A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

**cjmedina1** · 04-17-2008, 10:22 PM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

I'm glad you got to talk with him..I just don't get the "your not registered so I cant answer you questions". Incase inquiring minds want to know I was asking for bat lengths and weights in lot 658...

Heres what the description says

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif']A 2001 Adirondack "MAC25" model that shows excellent game-use with ball marks surrounding the entire barrel. Mark has signed the front barrel with inscription "01" in black marker that rates a 7-8; 1986-89 H&B "R161" model bat that was a Promo or minor league bat. There is a signature on the left barrel done in blue marker rating a 7-8; 2000 "MAC25" model Rawlings Adirondack with tar on the handle which is not typical for McGwire. Accompanied by a LOA from PSA/DNA as well as a LOA from JSA.

Carlie Medina III
carliemedinaiii@sbcglobal.net
[/FONT]

**suave1477** · 04-17-2008, 10:37 PM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

I dont understand why the need to post your whole conversation on emails on here was for but im glad that things endd up going positive.

Carlie as far as registering to ask questions thats a policy of a lot of auction houses thats nothing new

**otismalibu** · 04-17-2008, 10:43 PM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

I exchanged a few emails with him years ago and he told me to give him a call. I did, we had a brief chat and I learned something about Sixers jerseys that I'd not noticed before. He made reference to the old board and that was the first time I heard about it.

I always enjoy looking thru the GFC auctions because they always have a great offering of hoops jerseys. They've got the Dr. J. ABA dunk contest jersey in their current auction and they also have a sweet blue road Sixers jersey that will be in their HOF auction.

I emailed them regarding the blue Sixers jersey to point out that it was listed on their site as a 1976, but it's actually from the 77-78 season. I also offered to send them Erving game photos from the 77-78 season. I got a few unsigned "Thanks" and "That would be great" responses, but when I asked about my bidder status - no reply. I also sent an email regarding that Barkley jersey (and I signed my full name) - no response.

Perhaps I don't give them enough credit. Those two Erving jerseys are great and would be a fine addition to any collection. And the Barkley still looks like a brutal fake, IMO.

It's not like I'm rooting for fakes to show up. You have no idea how many links I send out to GFC hoops auctions to simply say "Check this out...I need a lottery win right now!" I want 'em all to be real.

**aeneas01** · 04-18-2008, 12:20 AM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

Originally posted by cjmedina1

I'm glad you got to talk with him..I just don't get the "your not registered so I cant answer you questions".

i hear ya - but apparently this seems to be the sop as far as other auction houses are concerned as well. the reason? apparently they feel that if someone takes the time to register then they are most likely serious buyers - and therefore responding to their questions may pay dividends.

Originally posted by suave1477

I dont understand why the need to post your whole conversation on emails on here was for but im glad that things endd up going positive.

i did it to be fair to russek - he saw that i had posted his first few curt responses and suggested that it only fair that i followed it up by posting his invitation to discuss the matter further via a phone call. and i agreed - it was the only fair thing to do.

Originally posted by otismalibu

I exchanged a few emails with him years ago and he told me to give him a call. I did, we had a brief chat and I learned something about Sixers jerseys that I'd not noticed before. He made reference to the old board and that was the first time I heard about it.

I always enjoy looking thru the GFC auctions because they always have a great offering of hoops jerseys. They've got the Dr. J. ABA dunk contest jersey in their current auction and they also have a sweet blue road Sixers jersey that will be in their HOF auction.

I emailed them regarding the blue Sixers jersey to point out that it was listed on their site as a 1976, but it's actually from the 77-78 season. I also offered to send them Erving game photos from the 77-78 season. I got a few unsigned "Thanks" and "That would be great" responses, but when I asked about my bidder status - no reply. I also sent an email regarding that Barkley jersey (and I signed my full name) - no response.

Perhaps I don't give them enough credit. Those two Erving jerseys are great and would be a fine addition to any collection. And the Barkley still looks like a brutal fake, IMO.

It's not like I'm rooting for fakes to show up. You have no idea how many links I send out to GFC hoops auctions to simply say "Check this out...I need a lottery win right now!" I want 'em all to be real.

nice post otismalibu - and i'm with you in that i'm not rooting for fakes to be listed. sure, a little garbage always seems to slip through at every auction house but, man, a lot of absolute gems have a knack of showing up as well, eh? the bottom line is i'm glad grey flannel yanked the gogolak lid - it was an embarrassment and only dragged down their other items. plus it appears someone also saved some cash given there were two bids already in on it....

**suave1477** · 04-18-2008, 09:57 AM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

Originally posted by aeneas01

i did it to be fair to russek - he saw that i had posted his first few curt responses and suggested that it only fair that i followed it up by posting his invitation to discuss the matter further via a phone call. and i agreed - it was the only fair thing to do.
....

Aenas so you understand im not trying to argue with you as I think you are one of the best helmet guys on this forum I am just trying to understand thats all.

You said you thought it would be fair to russek by posting your conversation here of him inviting you to speak to me directly after you admitted you started posting the begining of the conversation here.
Correct me if im wrong isnt it by that point a little too late on your behalf to be fair????

But my original question wasn't really answered what was the point of posting this thread to begin with. From what I can see technically he did nothing wrong because by going by most Auction policies they will respond to registered members which for his first few responses he seemed to be pleasent there was one moment where he might of seemed to be slight kurt but for the most part. He handled the situation pretty decent.
He even asked you in the email if you were a registered member and asked you to register if not.
I see you posted his side of the conversation can you please post yyour side of how you responded to him.

I means lets be fair so we can see both sides.

**aeneas01** · 04-18-2008, 11:01 AM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

Originally posted by suave1477

Aenas so you understand im not trying to argue with you as I think you are one of the best helmet guys on this forum I am just trying to understand thats all.

You said you thought it would be fair to russek by posting your conversation here of him inviting you to speak to me directly after you admitted you started posting the begining of the conversation here.
Correct me if im wrong isnt it by that point a little too late on your behalf to be fair????

But my original question wasn't really answered what was the point of posting this thread to begin with. From what I can see technically he did nothing wrong because by going by most Auction policies they will respond to registered members which for his first few responses he seemed to be pleasent there was one moment where he might of seemed to be slight kurt but for the most part. He handled the situation pretty decent.
He even asked you in the email if you were a registered member and asked you to register if not.
I see you posted his side of the conversation can you please post yyour side of how you responded to him.

I means lets be fair so we can see both sides.

no worries - you didn't give me the impression that you were being argumentative. obviously i wasn't clear so i'll try again...

i first emailed richard with reasons why i thought the helmet was bunk - he responded by asking if i was a registered bidder in good standing. i took this as a dodge and asked him what that had to do with the price of rice in china, i.e., the helmet's authenticity. he obviously didn't like this and responded rather condescendingly that it was their policy, that he would repeat it, and if i wasn't registered and in good standing not to contact them again as they wouldn't respond. i then told him that the first time he asked me the questions he made no mention that is was policy and that, in effect, i didn't appreciate his dismissive attitude and planned to share the emails with the forum. then we exchanged a few "fine", "fine", emails.

in your opinion he did nothing "technically" wrong. imo he did - he ignored serious issues regarding the lid, dismissed a serious a question, didn't tell me it was policy until a second condescending note and then decided to get into a "go ahead and post it, see if i care" exchange. so i obliged.

he then asked me to call him. when he didn't hear back, he emailed me a couple of more times asking again and added that he hoped i posted these emails as well given, imo, that it demonstrated that he wanted to resolve the issue. i could have simply said screw it and not posted his follow up emails thus leaving the impression that he could care less. but, as i mentioned, i wanted to be fair so i posted them at his request. i'm not sure what you mean by i posted his side of the conversation and that i should post mine to be fair - those are all of the emails.

we then had a good phone chat which i enjoyed very much, he ended up pulling the lid much to gf's credit, and all was right in the universe. and, as i mentioned, he's a very sharp guy who tells it like it is.

**hblakewolf** · 04-18-2008, 11:25 AM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

Originally posted by aeneas01

no worries - you didn't give me the impression that you were being argumentative. obviously i wasn't clear so i'll try again...

i first emailed richard with reasons why i thought the helmet was bunk - he responded by asking if i was a registered bidder in good standing. i took this as a dodge and asked him what that had to do with the price of rice in china, i.e., the helmet's authenticity. he obviously didn't like this and responded rather condescendingly that it was their policy, that he would repeat it, and if i wasn't registered and in good standing not to contact them again as they wouldn't respond. i then told him that the first time he asked me the questions he made no mention that is was policy and that, in effect, i didn't appreciate his dismissive attitude and planned to share the emails with the forum. then we exchanged a few "fine", "fine", emails.

in your opinion he did nothing "technically" wrong. imo he did - he ignored serious issues regarding the lid, dismissed a serious a question, didn't tell me it was policy until a second condescending note and then decided to get into a "go ahead and post it, see if i care" exchange. so i obliged.

he then asked me to call him. when he didn't hear back, he emailed me a couple of more times asking again and added that he hoped i posted these emails as well given, imo, that it demonstrated that he wanted to resolve the issue. i could have simply said screw it and not posted his follow up emails thus leaving the impression that he could care less. but, as i mentioned, i wanted to be fair so i posted them at his request. i'm not sure what you mean by i posted his side of the conversation and that i should post mine to be fair - those are all of the emails.

we then had a good phone chat which i enjoyed very much, he ended up pulling the lid much to gf's credit, and all was right in the universe. and, as i mentioned, he's a very sharp guy who tells it like it is.

Did you have a chance to read the attached Times story?

Page not found – New York Daily News

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/sports/2005/07/24/2005-07-24_the_score_hears___lots_of_gr.html

Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@patmedia,net

**aeneas01** · 04-18-2008, 03:51 PM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

coas, loas, sports memorabilia and judge judy, i mean judge marilyn - perfect...

**otismalibu** · 04-18-2008, 04:06 PM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

That robe shows moderate use and appears to have no alterations of any kind.

**kingjammy24** · 04-18-2008, 04:52 PM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

robert, i think it's great you were able to chat with richie and that the helmet was pulled.

"he is very familiar with the forum"

it's extremely disconcerting then that russek is very familiar with the forum and yet GFC continues to run items that are shown to be bad on here. it suggests that he's aware of the items, the problems, and continues to run them anyway. people on this forum were previously led to believe that richie was incapable of operating a computer. this at least provided some explanation as to why these items seem to be ignored. now that it's been confirmed that not only is richie computer-literate but is also is very familiar with the forum, GFC's practice of ignoring items shown to be bad on GUU certainly doesn't reflect very well on them.

"he knows mistakes have been made and he also knows that it's not a perfect system. and he doesn't pretend that, under the current system, more mistakes won't be made. and he's also very aware that the current system can generate feelings of mistrust and invite shenanigans."

excellent. so if understands that the current system is deeply flawed, then i trust he intends on trying to fix it. step 1 - accept the well-intetioned findings and advice of folks who aren't registered bidders/don't intend on paying you.

"yet, even so, he was disappointed and frustrated, much like bushing, that the only thing ever discussed at forums seems to be the gaffs - never the hard work and time spent nailing items, getting items right which, obviously, far outweigh the mistakes. in short, he ardently believes that the good, honest, hard work is being done everyday at auction houses but is completely overshadowed by the mistakes."

the idea that the only thing ever discussed are the gaffs is dead wrong. there are volumes of posts solely devoted to sharing information about jerseys, bats, helmets, etc. there's an entire section called "exceptionally educational" that highlights the best of these posts.

in regards to discussing the items that are authenticated accurately, i don't mean to sound facetious, but what does richie seriously want; a ticker tape parade? dozens of posts basically saying "this is a nice item!"? as it stands, multiple posters did post saying they thought the current GFC auction had a lot of very nice, quality pieces. what more?
naturally, more time is spent discussing the errors because the good items don't do any harm. when someone gets ripped off to the tune of $239k as billy crystal did on his mantle glove because some "professional authenticator" was asleep at the wheel ( http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/...l_s_glove.html ), then i think that merits more attention than the fact that someone just picked up a very nice '85 pat tabler jersey from Lelands. if richie is frustrated by people discussing the sloppy gaffs, then i guarantee you that people, in turn, are even more frustrated being victims of those gaffs. you know who pays for those mistakes? collectors. not GFC. GFC sold an absolutely horrendous '87 mcgriff shirt once. they pocketed the profits on it and some collector got stuck with a piece of garbage, so you'll have to excuse me if i don't have a lot of sympathy for richie's frustrations when it's the collecting community that pays the real price for them and not GFC. as frustrated as richie is having to constantly read about GFC's sloppy errors, collectors are even more frustrated being the victims of those errors. ditto for bushing and his "woe is me" lamentations. woe is him who authenticated a "game used" dimaggio glove that was actually made years after dimaggio retired the glove then made its way through the hobby, gouging collectors for thousands before it was finally put out of it's misery. my heart really goes out to dave for that whole debacle. ( http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/...ke_glove_.html )

secondly, i'm sure i sound like a broken record repeating this point but the issue doesn't simply revolve around errors. it revolves around the nature of them. more specifically, when the nature of an error indicates that it's more likely to be intentional than unintentional then the issue becomes significantly more serious. take the recent Krausse shirt. to bushing that was an error. however, in order for it to an innocent mistake, bushing had to have accomplished the highly unlikely; he either missed the stain or was unaware of mears' grading system. are either of these likely? if not, then is it really simply an innocent error?

when i first entered this hobby, i was as bright-eyed and bushy tailed as anyone. i thought the auction houses were great and the authenticators all real experts. then as time passed and i saw things happening, i woke up. lightbulbs started going off and i began to see the puzzle pieces coming together to reveal a picture of how this whole racket really works. of course, those involved in the racket have always done their utmost to try to convince people that there's nothing going on. what else would you expect though? i remember james brown of historic auctions calling us conspiracy theorists who were making big noises about nothing. this as he proceeded to run with yet another short-sleeved manning or retail rose jersey.

"anyway, i very much enjoyed the chat - russek is a very sharp, no-nonsense guy that has clearly been around the sports memorabilia auction block more than a few times. he''ll never be accused of sugarcoating his opinion or waxing poetic about his business of sports memorabilia"

good. sounds like he'd really enjoy participating in GUF. i have a real affection for folks who tell it like it is so i'm sure i'd love to read his posts. now that we know he owns a computer and knows how to access the Forum, it shouldn't be a problem to get him on. i'm sure chris cavalier would be more than happy to help set him up on here. i imagine it would go a very long way in helping to improve GFC's image.

"he will, imo, be more than willing to give a straight answer to any question about gf items if he feels the person asking is serious and not yanking his chain"

and he determines this, apparently, by whether or not they're registered bidders? his change of tune from telling you to buzz off and then immediately pulling a 180 and asking to call you is nothing short of bizarre.

i'll end off with a statement rob steinmetz made a long time ago that i thought held a lot of insight: "It is my belief that those who are vocal about the negatives of this forum are those who have the most to fear from what might come to light as a result of their active participation."

rudy.

**kingjammy24** · 04-18-2008, 06:18 PM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

Originally posted by hblakewolf

Did you have a chance to read the attached Times story?

Page not found – New York Daily News

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/sports/2005/07/24/2005-07-24_the_score_hears___lots_of_gr.html

Howard Wolf
hblakewolf@patmedia,net

rudy.

**aeneas01** · 04-18-2008, 06:51 PM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

rudy - i agree with everything you've stated. russek and bushing aren't saints but, then again, how many saints are there in this business? are they bald faced crooks that spend every waking moment conspiring to defraud the unsuspecting public? have they contributed zero to the hobby? i don't think so.

it's a shame these guys just don't bite the bullet and institute full satisfaction, money back guarantee policies - heck, charge a restocking fee if necessary. it would eliminate virtually all criticism. simply tell buyers that to the best of their knowledge items are authentic, provide a letter stating this, but if after purchase the item is discovered to be not as described then a full refund would be available. allow a 30-60 day period if necessary. i mean would such a policy sink an auction house? would it create an insurmountable accounting burden? i highly doubt it.

**cjmedina1** · 04-18-2008, 08:01 PM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

[quote=aeneas01;80792]i hear ya - but apparently this seems to be the sop as far as other auction houses are concerned as well. the reason? apparently they feel that if someone takes the time to register then they are most likely serious buyers - and therefore responding to their questions may pay dividends.

Taking 5 minutes to sign up is not the problem.The problem is there is no bat lengths or weights in the auction description. Register or not this should be in the listing..... Are they trying to pass bats that are not with in MAC Specs? I'm not picking on them just bringing up valid points that might attract bidders.

Also a correction needs to be made. Its noted that Mcgwire bat lot 658 at the end it says"[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] 2000 "MAC25" model Rawlings Adirondack with tar on the handle which is not typical for McGwire....

" Do I need to be a registerd bidder to tell them they made a mistake?

Carlie Medina III

carliemedinaiii@sbcglobal.net
[/FONT]

**Eric** · 04-18-2008, 08:03 PM

Re: A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

Originally posted by aeneas01

simply tell buyers that to the best of their knowledge items are authentic, provide a letter stating this, but if after purchase the item is discovered to be not as described then a full refund would be available.

therein lies the problem. you'll never get consumer to agree with auction house about what constitutes proof.

I have "proven" to auction houses that a game worn shirt was a scoreboard shirt and "proven" that an item had been modified and they were both sold anyway with the excuses "we trust our authenticator" and "have you seen every photo of ______) How can you argue those things?

A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

A Chat With Russek, Grey Flannel Prez...

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment