Mastro Winslow Helmet- Am I Nuts?

[kingjammy24]

why a "helmet expert"? you're not so much disputing the legitimacy of the facemask as much as simply saying it literally changed overnight.
all they need is someone with a) the gift the eyesight b) the cognitive ability to tell the difference between 2 bars and 3 bars. they need a "helmet expert" to tell them that one picture has 2 bars and the other picture has 3 bars? what are they..unionized?

rudy.

[Eric]

Here's the official word from Mastro

1) The helmet is from the Duke Hott collection. It came in over a year ago.

(Note- this is what was told to me when I was offered the helmet last year and rejected it because the facemask was wrong)

2) The helmet was photographed prior to authentication taking place

(Note- yesterday i was told that the information in the item description describing a two bar mask was the same info on the authentication letter)

3) Lou Lampson looked at the helmet and said the shell was correct for Kellen Winslow but the mask was incorrect.

(Note- this isn't exactly the case. For the record, when I was offered the helmet the emails, which I still have, say Lou looked at it and it's a good helmet. The only reason he determined that the mask was incorrect is because that was my reason for rejecting the helmet.)

Specifically Lampson said "a very good Winslow representation.It’s a 1985-86 era. All original with triple color number 80 identifiers on the back of the helmet. Nice wear throughout, gold facemask."

4) According to Mastro, since it was determined the facemask was wrong, Mr. Lampson "found the correct mask to replace it with"

(Note- I didn't know you could do that)
Eric

[otismalibu]

That's beyond pathetic.

Someone needs a Pacman-type suspension.

I wonder how often Lou has to "find the correct tag to replace it with".

[kingjammy24]

"4) According to Mastro, since it was determined the facemask was wrong, Mr. Lampson "found the correct mask to replace it with"



had you not engaged them, would anyone know the facemask was a replacement? apparently mastro didn't even know at first. the description makes no mention of a restored facemask.

if lou authenticates a jersey and finds the tagging is wrong, does he replace it with the correct tagging?

frightening lou, frightening.

rudy.

[RobSteinmetz]

Eric,

Does Mastro see anything wrong with Lou's decision to swap out the face mask? How do they plan to proceed?

[kingjammy24]

as it currently stands, all pics show a 2-bar mask. the loa/description mentions a 2-bar mask. (apparently lou realized the mask was wrong and replaced it after he "authenticated" it?) there's no mention whatsoever of a 3-bar mask anywhere. it's likely that the bidders are basing their decisions on the pics and the description; ie: a 2-bar mask. boy is the winner going to be surprised when they get that helmet in the mail and see a 3-bar mask.

rudy.

[Eric]

New photos are up showing a 3 bar facemask.

I wrote them back and asked if Mr. Lampson switched the facemask out with the permission of the consignor? Or perhaps is her the consignor?

I also asked if it was switched with a game used facemask of Winslow's?

Mastro also said that there will be "a modification note" on the website.

I just got an email saying Doug Allen has left me a voicemail, so I'll see what that's about.

This doesn't explain why the authenticator would switch out a facemask on something because it was the wrong facemask and why the auction house had photographed the wrong one.
Eric

[Eric]

Justin listened to the voicemail.

Doug Allen says they got the Winslow from the Duke Hott collection. They determined the facemask was incorrect and he and Mastro, based on the fact that the facemask was incorrect for what Winslow wore during this time period, asked Lampson to go find a vintage-style facemask similar to what Winslow would have worn.

Allen said that request was not documented properly and the wrong photos and description were put on the site.

He says the proper one will be put on, noting that it's a vintage-style facemask and not the game used original.

He admits there were miscommunications and was quite apologetic.

Eric

[Eric]

None of this by the way explains why everyone was fine with the helmet and facemask when it was offered to me a year ago for $5500!!!!, and it wasn't until I determined there was a problem, that there was a problem.

Now of course everyone is saying they determined the facemask was bad. I did the research on it when everyone was talking about the great provenance and authenticator and saw that something wasn't right...

Eric

[ChrisCavalier]

Doug Allen says they got the Winslow from the Duke Hott collection. They determined the facemask was incorrect and he and Mastro, based on the fact that the facemask was incorrect for what Winslow wore during this time period, asked Lampson to go find a vintage-style facemask similar to what Winslow would have worn.

Allen said that request was not documented properly and the wrong photos and description were put on the site.

Based on the initial online description (which I assume matches the description in the catalog...I did not receive one), it appears the original description did not include anything regarding the facemask change. Therefore, based on the explanation above, should we assume there was a separate description written by Mastro prior to this thread that was supposed to be used for this item? Personally, I would have liked to see the “right” description.

I guess the reason I ask is that I was very surprised to read on the vintage baseball card forum a while back how Mastro felt it was okay to do to certain things to baseball cards without having to disclose them to potential buyers. This included "taking out light creases or surface wrinkles" and "laying down corners or 'flips' caused by handling”. Here is a link to the post:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/message/1164339760/last-1164778122/Feedback

Apparently I wasn't the only one surprised to see these things being done. In fact, I thought the following quote by an apparently seasoned card collector was particularly insightful “I too believe that removing even minor wrinkles comprises alteration. Doug, even if you disagree, you must admit that the question is both unsettled and important to collectors. That being said, why doesn't Mastro simply disclose the ‘work’ performed on each card, so the collector can factor that into his bid?” Here is a link to the overall thread:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/message/1164306390/Questions+for+Doug+Allen

Does anyone know if Mastro now discloses these card preparation “practices” when listing them for sale? Judging from the posts on the thread linked above, it seems they should definitely be disclosed as at least some buyers would want to know if the card they are bidding on has had a surface crease or wrinkle removed. It also leads me to wonder if there are certain preparation “practices” regarding game used items that certain sellers may feel are okay to do without disclosing them to potential buyers.

As a side note, I hope everyone has seen from our efforts to help collectors make truly informed decisions (as well as the way we conducted our pilot auction) that those involved with Game Used Universe absolutely believe in full disclosure for the potential buyer. In fact, I think the Lou Brock bat description in our pilot auction disclosed some facts that probably prevented the bidding from going higher on that item. While we realize this did not maximize our profits from the auction, we would not have even considered doing it any other way.

Sincerely,
Chris Cavalier