Changes at MEARS

[Eric]

Re: Changes at MEARS

Mark, I do not know the answer to your question, but I think you should bring it up each and every day in a new thread on this site and you should add it to any discussion about MEARS on this discussion forum. In fact, you should email them every day and keep posting about your grade until your fingers get tired of typing.

You should also keep posting about it on the MEARS forum. Maybe then they will reevaluate their grade.

Joel-
Please refresh yourself with the forum rules. This is clearly baiting another user.
Eric

[jboosted92]

Re: Changes at MEARS

Joel,

We do not know if Bushing is breaking any ethics rules or is in violation of anything. What we do know is that he has a clear pattern of giving the jerseys he or MEARS owns a score of A10 when they have light wear and even some stains, yet my Rollie Fingers jersey that was won 2 years ago in the REA auction was given an A8 and they subtracted -2 for "light wear" when the exact same MEARS certification stated the wear on the Fingers jersey is "consistent with player and position".

Joel tell how all Bushings jerseys get an A10 and mine gets and A8.

Thanks,

Mark

Mark,

I didnt see a reply on the MEARS forum? I assume you saw my 3 examples, i provided in 15 minutes or jerseys with similar game use stain?

[trsent]

Re: Changes at MEARS

Joel,

We do not know if Bushing is breaking any ethics rules or is in violation of anything. What we do know is that he has a clear pattern of giving the jerseys he or MEARS owns a score of A10 when they have light wear and even some stains, yet my Rollie Fingers jersey that was won 2 years ago in the REA auction was given an A8 and they subtracted -2 for "light wear" when the exact same MEARS certification stated the wear on the Fingers jersey is "consistent with player and position".

Joel tell how all Bushings jerseys get an A10 and mine gets and A8.

Thanks,

Mark

Mark, I do not know the answer to your question, but I think you should bring it up each and every day in a new thread on this site and you should add it to any discussion about MEARS on this discussion forum. In fact, you should email them every day and keep posting about your grade until your fingers get tired of typing.

You should also keep posting about it on the MEARS forum. Maybe then they will reevaluate their grade.

[Moustache Gang]

Re: Changes at MEARS

Joel,

We do not know if Bushing is breaking any ethics rules or is in violation of anything. What we do know is that he has a clear pattern of giving the jerseys he or MEARS owns a score of A10 when they have light wear and even some stains, yet my Rollie Fingers jersey that was won 2 years ago in the REA auction was given an A8 and they subtracted -2 for "light wear" when the exact same MEARS certification stated the wear on the Fingers jersey is "consistent with player and position".

Joel tell how all Bushings jerseys get an A10 and mine gets and A8.

Thanks,

Mark

[trsent]

Re: Changes at MEARS

Beantown & Allstar, I do agree with you that it is a conflict of interest for someone to authenticate their own items but it happens with alot of other authenitcators/dealers/auction houses. John Taube and Grey Flannel are two that come to mind. I don't think that their is an authenticator in the business that does not have some sort of personel collecting interest. If they didn't I would highly doubt that they would be doing what they do for a living.

Authenticators/dealers do have to walk a very fine line but in the case of Bushing who else could look at their items and check their grading?

Good points, but as I keep stating, at least he is disclosing that he owns the item and his company, MEARS is authenticating it. How often does Grey Flannel (or AMI as I stated before) tell you in their auction catalog when they own the item they are selling, auctioning and authenticating?

[trsent]

Re: Trouble at MEARS

I'm saying that Dave Bushing can and should use his expertise to acquire pieces for his own personal collection. Which he did in this instance….

http://bid.robertedwardauctions.com/bidplace.aspx?itemid=11280

However, should he decide to consign/sell a piece from his own personal collection, he should have it examined by an objective third party…

What third party authenticator is there other than MEARS and the members of Game Used Universe's Forum?

MEARS has a policy that they can authenticate items they own and if they sell them, it must be fully disclosed. If anyone doesn't like the policy, they have a right not to buy or bid on it, but they have FULL DISCLOSURE in all listings through REA and their own web site's sales division.

I would think at least they are being honest would end this discussion, but it just appears a few people feel that it should be debated from now until the end of time. They are making it very clear their ownership and authentication (similar to that from say, 100% Authentic that is owned by the same people who own American Memorabilia, but they don't disclose if they own an item and then authenticate it for sale) is done by the same people. They are being honest, but that is not enough?

Wouldn't it be nice if someone from MEARs would comment on issues like this on this thread. Maybe there is a simplistic explanation.

By the way, I personally won't bid on any of these "Bushing owned" jerseys and I think every one has to decide on their own what to do.

MEARS will not reply on this discussion forum to your questions. They have a forum on their web site or I believe you can email them directly with your questions. It is too bad you will not look at any items owned by Dave Bushing, he is one of the old gang that really knows his stuff and I can tell you from my friendship and dealings with him personally, he doesn't spend his money on junk in my opinion.

[rose14]

Re: Changes at MEARS

Beantown & Allstar, I do agree with you that it is a conflict of interest for someone to authenticate their own items but it happens with alot of other authenitcators/dealers/auction houses. John Taube and Grey Flannel are two that come to mind. I don't think that their is an authenticator in the business that does not have some sort of personel collecting interest. If they didn't I would highly doubt that they would be doing what they do for a living.

Authenticators/dealers do have to walk a very fine line but in the case of Bushing who else could look at their items and check their grading?

[allstarsplus]

Re: Trouble at MEARS

i could also be wrong but i don't believe so.

"Jerseys dating from 1987 and earlier
A10 No negative traits can be found to receive this grade. The jersey must ... show optimal wear"

i took the point subtractions for light use from the mears grading criteria lists and the specific list for "light use" didn't say "post-1987 only" as it did in another list.

lastly, as you've read in this thread, mark had his 1974 rollie fingers subjected to a 2 point reduction from mears for "light use". if mears subtracted 2 points from marks 1974 jersey for "light use" then how on earth can they award A10s to jerseys that they describe exactly as having "light use throughout" !? ultimately it's this example that really provides the truth. mears took 2 pts off from his pre-87 jersey for light use. whether that's good or bad isn't the issue. it's mears' scale. that's fine. however, what doesn't make sense is why they don't seem to apply that scale accurately. why does mark's '74 rollie jersey get 2 pts off but 3 jerseys that bushing owns that he himself describes as having "light use" manage to have 0 points taken off?

rudy.

Rudy/Moustache Gang - I see your points, and the subtractions at the bottom of the MEARs grading page, I read as Post-1987 and the last point on their sheet is "can be added or subtracted at the authenticator's discretion" which gives them that subjective override, but it further says it "will be noted on the "Jersey Grading Authenticating Official Worksheet".

That Rollie Fingers rating would seem problematic if "wear" was the only issue given as it is a Pre-87 jersey as their A-10 description states, "Each piece is also evaluated on the degree of evident use and wear, which must be consistent with that of the player, sport, position,......"

Wouldn't it be nice if someone from MEARs would comment on issues like this on this thread. Maybe there is a simplistic explanation.

By the way, I personally won't bid on any of these "Bushing owned" jerseys and I think every one has to decide on their own what to do.

[Moustache Gang]

Re: Changes at MEARS

All Star Plus,

You might want to go back and read the criteria. Under the pre-87 it reads....

"A1 - A8: This grade reflects a cumulative evaluation resulting from documented subtractions of 2 full points or more. All reasons for subtraction will diagramed and noted by the defined point scale."

The defined point scale to add and subtract is below this section. It is my understanding that the listed point scale is used for both pre and post 1987 jerseys.

Mark

[kingjammy24]

Re: Trouble at MEARS

Rudy - I could be wrong, but isn't that subtraction for Post - 1987 jerseys?

i could also be wrong but i don't believe so.

"Jerseys dating from 1987 and earlier
A10 No negative traits can be found to receive this grade. The jersey must ... show optimal wear"

i took the point subtractions for light use from the mears grading criteria lists and the specific list for "light use" didn't say "post-1987 only" as it did in another list.

lastly, as you've read in this thread, mark had his 1974 rollie fingers subjected to a 2 point reduction from mears for "light use". if mears subtracted 2 points from marks 1974 jersey for "light use" then how on earth can they award A10s to jerseys that they describe exactly as having "light use throughout" !? ultimately it's this example that really provides the truth. mears took 2 pts off from his pre-87 jersey for light use. whether that's good or bad isn't the issue. it's mears' scale. that's fine. however, what doesn't make sense is why they don't seem to apply that scale accurately. why does mark's '74 rollie jersey get 2 pts off but 3 jerseys that bushing owns that he himself describes as having "light use" manage to have 0 points taken off?

rudy.

[allstarsplus]

Re: Trouble at MEARS

andrew,

from the link you provided:

"½ to 5 points subtracted for the following (determined solely by authenticator):
Use is light (-2 to 4)"

apparently, according to mears' own terminology, if the use is light then points ought to be deducted.

rudy.

Rudy - I could be wrong, but isn't that subtraction for Post - 1987 jerseys?

[kingjammy24]

Re: Trouble at MEARS

Just because a jersey is light or moderate use doesn't mean that an A10 is not justified.

Read their criteria for the grading on their Mears Website:

http://www.mearsonline.com/services/jersey.asp

andrew,

from the link you provided:

"½ to 5 points subtracted for the following (determined solely by authenticator):
Use is light (-2 to 4)"

apparently, according to mears' own terminology, if the use is light then points ought to be deducted.

rudy.

[Moustache Gang]

Re: Trouble at MEARS

Forum Readers,

King Jammy24's posting above is empirical evidence of what I have been saying exactly all along. The MEARS scoring system is inconsistent and in some cases not fair, and in other cases sides with jerseys owned by MEARS.

I have a 1974 green Rollie Fingers jersey that was purchased in 2006 from the Robert Edwards Auction. The jersey comes with a certification from MEARS. The certification listed the wear as, "consistent with player (Fingers) and postion (Relief Pitcher)., but on the back they subtracted -2 points for "light wear"!!! How can a jersey be lose two points for "light wear" when it is consistent with the player and the position???

It all goes back to what I produced to Troy at MEARS. I listed at least four points where MEARS was inconsistent in grading the Fingers jersey. Troy stated all my points were good, but they would not respond to changing the grade!!!

Why aren't the MEARS-owned jerseys subtracted by -2?!?!? They talk about holding Auction Houses to a high standard!!!

King Jammy (Rudy), this is incredible information. Thank you for your due dilligence.

Mark

[aeneas01]

Re: Trouble at MEARS

"Kansas City Royals jersey worn by catcher Fran Healy during the club's inaugural season in 1969. Graded a perfect A10 by MEARS. The white flannel jersey is lettered "Royals" across the front and features the number "16" on the reverse. All letters and numerals are appliquéd in royal blue tackle twill. A Major League Baseball "100th Anniversary" patch appears on the left sleeve. A "Wilson 42" label appears on the left front tail. The jersey is completely original, with no alterations, and displays light wear including a few light stains on the front. This is a very rare flannel Royals jersey dating from the club's inaugural 1969 season. The Royals wore flannel uniforms for just four seasons before switching over to knits in 1973. Fran Healy made his Major League debut with Kansas City in 1969, appearing in six games with the club that year. In 1974 he became the team's starting catcher before being traded to the Yankees in 1976, where he served as backup to Thurman Munson. Healy retired in 1978 and later enjoyed a successful broadcast career as a color analyst. Graded A10 by MEARS. This is one of only five Kansas City Royals flannel jerseys and only the second example from 1969 listed in the MEARS census (the other 1969 jersey is graded A7). It is also only one of three Royals flannel jerseys from any year graded at this level. This jersey has been consigned to this auction directly from the personal collection/inventory of world-renowned bat and jersey authenticator David Bushing. LOA from Dave Bushing & Troy Kinunen/MEARS. Reserve $500. Estimate $1,000/$1,500."

i gotta say fellas, i'm not very impressed with this "full disclosure". stating that the item came from the personal collection of bushing and comes with an loa from bushing, kinunen, mears is not the same as stating that the owner and seller of the item, bushing, is the one that awarded the item its grade. not in my book. as a matter of fact, this "full disclosure" strikes me more an effort to leverage bushing's reputation and connection with the item than an honest accounting of the fact that the seller is the one that graded his own item.

imo a true full disclosure would include the following at the beginning of the item description: note to all perspective bidders: in an effort to provide full disclosure it is important that you understand that the following item has been awarded its grade by the owner and seller of the item, dave bushing, who works as an authenticator and grader for mears authentications services. mr. bushing, through mears, has also issued the letter of authenticity for this item.

i think this would be less confusing - and honest.

[allstarsplus]

Re: Trouble at MEARS

How do you know that each and everyone of those jerseys that he has consigned to REA hadn't been originally submitted by an individual to be graded and then Dave or Troy purchased them at a later time either personally or through an auction house?


The only problem I could ever see is that if Dave or Troy ever gave a low grade to something they authenticated and then purchased it later on and researched it further and gave it a higher grade to sell at a higher price. To my knowledge this has never been done as it would be very hard to get by unnoticed by the very savy collecting community.

Great points except the other problem would be if the authenticator owned the jersey in their own inventory and then authenticated it with a higher rating than it deserved.

Your example of changing a Rating to a higher rating upon taking ownership would probably be considered "fraud" and be a crime unless there was some fairly material disclosed changes.

Just my opinion.