PDA

View Full Version : MEARS 100% Buyer Protection No Longer Honored?



aeneas01
04-27-2011, 03:08 PM
according to the mears bulletin board it appears that mears will no longer honor their 100% buyer protection program effective in a few days, 05/01/11. if i read the statement correctly, it looks like mears is saying that this change in policy is retroactive and that only the evaluation fee, not the buyer's out of pocket loss per mears' promise, will be covered should it be discovered that their evaluation was incorrect. in other words, if someone purchased an item based largely on a mears letter and mears' promise to back the purchase, well it looks like they're now out of luck.

if this is true, if i am reading mears' statement correctly, it strikes me as quite a precarious maneuver on mears' part - i mean how can all of those guarantees, those promises, all of a sudden be null and void just like that, simply because mears has decided to go in a different direction? further, does mears really believe that their change in policy could possibly hold up if challenged by a holder of one of their guarantees?

here is what mears had promised buyers, those that purchased an item with a mears letter:

MEARS 100% Purchase Protection Guarantee

The Buyer Protection Program is one of the fundamental guiding principles upon which MEARS was founded. We realize that collectors are looking for quality, certainty, and security when it comes to buying and selling memorabilia for their collections. Since our inception, MEARS has operated under the guidelines that if you purchased an item that MEARS evaluated and it was later proven to be something other than what MEARS claimed, MEARS would guarantee that you, as the purchaser, were not out of pocket for the expense of that purchase. This principle has become even more important now that MEARS members are selling items through our website.

In the past, this Buyer Protection Program has protected the collector and will continue to protect the collector through a wide range of remedies, which include:

MEARS purchasing the item outright thereby removing all financial responsibility from the collector.

Refunding a portion of the purchase price. This occurs in the instance when MEARS has made a minor error in the evaluation, which does not affect the overall authenticity of the piece itself.

MEARS will work with an auction house to assist the purchaser in returning the item for a full refund.

Locating a similar or comparable item to replace the original one evaluated.
The key to our ability to offer this guarantee and these services is the use of our worksheets and grading concepts. MEARS goes to great lengths to evaluate and grade all items with consistent accuracy. The Buyers Protection Program is designed to allow the purchaser to review all the details of our evaluation so that an informed purchasing decision can be made.

here is mears' change in policy statement, recently posted at the mears board:

With all that being said, I want to address changes in the MEARS Buyers Protection Program (MBPP). Effective 1 May 2011, claims against this policy will be limited to a refund of fees paid for evaluation. The MPPP was revolutionary and something I feel was the right concept of for the time. However, the number/value of items we have evaluated to this point have a direct and material effect on the price of insurance premiums required to safeguard this policy. Shareholders in MEARS Authentications (a separate business entity from MEARS Auctions) have made the decision to change the policy with respect to revenues and operating expenses. To date, the MBPP has refunded over $25,000 to collectors and there is another $6,000-$9,000 in claims pending. In the cases of where refunds were provided in accordance with the MBPP, the fees refunded far exceed (by an approximate factor of 10 times) the actual revenues generated by the evaluations. It should be noted that with respect to those pending claims, if found to be warranted, claims under the pre- 1 May 2011 will be honored.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/426247/message/1303856456/Revisions+to+MEARS+Buyer%27s+Protection+Program

the last line, highlighted in red, seems to indicate that mears will make good on any pending claims (if warranted) currently in the pipeline and any other claim that's submitted to mears prior to the 05/01/11 deadline. but beyond that, once the 05/01/11 deadline has come and gone, it appears the most one can hope for is the cost of the evaluation regardless of past promises...

another interesting change in the mears policy is that it appears they will no longer require that auction houses make available to them information which would ensure honest bidding. in the past robert edwards auctions was willing to abide by these rules but it now looks like mears will forgo these requirements and is receptive to all auction houses that might be interested in mears' services.

frankly, i never really understood how mears ever concluded that offering a "no loss" guarantee was a viable business approach, i mean their exposure was obviously tremendous. for example, if someone purchased an item for $100,000 based on mears' letter and guarantee, the only thing mears had to offset this exposure with was their evaluation fee, not much leverage there. anyway, i thought this was interesting news. i think what mears has stated on their board is pretty clear, but if i misunderstood i will be happy to change my post....

zonker
04-27-2011, 04:50 PM
how and where do you go to file a claim? any link or does someone know how to get to the link on the mears site.

kprst6
04-27-2011, 05:16 PM
Auction/memorabilia companies are getting worse by the second.

They don't want to guarantee anything because it allows them to sell, promote, and "certify" high end questionable items without any fear that someone will return a $100,000 item that the proved was fake.

I sure would sleep better at night if I knew I wouldn't have to refund $100,000 to someone while the COA still existed. It helps auctions companies and certification companies become lazier as the responsibility is completely eliminated from the company certifying and selling an item.

1929tudor
04-27-2011, 06:20 PM
Auction companies are yes getting worse. Most of the you see that have PSA look at something have PSA Pre-Certify. So you win the item at that cost. Pay a buyers preminim for another cost. Pay for shipping. A third cost and then if you want to get a PSA certificate you have to pay PSA to certify the item which to me they already did in the first place to get it pre certified. So your hit with 4 fees. What a joke.

aeneas01
04-27-2011, 08:29 PM
how and where do you go to file a claim? any link or does someone know how to get to the link on the mears site.
i imagine the best thing to do would be to just go to mears' website and submit a claim using mears' contact page, perhaps do a screen capture for one's records. once sent, the claim is in the pipeline and would have to be considered pending. but, really, i don't think this is even necessary - if someone has a problem with letter dated before 05/01/11 i would think the best thing to do would be to just hold mears to their promise despite the 05/01/11 deadline - i mean mears guaranteed to make good on any out of pocket loss when the letter was written, right?

fwiw i don't envy the spot mears is in - they've created a potentially disastrous situation for their business by guaranteeing to make good on out of pocket losses due to problems with their letters. the barry bonds russell jerseys mears stamped as authentic and game used alone would be a killer if the buyers returned them. then there's the mcauliffe shirts. and some of the post career babe ruth bats. etc., etc. - so much potential exposure.

in fact there's a 1938 gehrig jersey currently listed at rea right now that the buyer purchased years ago for $250,000 plus juice based largely on a mears a9 grade. prior to listing it at rea mears took another look at it and gave it an a5. needless to say the owner of the shirt probably wasn't too thrilled about this. mears eventually settled on an "average grade" of a7 or so by combining the old and new grades. if the shirt sells for much less than what the seller purchased it for based on the a9 grade, i'm sure he would want to have a chat about mears' buy back guarantee. could be a big number. and that's just one item. for those interested this is all public information that can be found at rea's blog.

i really don't know how mears can get out from under their potentially crippling buy back obligations. but announcing an arbitrary deadline doesn't seem to be a realistic solution. would shutting down and re-opening under a new name, a la mastro/legendary, offer a legal out? maybe.

zonker
04-27-2011, 08:41 PM
thank you, robert

schubert1970
04-27-2011, 10:31 PM
Too bad people place so much emphasis on a Mears letter. heck my Rose jersey on REA has several photomatches and Mears won't authenticate it. They basically killed the value of my uniform. I thought photomatches were the best, apparently not.

schubert1970
04-27-2011, 10:40 PM
Too bad people place so much emphasis on a Mears letter. heck my Rose jersey on REA has several photomatches and Mears won't authenticate it. They basically killed the value of my uniform. I thought photomatches were the best, apparently not.

Also, I received A10 on the uniform then was told undable to authenticate, what a joke.

trsent
04-28-2011, 12:21 AM
I understand MEARS change in policy and I was always amazed they offered such as great policy with a lot of risk for a very small price realized.

Now, I have not yet talked to Troy, but I will assume MEARS will 100% stand behind items they sell in their retail division and in the auctions but other items they authenticate and do not sell themselves they would only honor refunding the authentication fees.

I'd like to hear more from Troy about it.

DeacDoug
04-28-2011, 08:01 AM
I think that Mears would lose any suit over a jersey authenticated before May 1. You can't institute this new policy retroactively. Mears' choice, IMO, is either to go out of business or to honor the pre-May 1 guarantees. That said, it is probably harder to prove in court that a specific jersey is not authentic than it is to show its authenticity. I know because I lost such a case in White Plains, NY involving the late George Martin Lyons, a hobby hall of famer, as the defendant.

ziggy
04-28-2011, 10:04 AM
If you have a problem with them don't use them. I would never pay an authentication company. If you are interested in purchasing an item don't buy it because of the letter...Do you your homework. If interested in an item and have questions about it.......ask the forum. IT IS FREE.

trsent
04-28-2011, 10:37 AM
I lost such a case in White Plains, NY involving the late George Martin Lyons, a hobby hall of famer, as the defendant.

I'd love to hear more details about this case. I'm sure the rest of the fourm would like to read about it also. If you get a chance, please tell us the history of the case.

aeneas01
04-28-2011, 06:34 PM
If you are interested in purchasing an item don't buy it because of the letter...
i agree. but the thing is mears didn't just offer a letter. not by a long shot. mears also insured the item. which is huge. mears promised that they would protect collectors against any out of pocket loss arising from "an item that mears evaluated and it was later proven to be something other than what mears claimed... the key to our ability to offer this guarantee and these services is the use of our worksheets and grading concepts. mears goes to great lengths to evaluate and grade all items with consistent accuracy."

but now mears is saying that, retroactively, they will not honor their guarantee, they will not honor their promised coverage. again, i agree that a collector probably shouldn't base a purchase solely on a letter. but that's not what mears offered. mears also offered coverage against loss with the letter.


I understand MEARS change in policy and I was always amazed they offered such as great policy with a lot of risk for a very small price realized.
not sure why you would think it was such a great policy given that current holders of the policy, of the mears guarantee, can't exercise its terms according to mears' recent statement. in fact couldn't it be argued that it was a pretty poor policy now that mears has started to pay out on some of the claims (per their statement) and has realized they can't/won't honor any more pre 05/01/11 guarantees unless they are already pending?


Now, I have not yet talked to Troy, but I will assume MEARS will 100% stand behind items they sell in their retail division and in the auctions but other items they authenticate and do not sell themselves they would only honor refunding the authentication fees.
there's nothing to assume. in the statement mears clearly states that they will offer buyer protection for items purchased through mears. the question is, will mears eventually decide not to honor these guarantees as well if claims mount? btw, at the end of mears' change in policy statement they mention:

"it should also be noted that any item previously evaluated by mears will be revaluated (at no cost to the consigner) before a decision is made to offer it in mears auction."

imo this is a somewhat of an odd statement in that it comes across as mears saying that they no longer trust the letters and grades they have issued in the past, at least not enough to let them go unchecked for their own auctions. not sure what sort of message that sends out....

it's hard to tell who is now doing evaluations for mears - dave bushing has said that he is no longer involved. it seems that dave grob is still involved in some capacity. whatever the case, i think it's more than obvious that mears has had some very knowledgeable hobby experts evaluating for them in the past. the problem is, imo, these evaluators are handcuffed by having to work within the mears worksheet and grading criteria - it just doesn't work and puts these guys, especially the evaluators, in impossible no-win situations. i think a simple letter of opinion, sans grade and worksheet, is plenty if prepared by someone that knows what he's doing - and the 100% buy back pitch is just a huge, unnecessary problem waiting to happen given today's fluidity of information and communication within the hobby.

trsent
04-28-2011, 11:40 PM
I spoke to Troy Kinunen about the policy changes today, and as I expected, everything I assumed was true.

MEARS will stand behind any item their retail and auction division sells. Items authenticated after the change in date will not be covered for a purchase price, as they cannot take 100% responsibility for what someone paid for an item at a 2nd hand marketplace. This is common sense, and their old policy was a strong message for the industry, but at the end of the day, it could bankrupt the company and a lot of honest people's jobs.

Troy told me about the thousands and thousands of letters they have written without issue, but a few errors found and everyone assumes it's the end of the world. Like any other 3rd party authenticator, MEARS gives an opinion based on research and data. Errors may take place, and MEARS is now only able to guarantee letters written for items they sell in their auction or retail division. Other letters will have the letter price guaranteed, but not the value of an item.

I do not know of any other 3rd party authenticator who offers such a policy to cover purchase price of an item with problems found later. MEARS tried to make a ground breaking policy, and they have decided to change the policy to a safer policy for the future of their company.

I'm not sure why there is any more concern, the MEARS policy has been outlined for their new direction, and everyone now knows of this policy so they can decide to use the MEARS service or not.

Also, I asked Troy about who their primary authenticators are now, and as I expected, the answer was Troy himself and Dave Grob.

aeneas01
04-29-2011, 01:55 AM
MEARS will stand behind any item their retail and auction division sells.

mears said the same about the other items they've evaluated, that they would stand behind them 100%. now they've announced they won't. that they've changed their minds. will it stick this time around?


Items authenticated after the change in date will not be covered for a purchase price...

according to mears' announcement, items before the change won't be covered either despite what mears guaranteed.


...they cannot take 100% responsibility for what someone paid for an item at a 2nd hand marketplace.

but that's exactly what mears promised as part of their evaluation service, as part of the value of a mears letter. they said they would protect the buyer against any loss as a result of a mistake in their letter. in fact they guaranteed it. now they're reneging according to their recent statement.


...their old policy was a strong message for the industry, but at the end of the day, it could bankrupt the company and a lot of honest people's jobs.

what's the strong message to the industry? mears offered a guarantee and now they're taking it back. where's the message in that?


Troy told me about the thousands and thousands of letters they have written without issue, but a few errors found and everyone assumes it's the end of the world.

i don't think anyone believes that this is the end of the world, i just think some are concerned that what was promised is now being unilaterally unpromised.


MEARS tried to make a ground breaking policy, and they have decided to change the policy to a safer policy for the future of their company.

changing policy is fine, going forward. trying to make it retroactive isn't nor is reneging on collectors who in large part based their purchase decision on mears' 100% buyer protection guarantee.


Also, I asked Troy about who their primary authenticators are now, and as I expected, the answer was Troy himself and Dave Grob.
that's good information. although it seems like an awful lot of work for two "primary" guys.

aeneas01
04-29-2011, 02:58 AM
Auction/memorabilia companies are getting worse by the second. They don't want to guarantee anything because it allows them to sell, promote, and "certify" high end questionable items without any fear that someone will return a $100,000 item that the proved was fake.
i'm not sure that's entirely true. it has been my experience that most auction houses will take an item back if it can be conclusively proven that it wasn't as described or not authentic.

having said that, i don't know why an authenticator would even consider guaranteeing their work to the tune of an item's full market value. not because they're not good at what they do, but because the scope of what they're trying to do is so enormous and because aberrations to the norm, which can easily invalidate an opinion, are usually inevitable. take mears for example - i don't think there's anyone alive that takes the evaluation process more seriously, spends as much time on it, or offers as much detailed/quality work as dave grob. moreover i recently looked at an evaluation that dave bushing did on a very valuable piece that was impressive as hell and spot on. yet i would bet that both daves would admit that he's missed a thing or two in the past. of course this isn't a knock on these guys, it's just the nature of the beast. and the beast has never been more formidable than it is today given the easy communication between niche experts and the ton of available information that's readily available to anyone interested in doing a little digging. jmo.

CollectGU
04-29-2011, 12:51 PM
From my experience, I'm not so sure that their buy back guarantee was something they truly honored.

I purchased a jersey from ebay for $2,800 in the fall of 2008 and told the owner that I wanted a guarantee against authentication by MEARS with the intent of selling it in REA. I sent it into REA, who sent it to MEARS and it came back as an A10 (and I actually apid the authentication costs.) I let the seller know that it passed authtneication in February 2009. It was put in the catalogue and in auction as an A10. During the auction , Troy said he received information that the jersey was no good and asked that it be pulled which it was. I asked Troy if I was protected, since they were wrong in their original authentication and I was out $2,800 ( i explained in an email to the ols owner that it was now deemed not be authentic, but was ignored). He told me I wasn't protected and I felt that I should have been, because once they deemed it an A10 and I released the seller from the money back guarantee, I was now the one losing money based on their incorrect evaluation, and Troy still wouldn't budge, which made me question just how great the protection is.

Best,
Dave

trsent
04-29-2011, 02:29 PM
mears said the same about the other items they've evaluated, that they would stand behind them 100%. now they've announced they won't. that they've changed their minds. will it stick this time around?

How can anyone answer your question? It is impossible to know the answer. You poise a question to raise doubt which is your choice. You are basically trying to cause confusion in the industry. Never a positive post about MEARS from you, so what is your point?

I understand, you don't like the policy change, but MEARS made a decision and unless you get a court order I don't believe that decision is going to chance. They announced their decision and maybe it's because they are the only authenticator in the business open to public submissions (other than bat authenticators, there is no public authentication company writing letters for jerseys and other items) or maybe it has something to do with Dave Bushing not working for their authentication division anymore, but it is the change they decided to make.


according to mears' announcement, items before the change won't be covered either despite what mears guaranteed.

but that's exactly what mears promised as part of their evaluation service, as part of the value of a mears letter. they said they would protect the buyer against any loss as a result of a mistake in their letter. in fact they guaranteed it. now they're reneging according to their recent statement.

what's the strong message to the industry? mears offered a guarantee and now they're taking it back. where's the message in that?

I would guess the message is not to use their authenticating service if you used it for their guarantee. So, people who have items they are looking to sell with a good letter should take their item to which authenticating service now?

I know, people on this forum say just post it on here and we will tell you if it is good. Some people want a piece of paper, and MEARS is the only one offering this. No more money back guarantee hurts the value of the letter, but as usual, people bring up a small handful of errors found by MEARS but never pat them on the back for the multiple thousands of correct evaluations.

Again - They give an opinion, just now you lose the protection part. What I remember from this policy is that MEARS made a guarantee, but they also had a policy to go after the original submitter for the losses if errors were found. I don't remember details, but who cares, the policy is now void.


i don't think anyone believes that this is the end of the world, i just think some are concerned that what was promised is now being unilaterally unpromised.

changing policy is fine, going forward. trying to make it retroactive isn't nor is reneging on collectors who in large part based their purchase decision on mears' 100% buyer protection guarantee.

I think you are confused. I think most people didn't even know of the guarantee. Most people see a letter and make a decision.


that's good information. although it seems like an awful lot of work for two "primary" guys.

I think you believe MEARS is taking a lot more submissions that I believe they are.

In closing, I understand the reasoning for the policy change by MEARS - Too much risk for not enough profit. They risk being set up by fraudulent people, they risk the employment of several full time employees.

I always found the policy to be amazing and it caused a lot of friction on the boards over the years of how it was interpreted. Now they are moving forward with a new policy, and those who don't like it have to find other ways to have letters written for their merchandise.

It's a new day.

trsent
04-29-2011, 02:33 PM
i'm not sure that's entirely true. it has been my experience that most auction houses will take an item back if it can be conclusively proven that it wasn't as described or not authentic.

having said that, i don't know why an authenticator would even consider guaranteeing their work to the tune of an item's full market value. not because they're not good at what they do, but because the scope of what they're trying to do is so enormous and because aberrations to the norm, which can easily invalidate an opinion, are usually inevitable. take mears for example - i don't think there's anyone alive that takes the evaluation process more seriously, spends as much time on it, or offers as much detailed/quality work as dave grob. moreover i recently looked at an evaluation that dave bushing did on a very valuable piece that was impressive as hell and spot on. yet i would bet that both daves would admit that he's missed a thing or two in the past. of course this isn't a knock on these guys, it's just the nature of the beast. and the beast has never been more formidable than it is today given the easy communication between niche experts and the ton of available information that's readily available to anyone interested in doing a little digging. jmo.

Robert, you are wrong with the comment that most auction houses stand behind their auctions. Many, many do, but many, many have a policy that all items should be viewed before the auction and all sales are final.

Why do so many auction houses not accept credit cards? Insane that in 2011 any major business doesn't take credit cards, but still some major sports memorabilia auction houses do not take credit cards and they say this is to save 2-4% fees but many of us know this is so items cannot be returned and disputed.

earlywynnfan
04-29-2011, 03:16 PM
From my experience, I'm not so sure that their buy back guarantee was something they truly honored.

I purchased a jersey from ebay for $2,800 in the fall of 2008 and told the owner that I wanted a guarantee against authentication by MEARS with the intent of selling it in REA. I sent it into REA, who sent it to MEARS and it came back as an A10 (and I actually apid the authentication costs.) I let the seller know that it passed authtneication in February 2009. It was put in the catalogue and in auction as an A10. During the auction , Troy said he received information that the jersey was no good and asked that it be pulled which it was. I asked Troy if I was protected, since they were wrong in their original authentication and I was out $2,800 ( i explained in an email to the ols owner that it was now deemed not be authentic, but was ignored). He told me I wasn't protected and I felt that I should have been, because once they deemed it an A10 and I released the seller from the money back guarantee, I was now the one losing money based on their incorrect evaluation, and Troy still wouldn't budge, which made me question just how great the protection is.

Best,
Dave

Dave, the way I read this, I agree with MEARS that you deserve to get your money back from the original seller who guaranteed the item. Now, if someone bought the item from REA and then it was deemed bad, then that person would be under the MEARS guarantee.

Just my opinion, though.

Ken
earlywynnfan5@hotmail.com

BarryMeisel
04-29-2011, 03:24 PM
Joel,

MeiGray authenticates jerseys. Our area of greatest expertise is hockey and modern-era basketball jerseys.

Because of our vast research material and our working relationsihp with Getty Images, we believe we offer the hobby's most reliable and comprehensive photo-matching service.

And we believe the most reliable level of authentication involves that which relies on facts, not opinions.

Respectfully,

Barry

aeneas01
04-29-2011, 03:50 PM
Dave, the way I read this, I agree with MEARS that you deserve to get your money back from the original seller who guaranteed the item. Now, if someone bought the item from REA and then it was deemed bad, then that person would be under the MEARS guarantee.

Just my opinion, though.

Ken
earlywynnfan5@hotmail.com
ken, if i read dave's post correctly, and his account is accurate, then mears is definitely on the hook for the $2,800 based on their buyer protection guarantee. dave purchased the shirt from the seller contingent on whether or not it passed muster with mears. mears' gave it two enthusiastic thumbs up, an a10, so dave released the seller from their arrangement secure in the knowledge that his $2,800 was well spent. had mears told dave that the shirt was fake, or that they were unable to authenticate it, then dave wouldn't have dropped $2,800 for the shirt, nor would the seller have held him to the deal because of their contingency arrangement. so mears is directly responsible for dave being out of pocket on this deal, and therefore should reimburse dave the full amount for the shirt, plus the money he spent for the evaluation, according to their policy.


Joel,

MeiGray authenticates jerseys. Our area of greatest expertise is hockey and modern-era basketball jerseys.

Because of our vast research material and our working relationsihp with Getty Images, we believe we offer the hobby's most reliable and comprehensive photo-matching service.

And we believe the most reliable level of authentication involves that which relies on facts, not opinions.

Respectfully,

Barry
very helpful contribution barry.

freddiefreeman5
04-29-2011, 05:38 PM
If an company can make their buyer protection null and void and make it retroactive then why use them at all?
What good are they if they decide not to stand behind their work?

If anyone thinks that this will save them from future financial loss then I bet you would be wrong. There are a lot of the original Mears COA's out there and all it is going to take is one lawsuit for the house to crumble.

freddiefreeman5
04-29-2011, 05:39 PM
I wanted to say also that I can understand if Mears wants to make a new contract with new items but to make it retroactive is not good business in my eyes.

CollectGU
04-29-2011, 08:57 PM
ken, if i read dave's post correctly, and his account is accurate, then mears is definitely on the hook for the $2,800 based on their buyer protection guarantee. dave purchased the shirt from the seller contingent on whether or not it passed muster with mears. mears' gave it two enthusiastic thumbs up, an a10, so dave released the seller from their arrangement secure in the knowledge that his $2,800 was well spent. had mears told dave that the shirt was fake, or that they were unable to authenticate it, then dave wouldn't have dropped $2,800 for the shirt, nor would the seller have held him to the deal because of their contingency arrangement. so mears is directly responsible for dave being out of pocket on this deal, and therefore should reimburse dave the full amount for the shirt, plus the money he spent for the evaluation, according to their policy.


very helpful contribution barry.

Robert,

That is accurate. Once they deemed the shirt authenic and I released the seller letting him know it passed with an A10, then he was no longer responsible to me. It didn't switch to unable to authenticate until 3 months after I released him (the seller could have done the rigfht thing here, but I'm sure he knew I had no leg to stand on once I informed him it passed so he ignored me). The liability for my loss passed onto MEARS in my opinion when they authenticated it as authentic and I released the seller based on their authentication. They refused to reimburse when I requested under the buyer protection program. I sent MEARS my emails showing the contingent deal with the seller, etc to prove my point with Troy but to no avail.

Dave

trsent
04-30-2011, 12:26 AM
Joel,

MeiGray authenticates jerseys. Our area of greatest expertise is hockey and modern-era basketball jerseys.

Because of our vast research material and our working relationsihp with Getty Images, we believe we offer the hobby's most reliable and comprehensive photo-matching service.

And we believe the most reliable level of authentication involves that which relies on facts, not opinions.

Respectfully,

Barry

Barry, sorry, I forgot about MeiGray being a 3rd party authenticator.

Your company has so many team deals often I forget you do offer this service!

BarryMeisel
04-30-2011, 08:47 AM
No problem, Joel.

Barry

aeneas01
05-01-2011, 10:42 PM
Robert, That is accurate...
in that case dave (assuming there are no extenuating circumstances or details that you didn't mention), mears has you covered for the full amount you're out of pocket, including the evaluation fee according to mears' "100% purchase protection guarantee" - there's nothing at all ambiguous about mears' protection guarantee:

"The Buyer Protection Program is one of the fundamental guiding principles upon which MEARS was founded. We realize that collectors are looking for quality, certainty, and security when it comes to buying and selling memorabilia for their collections. Since our inception, MEARS has operated under the guidelines that if you purchased an item that MEARS evaluated and it was later proven to be something other than what MEARS claimed, MEARS would guarantee that you, as the purchaser, were not out of pocket for the expense of that purchase."

further, the guy you purchased the item from became moot the moment mears stepped in for a fee, told you it was an a9, and guaranteed there findings. in short dave, mears assumed full financial responsibility for the item when you went through with the purchase based on mears' fee-based expert opinion, according to the terms of their published guarantee. mears clearly states that they are able to guarantee their expert opinions because:

"The key to our ability to offer this guarantee and these services is the use of our worksheets and grading concepts. MEARS goes to great lengths to evaluate and grade all items with consistent accuracy..."

in fact, according to a fairly recent mears post at the net54baseball forum, mears is working with the consignor of the 1938 gehrig jersey in the current rea auction because he originally purchased the jersey based on a mears a9 grade (and guarantee i assume), which was later lowered by mears to an a5, then upped to an a7. according to mears' post, the consignor feels that the downgrade in evaluation score will cause him out of pocket loss. sounds similar to your situation.

CollectGU
05-02-2011, 03:26 PM
in that case dave (assuming there are no extenuating circumstances or details that you didn't mention), mears has you covered for the full amount you're out of pocket, including the evaluation fee according to mears' "100% purchase protection guarantee" - there's nothing at all ambiguous about mears' protection guarantee:

"The Buyer Protection Program is one of the fundamental guiding principles upon which MEARS was founded. We realize that collectors are looking for quality, certainty, and security when it comes to buying and selling memorabilia for their collections. Since our inception, MEARS has operated under the guidelines that if you purchased an item that MEARS evaluated and it was later proven to be something other than what MEARS claimed, MEARS would guarantee that you, as the purchaser, were not out of pocket for the expense of that purchase."

further, the guy you purchased the item from became moot the moment mears stepped in for a fee, told you it was an a9, and guaranteed there findings. in short dave, mears assumed full financial responsibility for the item when you went through with the purchase based on mears' fee-based expert opinion, according to the terms of their published guarantee. mears clearly states that they are able to guarantee their expert opinions because:

"The key to our ability to offer this guarantee and these services is the use of our worksheets and grading concepts. MEARS goes to great lengths to evaluate and grade all items with consistent accuracy..."

in fact, according to a fairly recent mears post at the net54baseball forum, mears is working with the consignor of the 1938 gehrig jersey in the current rea auction because he originally purchased the jersey based on a mears a9 grade (and guarantee i assume), which was later lowered by mears to an a5, then upped to an a7. according to mears' post, the consignor feels that the downgrade in evaluation score will cause him out of pocket loss. sounds similar to your situation.


I am going to email Troy and ask them if they wil reconsider my request for a refund of the $2,800 based on how the purchase protection guarantee reads (which I think I fit the criteria). They did agree to refund the authentication cost associated with the jersey, but not refund the money I was out under their purchase protection program...I will let you know what they say.

Dave