Authentication Issues - Help Needed

[kingjammy24]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

jim c & jboost:

jim, ultimately i think jboost is right in that it's a proprietary system and so it can be anything mears wants or doesn't want it to be. if troy wants to assign 30 pts because an item has the scent of curry on it, then that's completely his choice. there really isn't much to say against it because it's their perogative. (i once read their entire grading system for jerseys and, without sounding the least bit hyperbolic, after an hour my head was in a knot. i couldn't understand the logic behind 60% of it. however that's nothing against mears. they've come up with something they like. it may not make any sense to me but that's irrelevant. the mears system has no onus to be logical to me. it's like going to disneyland. if you're going to go, you have to suspend your expectation of reality. you can't blame disney that the idea of flying elephants makes no sense. it's their park and enjoyment of it requires you to pretend. if you refuse to pretend and therefore have a bad time, then it's not their fault.)

i also agree with jboost in saying that if you're going to base anything off a mears grade then it's your responsibility to understand exactly how it works. of course you could just choose not to base anything off the grades and save yourself the trouble of understanding them.

rudy.

[trsent]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

Rudy, when you are ready to offer a view of MEARS not based on your bias against them, I personally will respect it.

If there is an issue, I have been told that Mike and Chris have been notified by MEARS what the contact information is for the proper courts to file their case. I am beginning to believe there is not a case, as a letter was written and they are standing behind their grade and if there was a case why wouldn't it have been filed already?

If there was an issue with the grade, why was this topic addressed after the seller was disappointed with the price they realized at an auction house? This is the same auction house that privately sold the item to them.

MEARS has justified their grade (which you do not have to agree with and Troy is still doing more work over his findings) and the owner of the item is still not satisfied. So the next step is to go to court or attempt a public attack on MEARS if that will give them satisfaction.

From my conversations over this dispute with my private attorney, he told me that he believes even if MEARS lost a case in court, they would then be responsible for the last sale price of the item, which I believe was $6050.00 plus buyers premium.

[sportscentury]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

Forum readers, a couple of things:

One issue that seems to be lost in this debate is that of consignors bidding on their own items in Vintage Auctions. I have not yet bid with Vintage, though I have seen many nice items in their auctions and would certainly consider bidding in their future auctions. Still, I didn't realize that any major auction house allowed consignors to bid on their own items. This has me curious.

Another question I have is: Mike and Chris, you had to pay Vintage the buyer's premium on top of your $6000+ winning bid (buy-back price), correct? Did you also have to pay the consignor's percentage? It seems like Vintage has made out pretty well in all of this (and perhaps this is perfectly fine - just an observation) and it would be nice to know what they are doing to help resolve things for everyone.

Reid

[ChrisCavalier]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

Forum readers, a couple of things:

One issue that seems to be lost in this debate is that of consignors bidding on their own items in Vintage Auctions. I have not yet bid with Vintage, though I have seen many nice items in their auctions and would certainly consider bidding in their future auctions. Still, I didn't realize that any major auction house allowed consignors to bid on their own items. This has me curious.

Another question I have is: Mike and Chris, you had to pay Vintage the buyer's premium on top of your $6000+ winning bid (buy-back price), correct? Did you also have to pay the consignor's percentage? It seems like Vintage has made out pretty well in all of this (and perhaps this is perfectly fine - just an observation) and it would be nice to know what they are doing to help resolve things for everyone.

Reid

Hello Reid,

We were allowed to place the bid as any other bidder would do provided we abided by the rules the same way as other bidders. Given there was no intention to deceive anyone, we didn't see any problem with that policy. Once the item is consigned, we felt it would be available to the highest bidder assuming all bidders followed the same rules. As mentioned, at the time, we felt the price for this Speaker bat (based on the way the bat was presented to us) was being sold for an incredibly low price. Thus, we bought it at the closing price on the same terms as anyone else in the auction. Further, because the bat failed to achieve a market price that would have been in line with a "A7" Speaker bat, we realized there was quite possibly something awry with this bat's certification. Absent retaining possession of the bat, we would not have been able to investigate this further. And yes, we paid both the buyer's premium and the consignment fee.

Please let me know if that answers your question.

Sincerely,
Chris

[sportscentury]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

Hello Reid,

We were allowed to place the bid as any other bidder would do provided we abided by the rules the same way as other bidders. Given there was no intention to deceive anyone, we didn't see any problem with that policy. Once the item is consigned, we felt it would be available to the highest bidder assuming all bidders followed the same rules. As mentioned, at the time, we felt the price for this Speaker bat (based on the way the bat was presented to us) was being sold for an incredibly low price. Thus, we bought it at the closing price on the same terms as anyone else in the auction. Further, because the bat failed to achieve a market price that would have been in line with a "A7" Speaker bat, we realized there was quite possibly something awry with this bat's certification. Absent retaining possession of the bat, we would not have been able to investigate this further. And yes, we paid both the buyer's premium and the consignment fee.

Please let me know if that answers your question.

Sincerely,
Chris

Hi, Chris:

I understand. I wasn't questioning your bid as you were clearly following the auction house's policies and allowances. I'm just not familiar with this type of allowance is all. For example, I had a truly remarkable Hank Aaron game used/signed 1973-75 L.S. bat that I consigned to Mastronet. When the auction opened, I was devastated to find that Mastronet decided to list TWO Aaron 1973-75 gamers in the same auction. The other one had a much nicer write-up than mine and I knew that I was doomed. I had paid top dollar for my Aaron and there was no way that it could compete in this auction with the other Aaron given how different the descriptions of the two Aaron bats were. So, I wanted my Aaron bat back, of course. Well, I was not allowed to withdraw it. Also, I was not allowed to bid on it, as I was the consignor (which I believe is the norm with major auction houses). In the end, the other Aaron bat went for big dollars and mine went for what felt like peanuts. I lost a bundle and it still makes me ill to think about it. If I had consigned it with Vintage instead, I understand that I could have bid on it in order to try to buy it back. So, I was curious about Vintage's policy that you can bid on your own items because, based on my understanding (which perhaps is more of a misunderstanding on my part and I welcome forum members to correct me if it is), it is the hobby/industry norm among major auction houses that consignors cannot bid on their own items. This is all I was asking.

More generally, I guess I'm confused as to where Vintage stands in this whole situation.

Thanks, as always, for your prompt and clear responsiveness.

Reid

[ChrisCavalier]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

Hello Everyone,

As we have already stated, at this time we believe there are only two questions that need to be answered. They are:

1) Are there factory records relating to this bat?
2) Does this bat match factory records?

However, given the recent comments regarding buyer responsibility, I believe it might help to clarify a few things. I have seen the comment “Do your own homework” which has, rightfully so, become a mantra on this site. Personally, I am thrilled that the hobby has moved in that direction and that Game Used Universe has played such a large role in making that happen. However, please remember that a year and a half ago Game Used Universe and Game Used Forum did not exist.

I think it is fair to say the work of those involved with Game Used Universe, coupled with Vince Malta’s efforts, have given the general collecting community access to information they never before had available to them. Only a few years ago the factory records were known by only a select few and most of the collecting community didn’t have access to them. In fact, the standard protocol for collectors only a few years ago was to trust the information they were given by recognized authorities. If an authentication firm with the factory records said it “matched factory records” how would the average collector ever know? The fact of the matter is, at that time, they didn’t. That is the situation here. At the time we did what most of the collecting community did. We trusted the professional opinion.

Unfortunately, in this situation, the authentication information provided by MEARS failed to disclose there were factory records for Tris Speaker that could provide perspective on this bat and, as Mike Specht’s post clearly shows, this bat does not match those records. The fact that there are factory records is not a matter of “Opinion”, it is an objective fact. The factory records have been identified. The statement on the authentication document that “no record for this era exist” is objectively incorrect. You cannot attribute that to “Opinion”.

I think one other point needs to be clarified regarding the chain of events outlined in Mike Rose’s initial post. Prior to the bat being sold in auction, we never physically measured the bat. We accepted what was stated in the authentication documents regarding the length. We also had no input whatsoever in the writing of the auction description. It was only after buying the bat back that we, and the other authenticators, physically measured the bat. It was only then that we found out this bat was only 32 ¼ inches.

In addition, I would also like to address the comment that “If it had sold for $30K, we sure wouldn't be hearing about it.”Though I believe unintended, I think that comment is a little ambiguous. First of all, if the bat had sold for $30K, as per our previous post, we may never have realized the possibility that something may have been amiss in the authentication. However, let us look at that comment from another angle. As per Mike Rose’s first post, when we re-contacted Vintage Authentics they said they trusted MEARS opinion and felt they could still sell the bat outside of auction for at least what we paid for it. If the only issue here was our financial interest we would have disregarded the concern that the bat did not match factory records and let it be sold to someone else. The fact of the matter is, we felt the grade was not warranted given the error we identified and we were not interested in offering it to anyone else at the price we paid.

Once again, the issue here is that we believe there was simply an error in the authentication process. As stated, we believe people are human and these things will happen. All we are asking is that the situation be “made right”. However, that being said, I also have to say that there is error in the logic and deductive reasoning in the statement “I am beginning to believe there is not a case, as a letter was written and they are standing behind their grade and if there was a case why wouldn't it have been filed already?” While it was always our hope that this would not have to go to the courts, we believe the information we have gained with the help of the collecting community and a more thorough review of the MEARS documentation has actually supported the potential for litigation.

Sincerely,
Christopher Cavalier

[MSpecht]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

Here is one more observation, as I feel that the previous post needs to be explained a bit. Several contributors to this thread have indicated that the buyers "didn't do their homework," and accepted the authentication blindly.

Well, that is not entirely true in my opinion. Think back two years ago. What did you have as available resources to exercise "due diligence?" When you saw a bat (or other collectible for that matter, but bats are the issue here) in auction, and the bat was represented as having been authenticated by PSA, SCD, MEARS, John Taube Sports, Vince Malta, Mike Specht or whomever, what was the proces to further your comfort level with the bat?

Hopefully the auction house or seller made a copy of the LOA (Opinion Letter of Authenticity) available -- but the truth was that the LOA was almost never printed in a catalog auction, and only one or two on-line auctions ever had any link to the LOA available along with the item description. But, if you were able to read the LOA, then what?

If the LOA said "matches known factory records," what was your next step ?? Pretty much, there was no next step. Were you aware of what factory records the LOA was talking about? Did you have any idea of which authenticators actually had copies of these factory records? If you did knew, were you able to call up John Taube or Dave Bushing or Vince Malta or Bill Riddell, or me or two or three others on our cell phone and ask, "Errr, by the way, can you tell me what the factory records were for Ted Williams in 1957, and did he use a 34 inch W183 ?"

No. The truth is there was no easily available or accessible source for the average collector, or even many high-end collectors and dealers, to use for verification, if they even knew what records were available, who had "the records."

The best one could do is be aware of the reputation of whoever authenticated a particular item, and enter into a "relationshiip of trust" with that person. If the LOA stated "matches factory records," the "relationship of trust' decreed that, somewhere, there were actually records that were in the possession of the authenticator that matched the item. Unfortunately, the commonly issued LOAs, including the worksheets used by some authenticators, generally did not specify what records an item matched, so there was really no help there...you were forced to accept that statement on trust. Look through the library of LOA's archived on both the Game Used Universe site and the MEARS site, where the two largest libraries of LOA's are available, and see what I mean.

In this matter, it was stated on a worksheet dated 8/22/05 that the Speaker bat was "pre-factory records, " which pretty much means to me that there were no known factory records in existance for the period that the subject bat was manufactured. So, with that document, how many of you would have telephoned Dave Bushing and asked, "Hi Dave. I have an LOA of yours that states there are no known factory records for this bat. Does that mean there are no known factory records for this bat?"

Given Dave's reputation in many areas of authentication, no collector would have had any reason to even consider making such a call.



The object of this post is simply to remind everyone that, until the development of Game Used Universe (the genesis of which was, in fact, this specific transaction), there was no source of accurate information pertaining to factory records available to collectors to confirm or refute the information offered in a companion LOA.

Mike Jackitout7@aol.com

[mikeroseny]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

More than a week ago Troy announced on the MEARS website that he planned to do an abundance of research...While the additional research proposed may be beneficial to the hobby in general, it does not address the specific issue that needs to be answered here. That is, if A) MEARS was negligent by not disclosing that factory records exist (and this bat does not match them), and B) that we (as buyers) were misled in the information presented to us when we were deciding whether or not to purchase the bat.

There are only two questions that need to be answered at this point (neither of which are included in Troy's list). They are:

1) Do factory records exist relating to the Tris Speaker bat in question? (the MEARS certification documents claimed there were none)

2) Does this bat match those records?

If they would be so kind as to answer the two questions above this issue could be very easily resolved.

Mike Rose
mikeroseny@yahoo.com

[trsent]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

More than a week ago Troy announced on the MEARS website that he planned to do an abundance of research...While the additional research proposed may be beneficial to the hobby in general, it does not address the specific issue that needs to be answered here. That is, if A) MEARS was negligent by not disclosing that factory records exist (and this bat does not match them), and B) that we (as buyers) were misled in the information presented to us when we were deciding whether or not to purchase the bat.

There are only two questions that need to be answered at this point (neither of which are included in Troy's list). They are:

1) Do factory records exist relating to the Tris Speaker bat in question? (the MEARS certification documents claimed there were none)

2) Does this bat match those records?

If they would be so kind as to answer the two questions above this issue could be very easily resolved.

Mike Rose
mikeroseny@yahoo.com

Mike, so why post your questions on here on a public forum and not address your questions to Troy directly at MEARS?

Is this really about your issues or just to try to smear the MEARS name because you feel wronged in this situation? I would think by now you would have filed suit in the proper court system if you really feel you have been wronged.

If I am understanding you correctly, the letter states there are no bat shipping records for this item available, which is correct, even if some other bat shipping records have been made public?

Then again, you have not addressed my question to you previously about why Vintage will not take a return on this item and they can deal with MEARS directly. You must have attempted to return it to where you bought the item (and then consigned it to them immediately afterwords) at some point.

Then again, if you really want out, I'll gladly offer you the $6050.00 plus buyers premium that was the last price the item sold for and what MEARS would be liable for in a court of law if taken to that step so I can save you legal fees.

[stkmtimo]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

Then again, if you really want out, I'll gladly offer you the $6050.00 plus buyers premium that was the last price the item sold for and what MEARS would be liable for in a court of law if taken to that step so I can save you legal fees.

Joel,
This is a completely serious question that you may have already answered, so please forgive me if you have. Are you employed and/or compensated in any way by MEARS? The only reason I ask this is because I'm not sure what interest you would have in covering MEARS by offering Mike that type of money that MEARS could be liable for if taken to court.

Thanks,
Tim

[trsent]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

As of August 26, 2006, 12:30PM Central Standard Time, I, Joel Marc Alpert, have not been paid by MEARS or am a compensated employee of MEARS for anything of any nature.

I just offered to buy the bat for the last public sale price, thus saving the owner the court costs they may incur which will only find them receiving $6050.00 from in the end if they win because that was the last known public sale price of the item in question.

I have noticed my posts have been ignored by Mike Rose throughout the history of this thread, which makes me wonder if he has just given up and he wishes to publicly embarrass MEARS over this situation. Needless to say, I have spoken to MEARS about the issue and they are standing behind their work.

I am also curious, since Mike Rose has posted his problems with MEARS in this whole situation, what was the response from Vintage Authentics when Mike asked for a return of his original purchase price since Vintage didn't disclose that the bat was the same bat he originally offered Mike for a much lesser price and that it had a new revised grade, which as mentioned in the worksheet?

Notice, my concerns are now growing because Vintage is not using MEARS anymore and they have no reason to protect their relationship with MEARS. Any possible link to how this arose just after Vintage stopped working with MEARS?

[GameBats]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

Hi Joel,

I've been reading through the posts and am trying to digest all the info. What is your opinion on the Mears grade based on all the information available? Do you agree with the final grade?

Thanks,
John

[trsent]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

Hi Joel,

I've been reading through the posts and am trying to digest all the info. What is your opinion on the Mears grade based on all the information available? Do you agree with the final grade?

Thanks,
John

John, do I agree? Based on what they have told me their determinations were I agree. It will be interesting to find what Troy finds in his research that he has promised on the MEARS forum.

[GameBats]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

Joel,

Thanks for the reply. I would like to believe MEARS has some concrete facts to support their findings. Hopefully they will post them. I don't believe wishful thinking has any place in the authentication process.

John

[mikeroseny]

Re: Authentication Issues - Help Needed

Joel,


I must admit, I think your entire posts pretty much asks questions we have already addressed (not to be insulting, but most of your posts on this string fall into this category). I rarely have responded directly to you, because my perception is you are the "voice of MEARS," so my preference has been to keep this directed more between the parties with input from the collecting community. However, in case it wasn't clear, let me respond to each comment again:


Mike, so why post your questions on here on a public forum and not address your questions to Troy directly at MEARS? Is this really about your issues or just to try to smear the MEARS name because you feel wronged in this situation?


These exact questions were also posted directly on the MEARS site. In addition, we had multiple correspondences with MEARS where they rejected our request to handle this situation privately. It was only at that point that we sought more input to determine the appropriate next steps.

I would think by now you would have filed suit in the proper court system if you really feel you have been wronged.


As previously mentioned, it was always our hope that we would not need to take this court. However, absent an attempt from MEARS to make the situation right this seems to be the only alternative.

If I am understanding you correctly, the letter states there are no bat shipping records for this item available, which is correct, even if some other bat shipping records have been made public?


Let us make sure we are clear on what we are talking about. The MEARS documentation stated that this was "pre" factory records and that "...no record for this era exist so lathe is best known evidence of orders." Our question is whether or not shipping records for this era do exist and, if so, does this bat match those records. The MEARS grading criteria awarded points based on the bat matching factory records. If there were indeed records for this bat then MEARS should have disclosed that fact in their documentation. In fact, as per the previous posts on this thread, when we bought this bat the factory records were not available to the general collecting community and there was no way for collectors to know whether or not bats actually matched them. I think we can all agree, as per Mike Specht's post on this thread, that factory records do indeed exist for Speaker from that era and that this bat does not match them.

Then again, you have not addressed my question to you previously about why Vintage will not take a return on this item and they can deal with MEARS directly. You must have attempted to return it to where you bought the item (and then consigned it to them immediately afterwords) at some point.


As we have already stated, Vintage said they feel they have no responsibility for a refund since they used MEARS for the authentication and MEARS offers a "buyback" gaurantee if anything was done in error. Further, they offered to resell the bat for us for at least the price we paid but, given the error we identified, we did not want some other collector to end up with a bat we feel is clearly misgraded.

Then again, if you really want out, I'll gladly offer you the $6050.00 plus buyers premium that was the last price the item sold for and what MEARS would be liable for in a court of law if taken to that step so I can save you legal fees.


Joel, do you truly believe this bat warrants an A7-grade?

Mike Rose
mikeroseny@yahoo.com