GUU The Newest Authentication Service On The Block?

[aeneas01]

are auction houses and "third party authenticators" now looking to the guu forum for help with their authentication needs? have they discovered a zero-fee resource that is proving to be much more reliable than what they've had to pay for in the past? is guu the new "mears" on the block, but free?

a couple of weeks ago i outed the following "hacksaw reynolds" helmet, along with a few other lids, in response to blog comments that suggested guu forum members tend to overreact to the mistakes auction houses and authenticators make. the reason for my post was to show that guu members, among the most knowledgeable collectors around, have very good reason to criticize and air their frustrations.

in the post i picked one obvious problem with each helmet that i listed - as for the "reynolds" helmet, i pointed out that the lid was fitted with a blue facemask which the rams didn't use until after he had left the team - yet no mention of this was made in the ad. here's the link:

http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=15127

anyway, american memorabilia has listed the "hacksaw reynolds" helmet again - but this time around it seems that ami may have benefited from my post. the new item description has been overhauled in an attempt to explain what was overlooked and/or not mentioned the first time around.


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/new2.jpg



original item description, 03/24/2005 (sold for $1,700++) - note the red box. mention was made of the blue facemask, "rams" bumper decal and "intact and original" warning decal.


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/d1.jpg


overhauled description, current auction - again, note the red box. facemask, bumper decal and warning label are now "trimmings" that were added later. explanation? according to the rewrite, this suspension relic was presumably recycled and readied for the following year's camp - recycled and readied for another player joining the rams given that jack had long since departed. hmmm.. i guess that explains why a "reynolds" dymo tape would still be stuck to the inside of the lid. just in case the incoming player wanted to pretend to be hacksaw. makes sense. good grief.


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/d2.jpg


ppppppp

[Eric]

So they ban people for their association with this site, but they're more than happy to use the information to help sell their products.
Classy!
Aeneas- nice work, if before it was 100% Authentic, you made that helmet 1000% Authentic!

[mvandor]

You know, I respect that they tried to address the issues but really have to wonder with all those differences how they then can attribute it to Reynolds at all? And curious where the recycled camp story came from as well, sort of suspect the creative writers that do their catalogue.

[lund6771]

You know, I respect that they tried to address the issues but really have to wonder with all those differences how they then can attribute it to Reynolds at all? And curious where the recycled camp story came from as well, sort of suspect the creative writers that do their catalogue.

Mvandor...some might call it creativity...I call it morally & ethically dispicable what auction houses like AMI do...I put them, morally, at the same level with the terd that a bird left on my pick-up this morning

[harpt]

...I put them, morally, at the same level with the terd that a bird left on my pick-up this morning

I can honestly say that's first time in my life that I have ever heard any reference to the morality of a terd.

[both-teams-played-hard]

Notice post #9 from this thread:
http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=3023&highlight=alworth

Could just be a coincidence, but Lampson may have used my research. I still urge Mr. Lampson to join this forum and ask questions of its members. He may have caught details that I, or other members of this forum, missed.

[Eric]

I'm confused. I have always been told (by two auction houses) that Mr. Lampson doesn't use email, computers, the internet etc.

If that's true, then he's missing out on a lot of research material. So it can't be true, can it?

Anyone know first hand?

[aeneas01]

... but really have to wonder with all those differences how they then can attribute it to Reynolds at all? And curious where the recycled camp story came from as well, sort of suspect the creative writers that do their catalogue.

exactly...

the first time around the decals were "intact and original" - the second time around they are "trimmings" later added. yet we're supposed to believe that the "reynolds" dymo tape, the item connecting this lid to hacksaw, is original? and, p.s., the "camp" story is utterly ridiculous.

[kingjammy24]

I'm confused. I have always been told (by two auction houses) that Mr. Lampson doesn't use email, computers, the internet etc.

If that's true, then he's missing out on a lot of research material. So it can't be true, can it?

of course it's true. lampson claims to have an "astounding" 8000 photos. how do you suppose he carries around 8000 photos? assuming he carries 8x10s (or larger) and that each one would weigh approx .20 oz, that's roughly 80lbs. don't you always carry around an 80lb briefcase with 8000 photos inside? i know i do. these biceps of mine don't build themselves!

no computers, no internet. just books and hard copies of photos. the thing that has me really puzzled though is how he prints off so many loas. his website has 10 loas per page and 580 pages for a total of 5800 loas. that's a whole lot of typewriter ribbon! or maybe he's got his own printing press? all that typesetting must be madness for the poor guy.

http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/3241/sillycz4.jpg

rudy.

[Dewey2007]

Your L.L. LOA photo w/ captions just gave me the laugh that I needed to get me through the rest of the day. Thank you and keep them coming!

[helmets]

If you have ever seen Lou at a show, he pulls a large briefcase (almost a suitcase) around on wheels. In it, he has his latest treasures for show and tell, as well as many photos.

[kingjammy24]

"If you have ever seen Lou at a show, he pulls a large briefcase (almost a suitcase) around on wheels. In it, he has his latest treasures for show and tell, as well as many photos."

:D and thank you for my laugh of the day! a suitcase on wheels. i love it. forget 4.7gb dvd discs, lou's still doing it old-school. what a relic. does he still enjoy taking in a good vaudeville show? maybe getting into his trusty Packard and heading downtown for a 5-cent sarsparilla and some frozen custard? maybe see the doc about getting a poultice for his gout? maybe that's why he and victor get along so well. they can both dish about the time they saw jack dempsey making eyes with theda bera. i bet andy rooney drives them nuts with his youthful impishness.

anyway, robert: i think some auction houses have long been skimming free information off this site for their own authentication purposes. i suppose that's a good thing, right? can't exactly bitch about them not listening and then bitch when they do. in this specific case, i understand the ridiculousness of AMI banning chris, rob, and eric solely for their association with the GUF and then turning around and pilfering information from it for their own purposes. my personal feeling on the matter in general is that while i think it's prudent for auction houses to listen to GUF, it's a bit of a raw deal that this free information is helping their venture to profit. i can't count the number of screwups lampson has made that were corrected by this Forum. not only did they fail to send any of the authentication fee to the folks on here who really did the work but they didn't even come on this Forum to say thank you! classless is right.
lampson screws it up, members on here correct it, and lampson collects 100% of the fee. i don't mind helping people on here for free because i receive the same in kind. i do mind helping people for free when they're making money off of my work, not sharing a dime of it with me, and have never helped me in the least.
you'll continue to authenticate helmets at various auction houses and i guarantee you that if the auction house is GFC, AMI, Mastro, Vintage or Historic, you'll never hear so much as a thank-you much less actually receive a cut for your work. they'll take your info but pay lampson.

rudy.

[Vintagedeputy]

"If you have ever seen Lou at a show, he pulls a large briefcase (almost a suitcase) around on wheels. In it, he has his latest treasures for show and tell, as well as many photos."

:D and thank you for my laugh of the day! a suitcase on wheels. i love it. forget 4.7gb dvd discs, lou's still doing it old-school. what a relic. does he still enjoy taking in a good vaudeville show? maybe getting into his trusty Packard and heading downtown for a 5-cent sarsparilla and some frozen custard? maybe see the doc about getting a poultice for his gout? maybe that's why he and victor get along so well. they can both dish about the time they saw jack dempsey making eyes with theda bera. i bet andy rooney drives them nuts with his youthful impishness.



King - that was priceless! Well worth the price of admission! Thanks for a good hearty laugh!

Jim

[CollectGU]

"If you have ever seen Lou at a show, he pulls a large briefcase (almost a suitcase) around on wheels. In it, he has his latest treasures for show and tell, as well as many photos."



i think some auction houses have long been skimming free information off this site for their own authentication purposes. i suppose that's a good thing, right? can't exactly bitch about them not listening and then bitch when they do. my personal feeling on the matter in general is that while i think it's prudent for auction houses to listen to GUF, it's a bit of a raw deal that this free information is helping their venture to profit.
rudy.


Isn't this exactly the model being used by the auction portion of this forum? Put the items up to the scrutiny of its members?

Regards,
Dave

[aeneas01]

anyway, robert: i think some auction houses have long been skimming free information off this site for their own authentication purposes. i suppose that's a good thing, right? can't exactly bitch about them not listening and then bitch when they do.

i don't have any problem with an auction house looking to guu for help. i have a problem with an auction house that cherry-picks good info from this site for less than above board purposes - such as to bolster, or make excuses for, a very suspect item in their possession. and, imo, that seems to be the case with the reynolds lid. but, hey, i have a vivid imagination. and i also suffer from delusions of grandeur.

:)


forget 4.7gb dvd discs, lou's still doing it old-school. what a relic. does he still enjoy taking in a good vaudeville show? maybe getting into his trusty Packard and heading downtown for a 5-cent sarsparilla and some frozen custard? maybe see the doc about getting a poultice for his gout? maybe that's why he and victor get along so well. they can both dish about the time they saw jack dempsey making eyes with theda bera. i bet andy rooney drives them nuts with his youthful impishness.

funny, funny stuff! i guess we all need to simply face the fact that lampson is from a much gentler, kinder, "kick off your shoes and grab your fishing pole" place and time. and, further, i guess we all need to finally realize that nerat is right - lampson is just a harmless little rascal trying to make his way in the world....


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/ll.jpg

[aeneas01]

Isn't this exactly the model being used by the auction portion of this forum? Put the items up to the scrutiny of its members?

Regards,
Dave

not quite the same - i don't believe items listed here as one thing evolve and morph into something else based on member comments. of course i've been wrong before....

[kingjammy24]

Isn't this exactly the model being used by the auction portion of this forum? Put the items up to the scrutiny of its members?

Regards,
Dave

hi dave,

yes and no. to an extent, GUU Auctions does rely on free labor and i believe that may be an inherant flaw in chris' idea. in general, i don't believe one can operate a for-profit venture that is dependent on free labor.

however, it's not entirely free. in return, GUU provides this forum completely free of charge. as well, mike specht and jim caravello, under the GUU banner, have put in prodigious effort in regularly answering volumes of bat record info for one and all. again, free of charge. if chris cavalier told me that, in order to enjoy this forum on a daily basis, i needed to authenticate 4 jerseys a year for GUF, then i'd gladly do it because i'd consider it a fair trade. GUU gets its "free" authentication and i, in turn, get access to an unbelievable amount of expertise and insightful discussion free of charge.

conversely, in return for free authentications from Forum members, what exactly has GFC, AMI, Mastro or Historic given back? AMI has banned chris, rob, and eric. Historic has blocked all incoming links. i don't recall GFC offering to make nick coppola's crew available to answer jersey questions free of charge. i don't recall doug allen making his crew available free of charge to help out with member questions, despite having his ass saved by this very Forum on the jordan shirt. doug was too classy to even come on and say thanks.

dave, you and i both get a lot from GUU/GUF. otherwise, we wouldn't be regulars right? i've gotten absolutely, unequivocally nothing from GFC, AMI, Historic, or Mastro. when's the last time lampson came on the forum to offer up some of that astounding knowledge that he's supposedly got packed into his amazing brain? coppola? does he not have a computer either? how many times has this forum saved GFC's ass? how about a "hey forum members, here's 10% off just for you. thanks for all of your help".

there are folks in the industry who seem to willingly help others. most of the GUU folks as well as rob lifson and dave grob come to mind. it's not hard to give back to those who help you. conversely, when someone's a boor who's given back little, it's pretty hard to feel you ought to help them willingly and for free.

rudy.

[ChrisCavalier]

GUU Auctions does rely on free labor and i believe that may be an inherant flaw in chris' idea. in general, i don't believe one can operate a for-profit venture that is dependent on free labor.
Hello Rudy,

I need to correct you here. The GUU Auction model is not based on "free" labor. In fact, every item submitted to GUU is evaluated first by knowledgeable people like Mike Specht, Rob Steinmetz, Darrell O'Mary and others before they are listed in the auction. Those knowledgeable people are also the ones who write the descriptions for the items. That process is not different from the services other auction houses provide although we feel more comfortable with our evaluators and the way they examine items. In fact, we rejected quite a few item that were submitted to us for this auction because they did not pass our internal evaluations. Some potential consignors have been upset with us because they we wouldn't accept items for our auction even though they have LOAs from other entities. While we were not saying the items were "bad", they simply did not meet the criteria we have established for GUU auctions.

Further, we have invested a great deal of time and money to build the community on Game Used Universe and we have integrated it into our transaction model to add further assurances to collectors when they make a purchase. It is a "layered" model that uses trust-worthy experts to do the evaluations, write-ups. etc. and then allows questions to be asked so that items are fully understood. It is in my mind the best model in the industry to validate items. However, it is far from being based on "free" labor.

I hope that clears up any misunderstanding you may have had about how the auction works.

Sincerely,
Chris

[kingjammy24]

hey chris,

after reading your explanation and the details found in GUU's "Auctions and Policies" section, i don't believe i ever misunderstood.

GUU has a very unique and proprietary auction system. one that you rightfully pride yourself on. as you said, it's a mult-layered system in terms of the authentications. i understand that the first layer operates in the same manner as most auction houses where a few experts look at all of the items. however, this first or preliminary layer isn't really what the GUU's model is inherantly about. if it were then it'd be no different than any other auction system out there. you yourself admit that "When you think about it, it seems strange to assume that a limited number of people can know everything about every item". clearly your intent in devising this new system was to markedly improve upon the old system that you felt was insufficient. the real crux of the GUU model therefore is the second layer. it is in the second layer that you leverage the most unique of your assets, the Forum and its population of experts.

the second layer is where threads are created, in this Forum, for each auction item. the purpose is to allow questions to be asked of GUF's many posters. the goal, to be sure, of this second layer isn't to once again thrust these items back to steinmetz, specht, and caravello. rather, it's to thrust them into the general GUF community for the deliberate purpose of having the community suss them out. as you said "if an item is illegitimate, questionable or misrepresented, there is little to no chance of making it through Game Used Universe's system without being identified". to slightly rephrase the purpose of this second layer, it's not simply to allow potential buyers to ask questions but it's also for them to receive answers from the GUF community. thus the most notable crux of your model is have the community suss out the items. a small example to illustrate how you've designed your model to work:

GUU recieves a 1987 Fred McGriff jersey. steinmetz, not being an expert on 80s jays shirts, thinks it's ok and passes it. as you said, noone can be an expert in every item and the GUU system is designed not to rely on the opinions of a very select few. the item is then posted and a thread is created for it. looking at the jersey, I, an ordinary unaffiliated GUF member, notice the team wordmark is incorrect so i post all of my evidence and a dissertation on the issue. the jersey is then removed and everyone cheers. the system worked as designed, right? explain to me how that wasn't free labor that i provided.

the second layer of the GUU auction system depends on community folks answering questions for, as far as i'm aware, no monetary compensation. is that not free labor?

most of us answer questions to each other all day long on here but there really isn't profit being derived from those interactions. the auction is slightly different.

don't get me wrong, i think it's a great system. i just don't see how you genuinely don't believe that community members, participating in the second layer, aren't providing free labor. if the folks involved in the first layer are doing what qualifies as labor, then how is it that the folks involved in answering questions in the second layer are not considered to also be similarly laboring?

rudy.

[both-teams-played-hard]

http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/1982/lampsonlloyd2xj8.jpg

[ChrisCavalier]

Rudy,

There are a couple of concerns I have with your analysis. The first is that it assumes we are using the forum knowledge in our transaction model for “free” as if this community magically appeared out of thin air and there was no investment on our part to create it. The fact is, there has been a great deal of investment on our part in both time and real dollars. We have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars, not to mention thousands and thousands of unpaid man-hours, to make GUU what it is today.

We are the ones who paid to create the site. Every month we pay the bills to keep the site running. We are the ones out at the trade shows promoting the site to bring in more people so everyone can benefit from the information shared on GUU. We have done this for years now and, I honestly believe, our efforts have been one of, if not the, biggest reasons why the hobby is now safer for collectors. As for all the time and money that has gone into the development and growth of GUU’s forum component, we have not asked a dime from our members to use it. You say GUU is using “free” labor but I beg to differ.

In addition, I do believe our auctions are inherently different from others out there in other ways as well. For example, we had items submitted to us for the current auction that I know many other auctions houses would have run with and we chose not to. Items, for example, whose tagging perfectly matched specifications but were devoid of use. We could have run the item and easily been justified doing so. However, we chose not to because that is not we are about. We are creating a marketplace where collectors can come to with confidence to find legitimate merchandise. We are purposefully more critical in terms of what passes our evaluations. To illustrate this, how many items in our initial auction were questioned? I think it’s fair to say much fewer than those I’ve seen questioned in most other auctions and every single one of our items is put to the test.

The bottom line is we have invested a great deal of time and money to create a transaction model where everyone on this site can benefit. We could have created an auction house like others out there but we chose not to. We could have profited from the sale of suspect items but we chose to hold our items to a higher standard. Instead, we allow all questions to be asked publicly which virtually eliminates a question either going unanswered or ignored. Unlike others, every question in our auction gets answered (many times by our experts). Like Wikipedia, all the members of GUU benefit from efforts of those who participate in what we created. In fact, the tremendous investment we made in this site is one of the key reasons collectors everywhere can now benefit for free from the resources found on GUU. We have invested a great deal to create this community. I think to say we are using “free” labor would be a mischaracterization.

-Chris

[aeneas01]

hey chris,

after reading your explanation and the details found in GUU's "Auctions and Policies" section, i don't believe i ever misunderstood.

GUU has a very unique and proprietary auction system. one that you rightfully pride yourself on. as you said, it's a mult-layered system in terms of the authentications. i understand that the first layer operates in the same manner as most auction houses where a few experts look at all of the items. however, this first or preliminary layer isn't really what the GUU's model is inherantly about. if it were then it'd be no different than any other auction system out there. you yourself admit that "When you think about it, it seems strange to assume that a limited number of people can know everything about every item". clearly your intent in devising this new system was to markedly improve upon the old system that you felt was insufficient. the real crux of the GUU model therefore is the second layer. it is in the second layer that you leverage the most unique of your assets, the Forum and its population of experts.

the second layer is where threads are created, in this Forum, for each auction item. the purpose is to allow questions to be asked of GUF's many posters. the goal, to be sure, of this second layer isn't to once again thrust these items back to steinmetz, specht, and caravello. rather, it's to thrust them into the general GUF community for the deliberate purpose of having the community suss them out. as you said "if an item is illegitimate, questionable or misrepresented, there is little to no chance of making it through Game Used Universe's system without being identified". to slightly rephrase the purpose of this second layer, it's not simply to allow potential buyers to ask questions but it's also for them to receive answers from the GUF community. thus the most notable crux of your model is have the community suss out the items. a small example to illustrate how you've designed your model to work:

GUU recieves a 1987 Fred McGriff jersey. steinmetz, not being an expert on 80s jays shirts, thinks it's ok and passes it. as you said, noone can be an expert in every item and the GUU system is designed not to rely on the opinions of a very select few. the item is then posted and a thread is created for it. looking at the jersey, I, an ordinary unaffiliated GUF member, notice the team wordmark is incorrect so i post all of my evidence and a dissertation on the issue. the jersey is then removed and everyone cheers. the system worked as designed, right? explain to me how that wasn't free labor that i provided.

the second layer of the GUU auction system depends on community folks answering questions for, as far as i'm aware, no monetary compensation. is that not free labor?

most of us answer questions to each other all day long on here but there really isn't profit being derived from those interactions. the auction is slightly different.

don't get me wrong, i think it's a great system. i just don't see how you genuinely don't believe that community members, participating in the second layer, aren't providing free labor. if the folks involved in the first layer are doing what qualifies as labor, then how is it that the folks involved in answering questions in the second layer are not considered to also be similarly laboring?

rudy.


my understanding of the guu model, what makes the guu model so unique, is the overtly public and transparent auction experience it offers - an experience that allows and encourages collectors to publicly discuss and evaluate items in real time before bidding. i'm not sure how this translates into a second tier of labor, let alone free labor. further, i'm not familiar with any other existing model that comes close to matching this level of transparency.

however if, for example, guu's model stipulated that a previewed lot would not become available for auction unless 5 independent opinions were submitted/posted by forum members, then i would see your point regarding free labor - but, obviously, that's not the case.

speaking of labor, i wonder how many appreciate the enormous amount of man-hours guu has opened itself up to by offering such a public format for discussing and questioning each lot. the assumption that forum members will field all questions about every lot , that all questions will be satisfied at the second level, is very difficult for me to believe.

and, finally, how does one define labor in this context? if i question a lot, list my issues, and am proven wrong would this constitute labor, my labor, at the second level? or would it only be considered labor if an evaluation proved to be correct? does any question regarding a lot constitute labor? even though the answer to the question would most likely result in an informative reply which would ultimately contribute to a collector's knowledge?

i get what you are saying kingjammy24 and, imo, guu certainly is no worse off for the amount of information freely shared at this forum. but by the same token i don't see chris and the guys simply throwing lots up for auction and telling the the world that the collective expertise of the forum will provide the best authentication available. quite to the contrary, i see guu doing their homework, running lots by some of the most knowledgeable in the hobby and then, and only then, parading these lots in front of the most savvy collectors in the hobby with an invitation to tear apart their work, if you can.

sounds like a pretty square deal to me - and certainly much more than any other auction house model offers.

[kingjammy24]

chris,

for the most part, we agree. see my earlier reply to dave o'brien where i stated that "it's not entirely free" and explained that, in exchange for their various efforts, community members are given a valuable resource that undoubtedly requires substantial time, effort, and money to run. it's a fair and mutually beneficial trade for GUU and it's members. i even stated that if my membership required me to help authenticate items, i would consider it a fair deal because of all i've received, for free, from the good folks of this Forum. to that end, we agree that the use of forum knowledge has not been leveraged entirely for free by GUU. (your wikipedia analogy is correct insofar as it describes a similar, symbiotic community but misses the main point as wikimedia is a non-profit, charitable group. wikipedians aren't laboring pro-bono towards an endeavor that's building personal wealth for jimmy wales.)

this originally came about because of my aversion to having auction houses pilfer information from GUF for their own for-profit purposes without providing a shred of anything in return (except some healthy doses of belligerence). dave o'brien asked, what i thought, was a natural question about whether that relates to GUU. of course, as we both agree, the major distinction is that GUU clearly gives something substantial in return whereas the auction houses, for the most part, give absolutely nothing in return for the knowledge that's been sent their way.

anyway, i also wanted to see that, in this specific discussion, eric stangel received his just credit for starting the Forum back in Jan 2005. eric can correct me if i'm wrong but it seems that he pretty much started it singlehandedly and hosted it on the free network54 platform. by the time the Forum made it's way over the GUU in Nov 2005, there were over 1000 threads created in only 11 months. not sure how he made it catch fire, but it's pretty impressive.

rudy.

[ChrisCavalier]

anyway, i also wanted to see that, in this specific discussion, eric stangel received his just credit for starting the Forum back in Jan 2005. eric can correct me if i'm wrong but it seems that he pretty much started it singlehandedly and hosted it on the free network54 platform. by the time the Forum made it's way over the GUU in Nov 2005, there were over 1000 threads created in only 11 months. not sure how he made it catch fire, but it's pretty impressive.
Rudy,

I couldn't agree more. We added the statement to the bottom of the forum as a reminder of what Eric did in terms of creating the forum and getting it started. However, given what he has done for the hobby, it certainly doesn't feel like that's enough. He definitely deserves all of our thanks and I know I will always see him as a true pioneer in the hobby.

-Chris

[kingjammy24]

hey robert

my 2 bits, keeping in mind i'm in no way speaking on behalf of GUU.

"my understanding of the guu model, what makes the guu model so unique, is the overtly public and transparent auction experience it offers - an experience that allows and encourages collectors to publicly discuss and evaluate items in real time before bidding. i'm not sure how this translates into a second tier of labor, let alone free labor...however if, for example, guu's model stipulated that a previewed lot would not become available for auction unless 5 independent opinions were submitted/posted by forum members, then i would see your point regarding free labor - but, obviously, that's not the case."

the second tier is the real heart of GUU's auction model. while GUU doesn't require members to participate, obviously the second tier only works if the community participates. it depends on altruism. whether the labor is forced or volunteered, it occurs nonetheless. by labor i meant anything above a negligible amount. what you did on the namath helmet qualifies as labor. (btw, would it irk you to imagine lampson collecting the fee on that one despite the fact that you're the one who did the work? he'd be off treating himself to a banana split for getting it wrong and you'd be left empty-handed for getting it right.)

the discussion, for me, was never about whether GUU's model is good or better than others because it clearly is. the discussion began as one of for-profit auction houses leaching on the work of Forum members without giving anything in return. then via dave's question, it morphed into a discussion about GUU's reliance on volunteerism to make the second tier of their for-profit auction model work. as i stated in my original response to d. o'brien, the labor performed in the second tier "isn't entirely free" and pretty much described the same symbiotic relationship between GUU and its members that chris c. described.

rudy.

[aeneas01]

the second tier is the real heart of GUU's auction model. while GUU doesn't require members to participate, obviously the second tier only works if the community participates. it depends on altruism. whether the labor is forced or volunteered, it occurs nonetheless. by labor i meant anything above a negligible amount. what you did on the namath helmet qualifies as labor. (btw, would it irk you to imagine lampson collecting the fee on that one despite the fact that you're the one who did the work? he'd be off treating himself to a banana split for getting it wrong and you'd be left empty-handed for getting it right.)


i think this is where we disagree rudy... the real heart of guu's auction model, imho, is their novel approach; that an internet auction can be a very public and entirely transparent experience. lots can be previewed, discussed and scrutinized in real time and, most importantly, questions can be answered by not only those with a vested interest in the business but also by fellow collectors. perhaps naively, i tend to equate the guu experience to actually being at an auction physically, surrounded by fellow collectors, discussing and evaluating lots, seeking out opinions and getting questions answered prior to the start of bidding.

i also think that it's guu's willingness and commitment to being so open, so transparent and, yes, so honest which attracts collectors. that and just knowing that an auction house is so confident in the quality and authenticity of their items that they would make them so readily available for public scrutiny. it really speaks volumes imo. in short, i believe that guu would enjoy continued and growing success regardless if the community, the second tier, actively participated in lot evaluations or not because the honesty and integrity required to offer such transparency is what will ultimately attract bidders - not the internal policing of forum members.

btw your mention of altruism gave me ayn rand flashbacks. could it be that lampson is simply the ellsworth toohey of the game-used equipment world?

[mvandor]

I do see Rudy's point, to some extent it can be argued that as this site morphs into an auction house, a critical part of the selling point to attract honest consignors and more importantly buyers, is the uncompensated input of the members of the forums.

Perhaps it's productive in this discussion to separate the free forum from the GUU site and operations as their purposes are completely different at this point.

My only other comment, as the owner of a web development company for 12 years, is that Chris's figures for investment in this enterprise amaze me unless the bulk of his figure are for activities outside of site development and maintenance.

[kingjammy24]

"the real heart of guu's auction model, imho, is their novel approach; that an internet auction can be a very public and entirely transparent experience. lots can be previewed, discussed and scrutinized in real time and, most importantly, questions can be answered by not only those with a vested interest in the business but also by fellow collectors."

that IS the second tier in its entirety! the second tier doesn't refer simply to the community per se but rather the specific act of the community performing lot evaluations.

"i believe that guu would enjoy continued and growing success regardless if the community, the second tier, actively participated in lot evaluations or not because the honesty and integrity required to offer such transparency is what will ultimately attract bidders"

you believe that the real heart of the model is "the public process that enables lots to be discussed in real time" (aka the second tier) yet you also feel that GUU auctions would succeed even if the community didn't actively participate in the "second tier". that is, if the "real heart" of the model didn't work. i understand you're saying that the gist of it, for you, is simply the mere notion of transparency and honesty but if that were all there was to it then there'd be no need whatsoever for the second tier. (especially if noone would participate). chris, mike, and jim were all known as honest men prior to GUU. clearly chris believes it's the second tier that truly differentiates this system from all others. after all, GUU didn't purchase the Forum from eric without any plans on leveraging it for something greater than simply running a Forum.

anyway, at this point, if i say "second tier" anymore i'll probably start having nightmares about it. i think this was an interesting discussion. thanks for the enlightenment!

rudy.

[aeneas01]

I do see Rudy's point, to some extent it can be argued that as this site morphs into an auction house, a critical part of the selling point to attract honest consignors and more importantly buyers, is the uncompensated input of the members of the forums.

but why is forum input considered uncompensated labor?

let's say i attended an auction and overheard rudy comment to a fellow lot previewer "nice jersey" in reference to jordan gamer. i know rudy from the dozens of auctions i've attended over the years, have heard him share his extensive knowledge with fellow attendees in the past and, as a result, have to come to highly respect his opinion when it comes to jordan jerseys. as such, his opinion would sway my decision.

and let's say i made my way over to a montana helmet preview lot where you, rkgibson, gridman80, cohibasmoker, drj, jake51, helmets and a host of others were shaking their heads in serious doubt while pointing to what you believed to be obvious deal-breakers. i know all of you guys from the dozens of auctions i've attended over the years, have heard all of you deftly and accurately dissect game-used helmets in the past and, as a result, have come to highly respect your opinions when it comes to game-used lids. as such, their opinions would sway my decision.

does this constitute uncompensated labor as well?

as i wrote earlier, what i believe truly separates guu's model from others is the open and transparent environment which allows fellow collectors to discuss auction lots during the preview stage much in the same manner as mentioned above - i believe this to be the "real heart" of their model. do such discussions constitute free labor? imo no.

further, i believe that most (all?) here do their homework when interested in a game-used item, that most (all?) subscribe to the notion that an loa does not guarantee authenticity. and homework takes time. but it's something prudent collectors deem necessary prior to bidding on a big-ticket item. so the homework gets done, the labor spent. for the personal benefit of the collector. yet when a collector chooses to share his homework with fellow collectors, even if it's just to see if it floats, it becomes uncompensated labor? why?

i guess it could be argued that i spent time on the namath lid, uncompensated time. but my motivation was not financial compensation. further, i can't imagine a situation like the namath helmet, the jordan jersey or the like happening with guu auctions - because of their transparency. what motivated the namath and jordan threads (i believe) was the lack of trust many of us have in auction houses given their history of ignoring issues with items. given their non-transparency.

[kingjammy24]

hiya robert

in this case, i believe that analytical work performed and expertise given constitutes labor. it's no different than any other analytical work for which individuals are paid. you wrap it in the guise of mere casual "discussions" and "opinions". whatever superficial label you want to give it is ultimately irrelevant because at the core, there is analytical work being performed. when you have a "discussion" with a lawyer and he gives you an "opinion" that influences your actions, is he not laboring? if you don't believe he is, then you may be surprised when he hands you a hefty bill for it.

"do such discussions constitute free labor? imo no"

what many of the folks do on this Forum is no different than what dave bushing, john taube, lou lampson, nick coppola, and keith vari make a living at. would it surprise you to learn that you "authenticated" the namath helmet and that lampson is paid to do what you did for free? analysts make a decent living in all fields. people on this forum trade their expertise freely because it's understood that we all benefit from helping each other. you describe friendly discussions and can't see where the labor is. it's there, we're just not charging for it. many people come on, for example, and ask others to find them a photomatch. some do it and there's no charge. do you know what meigray charges to find a custom photomatch? hint: it isn't cheap. nor should it be because they're investing their time and effort. there's a ton of "free work" going on everyday on this forum.

however, when a entity wants to capitalize on these "friendly discussions" for it's own for-profit ventures, then it's a different story. how would you feel if i took all of the information in your posts, made it into a book on football helmets, charged $29.99 a copy and gave none of the proceeds to you? would you be cool with that?

"guess it could be argued that i spent time on the namath lid, uncompensated time. but my motivation was not financial compensation"

doesn't much matter what your motivation was. you spent time, you spent your expertise and you conducted analytical work. uncompensated labor. why? because you labored and you weren't compensated, regardless of your motivation. you're a "volunteer"; but what is volunteering if not unpaid labor? volunteers freely and willingly give their time and effort but that doesn't mean it's not unpaid labor. it's unpaid labor given freely and willingly for an altruistic cause.

rudy.

[aeneas01]

and 'round and 'round we go... :) ;)


when you have a "discussion" with a lawyer and he gives you an "opinion" that influences your actions, is he not laboring? if you don't believe he is, then you may be surprised when he hands you a hefty bill for it.depends - if i retained his services then, yes, i would consider it labor and expect a bill. but if i overheard him at an auction tell another collector not to pay any attention to the "all sales are final" notices, that they don't hold any legal water, then no. and i don't believe i would have much legal recourse if i ran with his advice and later found i couldn't get my money back from the auction house.


what many of the folks do on this Forum is no different than what dave bushing, john taube, lou lampson, nick coppola, and keith vari make a living at. would it surprise you to learn that you "authenticated" the namath helmet and that lampson is paid to do what you did for free?i think there is a difference - the people you mentioned are recognized, right or wrong, as the best in the business and authenticate items for a living. they've been at it a long time, have developed a brand name that auction houses can exploit and, despite their well deserved criticism, have probably forgotten more about game-used equipment than many of us will ever know - i really believe this. my beef with lampson is not that he's a charlatan posing as an expert - as a matter of fact i think he could do a great job on an item if he took his time. my beef is with auction houses that demand huge lots be authenticated in a short period of time and then turn their back when they know damn well this results in sloppy authentication work. and i have a beef with authenticators that are party to this sham.

on the other hand i only evaluate items i'm personally interested in - when i want, at my own leisure. if i'm not particularly interested in an item i can pass on it. i have this luxury because i'm not a paid authenticator. but, most importantly, i evaluate items because i thoroughly enjoy what i learn along the way - it's a wonderful pastime. outing shoddy authentication work is just a bonus.

as such, i don't agree that "what many of the folks do on this Forum is no different than what dave bushing, john taube, lou lampson, nick coppola, and keith vari make a living at." - sure, they look at photos, we look at photos. but until one of us quits their day job and proves he can make a living at the authentication game, i'll continue to contend that there is a substantial difference.


analysts make a decent living in all fields. people on this forum trade their expertise freely because it's understood that we all benefit from helping each other. you describe friendly discussions and can't see where the labor is. it's there, we're just not charging for it. many people come on, for example, and ask others to find them a photomatch. some do it and there's no charge. do you know what meigray charges to find a custom photomatch? hint: it isn't cheap. nor should it be because they're investing their time and effort. there's a ton of "free work" going on everyday on this forum.yes, analysts make a decent living in all fields - and they hang their shingles, announce their open for business and hope for the best. but i don't think any forum members mistook guu as an internet storefront where they could hawk their expertise. nor do i think any forum members are under the impression that what they share, offer or discuss (regardless of the level of expertise) is protected or considered proprietary. yet we continue to share. you continue to share. i continue to share.

why? why would someone take the time to help another member with a photomatch? because what goes around comes around? because we all benefit from helping each other? perhaps. but, frankly, i think the real reason is far less altruistic - i think we do these things for ourselves. because this is what we enjoy.


however, when a entity wants to capitalize on these "friendly discussions" for it's own for-profit ventures, then it's a different story.guu has it's own team of authenticators. and when deemed necessary they bring in a niche expert, as was the case with scoggin and the elway jersey. on top of this guu also offers a format which allows bidders to ask questions and discuss items before bidding. this equates to "capitalizing" on member input for guu's own profit? pretty tough paint job.


how would you feel if i took all of the information in your posts, made it into a book on football helmets, charged $29.99 a copy and gave none of the proceeds to you? would you be cool with that?how would i feel? to start, flattered. if it sold, shocked. $30 clams for such a sparse publication? wow. but i don't think i have to worry about that. nor do i think i have to worry about anyone getting rich off of the dos centavos i contribute to the forum. but i do think the analogy is a stretch - as far as i know, guu has done nothing that i haven't consented to as far as my posts are concerned...


doesn't much matter what your motivation was. you spent time, you spent your expertise and you conducted analytical work. uncompensated labor. why? because you labored and you weren't compensated, regardless of your motivation.again i disagree - imo motive does indeed need to be considered. my motive for posting here is pleasure, personal entertainment coupled with the certainty that i will learn something new while researching for answers to questions. as a matter of fact it's labor that i'm avoiding, putting on the back burner, whenever i kick back in my chair and log-on to the forum. but if one chooses to use the strictest definition of labor, i suppose most everything in life could be considered work, free labor, uncompensated toil. even the time spent putting together your son's first bike.

[kingjammy24]

hey robert,

suffice it to say that i disagree with almost all of your points so strongly that we've reached a complete impasse :)
not a minute too soon probably as i'm sure this exchange has bored most of the other members to tears.

i did want to add a few somewhat unrelated points:

- "the pros" - the problem with the pros (and i don't believe at all that most of them have forgotten more than most of us will ever know. for jerseys, i'll easily take howard wolf and lon lewis on their worst day over dave bushing or coppola on their best day. on bats, i'd take specht and caravello over bushing. i'll take the secretary in my office over lampson on any item. she may not know a gamer from a retail jersey but, unlike lampson, at least she'll admit her ignorance)..anyway the problem with the pros, in addition to the one you mentioned, is that they frequently venture far outside of their areas of expertise. we all have our niches. their niche seems to be everything under the sun. having a single, narrow niche isn't as profitable as pretending you're an expert on every single item out there. you once asked for my opinion on a football jersey. my response to you was that there are other members on here far more qualified for vintage football jerseys and it wasn't my place to comment. try getting most of the pros to ever admit something isn't in their realm of expertise. i once saw lampson "authenticate" a pair of madonna's undies. if there's a dollar involved, they'll authenticate it.

- lampson - the problem with lampson isn't that auction houses ply him with too much and give him too little time. it's, as you said, that he's a "party to this sham". as i told nerat, noone forces lampson to agree to anything. lampson may have a ton of expertise in his massive brain but it's completely useless because, as it seems to me, he's guided primarily by a sense of greed and an overwhelming lack of common sense and ethics. i'm sure the drunk down the block may be a musicial genius but if he's constantly drunk then what good is his talent? i've constantly heard about how much lampson supposedly knows, yet all i've ever seen from him are the stupidest, sloppiest mistakes ever made. what good is knowledge if it's never used? lampson's attitude has made him completely worthless.

- making a living at something doesn't require that you be good at it. only that you convince others that you're good at it. marketing can convince people of anything and as denny esken once said, many of the "pros" spend more time marketing themselves as "experts" than doing research. i've never once even pondered making a living at it because i'm completely certain there's far less money in it than what i'm currently making. the only way to turn a decent profit at it is to rack up the auction house contracts and then rubberstamp everything in as little time as possible and employ no assistance. we don't know anyone who does that though, right? unfortunately, i lack the moral turpitude that seems necessary to truly turn big profits at the authenticating game.

- the most important point i wanted to add was that when i referred to an entity capitalizing on Forum conversations, i wasn't referring to GUU at all. i was referring to auction houses.

anyway, i enjoyed the discussion. i'll put up another thread soon with your name on it that i'm sure everyone will enjoy far more than this one.

rudy.

[aeneas01]

suffice it to say that i disagree with almost all of your points so strongly that we've reached a complete impasse :)

nothing wrong with that!

not a minute too soon probably as i'm sure this exchange has bored most of the other members to tears.

we do agree on something!

i'm sure the drunk down the block may be a musicial genius but if he's constantly drunk then what good is his talent?

unless the drunk was passed out, i can guarantee that you could get more music out of him than anything i could bring to the table. and therein lies the rub - imo i believe that many auction houses take the position that these "pros", even on their worst days and even when rifling through lots, can nail items a heck of a lot better and consistently than john q. public. and apparently that's good enough as far as they're concerned.

but "the times, they are a-changin'". imho "authenticators" are a dying breed and so is the "thumbs up" coa model. before too long we will most likely see the "pros" replaced by dedicated research services that do nothing more than dissect photos, film footage and license information from known resources and collections. a few more jordan and namath threads, coupled with the increasing traffic to guu, will probably bring this around sooner than later.

the only way to turn a decent profit at it is to rack up the auction house contracts and then rubberstamp everything in as little time as possible and employ no assistance.

today, no doubt.

the most important point i wanted to add was that when i referred to an entity capitalizing on Forum conversations, i wasn't referring to GUU at all. i was referring to auction houses.

then i misunderstood, my apologies.

anyway, i enjoyed the discussion.

i always enjoy exchanges with you - more importantly, i always enjoy and appreciate your tremendous contributions to the forum. your labor, if you will.

;) :)