abided by such laws when they haven't, just because they don't agree with them. In the UK, you have a right to buy from an auction house on the presumption that they have abided by the law, but if they haven't, you still lose the coin and you still need to go after the auction house for your money.

There are still peasants in the UK??? I had no idea!

[Hrefn]

This is quite complex.  Assuming my country has a treaty with CountryX, and the treaty was signed on 1/1/2000;  could coins exported from CountryX before the treaty was signed ever be subject to repatriation?  If yes, the Arthur Evans provenance may not save me, because the terms of the treaty could be altered, assuming both signatories agreed, to include coins exported earlier than the signing date.  
If societal opinion became more hostile to collectors, I could envision an inclination to push the date which renders coins immune to repatriation much further into the past, if this were feasible and the powers-that-be thought they could get away with it.  Perhaps this is an unreasonable concern on my part.   I understand that the Arthur Evans provenance protects me as of now.  
 

Second, suppose United States law forbade export of US silver coins to be melted, which I believe was the law at one time, (since repealed.). If I manage to smuggle my stash of silver quarters to London, I would think it would there be perfectly legal to sell them to a smelter, since US law doesn’t apply in the UK.  Similarly, if the Anatolian peasant smuggles his tetradrachm to Paris in defiance of his own country’s law, why should any collector suffer any qualms of conscience about buying it?  Turkey probably has lots of laws I don’t agree with.  If I am in Turkey I must obey them or face the consequences.  Outside of Turkey, who cares what their laws are?  

Again, this assumes the coin is not stolen in the strict sense of the word. 

[robinjojo]

4 hours ago, DonnaML said:

There are still peasants in the UK??? I had no idea!

 

[Hrefn]

@robinjojo, I love those BBC documentaries.  

[DonnaML]

41 minutes ago, Hrefn said:

This is quite complex.  Assuming my country has a treaty with CountryX, and the treaty was signed on 1/1/2000;  could coins exported from CountryX before the treaty was signed ever be subject to repatriation?  If yes, the Arthur Evans provenance may not save me, because the terms of the treaty could be altered, assuming both signatories agreed, to include coins exported earlier than the signing date.  
If societal opinion became more hostile to collectors, I could envision an inclination to push the date which renders coins immune to repatriation much further into the past, if this were feasible and the powers-that-be thought they could get away with it.  Perhaps this is an unreasonable concern on my part.   I understand that the Arthur Evans provenance protects me as of now.  
 

Second, suppose United States law forbade export of US silver coins to be melted, which I believe was the law at one time, (since repealed.). If I manage to smuggle my stash of silver quarters to London, I would think it would there be perfectly legal to sell them to a smelter, since US law doesn’t apply in the UK.  Similarly, if the Anatolian peasant smuggles his tetradrachm to Paris in defiance of his own country’s law, why should any collector suffer any qualms of conscience about buying it?  Turkey probably has lots of laws I don’t agree with.  If I am in Turkey I must obey them or face the consequences.  Outside of Turkey, who cares what their laws are?  

Again, this assumes the coin is not stolen in the strict sense of the word. 

The first situation probably  couldn't happen in the USA or in any other country where ex post facto laws are prohibited.  The second would depend on whether France and Turkey have a treaty agreeing to recognize Turkish prohibitions on the export of that particular type of tetradrachm, allowing Turkey to claim the coin from the buyer as its cultural heritage. Not a question of criminal liability for the buyer, but of whether Turkey has the right under French law to claim ownership even after a good faith purchase. Hardly a practical likelihood for an ordinary coin.

Edited May 5 by DonnaML

[David Atherton]

9 hours ago, CPK said:

I have mixed feelings about this. One the one hand, of course what Richard Beale did was wrong and he should be justly punished for it. On the other hand, I don't think this case will be seen, as it should be, as just being about Richard Beale and his crimes. The "ban-ancient-coin-collecting, repatriate-everything" crowd will jump at the opportunity to use this case unfairly against honest collectors and dealers. And you can't blame Beale for that.

Nobody wins.

Totally agree. Beale was conducting a nefarious business, and it played right into the anti-collecting narrative. Roma/Beale's shenanigans did not do the hobby any favours. They were the anti-collecting's boogeyman come to life. 

Thanks Roma for making things harder for the honest sellers. 

[robinjojo]

I guess the postmortem and analysis will continue even though its not May 24th yet.  One thing seems clear: Roma was a financially stable and successful operation.  What sank it was what I call  the Eid Mar aureus affair of last year.  The legal fallout and consequences did it.

Roma did provide a venue for collectors of mid-grade coins, both ancient, world and British, much like CNG's e-auctions.  And yet, as are so many things in the world, Roma was a truly mixed bag of both giving collectors easy access to a wide array of coins, coupled, in the end, with nefarious practices in the realm of dubious  pedigrees, and, in the high profile case of the Eid Mar aureus, Beal's being caught red-handed in selling a coin under false pretenses, which fell very nicely into the hands of the New York City DA.  Human affairs are often very messy and the history of this firm, especially towards the end, is no exception.  

But the world moves on, and there are plenty of other auctions and dealers to patronize.  As for Roma, there are lessons to be learned about ethical conduct; whether those lessons are heeded is another matter entirely.

[filolif]

8 hours ago, robinjojo said:

Roma was a financially stable and successful operation.

Many criminal organizations are stable and successful. Doing things that are unethical or illegal often results in success and profit because many others will not want to suffer the potential consequences.

edit: I guess the idea that Roma is stable could be in dispute too as they are now going to no longer be in business.

Edited May 5 by filolif

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

Yes, I agree.  My definition of looting would be something like the German occupation or digging up a place like the Parthenon or Palmyra, not circumventing some ridiculous laws.

However, the false provenance would put any such vendor in my 'buyer beware' category, insofar as high-end coins.  However, since those coins are out of my league and I would research such a provenance even if it were affordable, that doesn't really matter to me.  A provenance would never make me pay more than 5 or 10% more, at best.

I'd rather buy from Roma than my formerly favorite UK dealer.  At least I'd probably get a refund if something went wrong, especially on an inexpensive coin.

On a smaller level, I'm sure the inexpensive coins from a certain middle eastern dealer aren't fresh digs!

And per Athena (not the dealer whom I was referring to), what was that dodgy place in New York City which sold fake antiquities, circa 2010?  Something Gallery.  The proprietor might have just had a similar name, but somehow that name stuck in my head.

The horrible, fake patinas/toning drive me away from Athena.  I do sometimes see silver offered which doesn't look like poo. The Zurqieh fake patinas usually don't affect me.  I usually go for the silver.  Do they end up being badly cleaned sometimes?  Yes.

One constant in life; probably five years from now the politicians going after Beale will probably have been convicted of something.  That's how it goes with most big city politicians.

[Limes]

fantastic coins @DonnaML. I believe you have shown the one below before, but I can't find it. Would you be so kind to give some addition info? It's a fantastic coin! 

On 5/3/2024 at 1:41 AM, DonnaML said:

Ex Roma Numismatics Ltd., Auction XX, 29 Oct. 2020, Lot 384.

On topic; I avoided Roma somewhat after Brexit because of import taxes. I look back at Roma with pleasure. I got some really nice coins from them. And my Athens tet! I will miss the lovely provenances, such as 'from the inventory of a UK dealer' 🤣 

I'm not feeling sorry for mr. Beale, for what its worth. Play with fire... etc. And his actions did not do the hobby any good, that's certain. I think it's hard to predict what his case will do to the hobby / profession on the long run. Seeing the current state of the market, I absolutely see nothing to believe that the hobby is suffering from it at the moment. Just looking at the listings on e.g. biddr, lots of sellers are active and prices do not go down it seems. I do hope the staff of Roma ends up well, but reading that they're already switching to other offices is a good thing. 

Anyway, the coins:

 

[DonnaML]

38 minutes ago, Limes said:

fantastic coins @DonnaML. I believe you have shown the one below before, but I can't find it. Would you be so kind to give some addition info? It's a fantastic coin! 

Thank you, @Limes. I bought the coin from one of the Harlan J. Berk Buy or Bid Sales a couple of years ago. It even has a verifiable pre-Roma Numismatics pedigree! Here's the writeup:

Macrinus Æ26, Nicopolis ad Istrum, Moesia Inferior, AD 217-218. Under Marcus Claudius Agrippa, consular legate. Obv. Laureate and cuirassed bust right, seen from front,  with aegis on left shoulder (snake protruding, representing Medusa’s hair) and head of Medusa on breastplate of cuirass, AV K OΠΠEΛ CEV - H MAKΡINOC / Rev. the emperor driving triumphal quadriga (decorated with image of Victory) to right, holding reins and transverse sceptre in left hand, raising right hand in salute; Virtus or soldier preceding, stepping right before the horses with head reverted to left and holding vexillum over shoulder; above, trophy of arms between two seated captives; VΠ AΓΡIΠΠA NIKOΠOΛ around from 8:00; in exergue in two lines, ITΩN ΠΡ OC | ICTΡΩ. 10.38g, 26mm, 6h. Pick, AMNG I/I 1712 (at p. 440) & Pl. XIX nr. 16 [rev. die match] [Pick, Behrendt, Die antiken Münzen von Dacien und Moesien, Die antiken Münzen Nord-Griechenlands Vol. I/I (Berlin, 1898) (6 specimens)]; Corpus Nummorum Online 26655 [see https://www.corpus-nummorum.eu/CN_26655]; Varbanov I 3405 (var. obv. legend) [Ivan Varbanov, Greek Imperial Coins And Their Values, Volume I: Dacia, Moesia Superior & Moesia Inferior (English Edition) (Bourgas, Bulgaria, 2005)];   Hristova-Hoeft-Jekov 8.23.34.2 [Hristova, H., H.-J. Hoeft, & G. Jekov, The Coins of Moesia Inferior 1st - 3rd c. AD: Nicopolis ad Istrum (Blagoevgrad, 2015)]. “Near Extremely Fine; beautiful olive green patina. Very Rare.” [39 examples on ACSearch, inclusive of duplicates.] Purchased from Harlan J. Berk, Ltd., 220th Buy or Bid Sale, June 2022, Lot 334; ex Roma Numismatics Ltd., Auction XX, 29 Oct. 2020, Lot 384 (acquired from Leu Numismatik AG); ex Helios Numismatik, Auction 8, 13 October 2012, lot 337 (ex European collection, formed before 2005). [Video of coin at https://www.hjbltd.com/#!/inventory/item-detail/ancient-coins/100313?fromBbs=220th Buy Or Bid Sale.]

Edited May 5 by DonnaML

[DonnaML]

1 hour ago, Nerosmyfavorite68 said:

Yes, I agree.  My definition of looting would be something like the German occupation or digging up a place like the Parthenon or Palmyra, not circumventing some ridiculous laws.

However, the false provenance would put any such vendor in my 'buyer beware' category, insofar as high-end coins.  However, since those coins are out of my league and I would research such a provenance even if it were affordable, that doesn't really matter to me.  A provenance would never make me pay more than 5 or 10% more, at best.

I'd rather buy from Roma than my formerly favorite UK dealer.  At least I'd probably get a refund if something went wrong, especially on an inexpensive coin.

On a smaller level, I'm sure the inexpensive coins from a certain middle eastern dealer aren't fresh digs!

And per Athena (not the dealer whom I was referring to), what was that dodgy place in New York City which sold fake antiquities, circa 2010?  Something Gallery.  The proprietor might have just had a similar name, but somehow that name stuck in my head.

The horrible, fake patinas/toning drive me away from Athena.  I do sometimes see silver offered which doesn't look like poo. The Zurqieh fake patinas usually don't affect me.  I usually go for the silver.  Do they end up being badly cleaned sometimes?  Yes.

One constant in life; probably five years from now the politicians going after Beale will probably have been convicted of something.  That's how it goes with most big city politicians.

The place in New York that sold 99% fake antiquities for way too long -- many of them made in its own back rooms -- was Sadigh Galleries. 

I don't like the fake patinas on Athena's silver coins either, but at least they're removable fairly easily.

Your generalization about big city politicians is wildly out of place in this case. The New York DA's office is not known for being corrupt or for the attorneys who work there -- other than the DA himself, who has nothing to do with the "stolen art" unit -- being "politicians," and there hasn't been a single  elective politician in New York City who's said a word about Beale or cares in the least about the ancient coin trade. It's not exactly a burning issue for the electorate!

 

Edited May 5 by DonnaML

[DCCR]

22 hours ago, John Conduitt said:

but even in the UK, you can't just sell what you find. The landowner is actually the person with the rights to the object, not the peasant,

You are conflating England with the UK. In Scotland all treasure belongs to the crown, and the landowner never has any right to the property. Any reward paid is to the finder only

[John Conduitt]

9 minutes ago, DCCR said:

You are conflating England with the UK. In Scotland all treasure belongs to the crown, and the landowner never has any right to the property. Any reward paid is to the finder only

To be fair, you're conflating England and Wales 🤣

Yes in Scotland the landowner has to make an agreement with the detectorist to share the proceeds. This also has to be done in England and Wales, although it is the landowner not the finder who has the default there. I'm not sure how that works in Scotland if someone is trespassing.

Edited May 5 by John Conduitt

[Hrefn]

We are all struggling in these conflationary times.  

[DCCR]

6 minutes ago, John Conduitt said:

To be fair, you're conflating England and Wales 🤣

Yes in Scotland the landowner has to make an agreement with the detectorist to share the proceeds

I was trying to keep in simple by dropping Wales and NI. Your second point touches on an interesting quirk in Scottish law, because since the Open Access laws were introduced, you don’t need permission to metal detect on someone's land. You do need permission to remove an item “for reward”. In general it's probably a moot point and you need permission, but technically you could detect without it, find a hoard, report it, and you'd remain perfectly legal if you decline the reward. Maybe. It could do with being clarified. 

[kirispupis]

38 minutes ago, DCCR said:

I was trying to keep in simple by dropping Wales and NI. Your second point touches on an interesting quirk in Scottish law, because since the Open Access laws were introduced, you don’t need permission to metal detect on someone's land. You do need permission to remove an item “for reward”. In general it's probably a moot point and you need permission, but technically you could detect without it, find a hoard, report it, and you'd remain perfectly legal if you decline the reward. Maybe. It could do with being clarified. 

Learn something new each day. I wasn't aware of the Open Access laws in Scotland. Pretty remarkable the difference in countries, since here in the US trespassing on rural property can often be a death warrant. One can expect the property owners to be aggressive and they'll likely be armed.

Here in Washington State, even the beaches are privately owned, so a walk on the beach is only possible either at the one national park with access or by prior agreement with each of the owners.

[CPK]

2 hours ago, DonnaML said:

The place in New York that sold 99% fake antiquities for way too long -- many of them made in its own back rooms -- was Sadigh Galleries. 

Yes! Just the other day I was trying to remember the name. Funny thing though, it was seeing his old ads in Archaeology magazine that first opened my eyes to the possibility of actually owning antiquities/ancient coins. I even visited his website a few times, but was prudent enough to check reviews and was warned off. I eventually found Ancient Resource, from there Forum Ancient Coins, and the rest is history. 🙂 

[John Conduitt]

1 hour ago, kirispupis said:

Learn something new each day. I wasn't aware of the Open Access laws in Scotland. Pretty remarkable the difference in countries, since here in the US trespassing on rural property can often be a death warrant. One can expect the property owners to be aggressive and they'll likely be armed.

Here in Washington State, even the beaches are privately owned, so a walk on the beach is only possible either at the one national park with access or by prior agreement with each of the owners.

The Scottish rules are a bit less free than it sounds - it has to be a park, woodland, certain type of farmland etc. You can't go trampling crops, wander into someone's garden or even go onto any land with a building on it. There's a 135 page guide 🤣There are certain types of private land you can access in England and Wales too ("right of way") but that's mostly farmland and designed for walkers rather than metal detectorists. Even in Scotland, in practice you can't metal detect without the landowner's permission as I don't think there are enough loopholes to do it and keep what you find, especially if you make money from it.

[JulianIX]

On 5/2/2024 at 10:01 AM, discoinfiltrator said:

The whole business.

Do you know when is Richard Beale is due to be sentenced? 

[robinjojo]

I just realized that I need to move quickly on making labels for my backlogged Roma purchases.  I use the lot descriptions from Roma when creating them. 

Gotta move fast.  Yikes!