Robert Edward Auctions

[Archive]

Posted By: Robert_Lifson

There have been posts recently on this message board by David Rudd suggesting that photographs in the recent REA auction are not authentic. As a courtesy, a fellow collector has brought this to my attention, and eventually directed me to this site. By the way, this message board is great. Anyway, it is understandable that I would be very concerned about reports of not authentic items in our auction, especially when those reports are from someone as respected and knowledgeable as David Rudd, who has even written a book on the subject of photographs. I have a lot of respect for Mr. Rudd’s knowledge, and have even occasionally used his book as a valuable reference tool. I would have asked for more information from anyone about a report of a non-authentic item in our auction, all the more so if that report came from someone who I understand to be extremely knowledgeable. I make this post at the risk of alienating Mr. Rudd, which I very much do not want to do, and I am uncomfortable making this post because of that. But I am even more uncomfortable not making this post. As things stand, I may have a potential forgery in the auction, which I would like to address before it is paid for and sent out, and cannot (because I don’t know what the item is), I have posts on a public forum stating that Robert Edward Auctions has offered and sold a forgery in the recent auction, I have two auction winners who would like assurances that the photos they have purchased in the auction are not the fake photo that has referred to on this board; and lastly, it has been suggested to me that at least one person believes that Robert Edward Auctions has somehow influenced Mr. Rudd to not speak out about the problem lot in question so that we will not lose our commissions on this item (when nothing could be further from the truth). This just isn’t right. I am posting my communications with Mr. Rudd regarding this issue. The emails I believe speak for themselves. I hope that Mr. Rudd will forgive that I have chosen not to ignore this issue. If not, I am sorry. In no way do I mean to show any disrespect to David Rudd. I am just very uncomfortable with the impression that is left by the posts that have been made, the impact these posts are having on our purchasers, the idea that it is possible that we really do have a problem lot and are unable to address it, and that our response to these issues is not in any way reflected anywhere, and that in fact a completely inaccurate impression is being given. If anyone on this board can help us identify what photograph is being referred to, I would very much appreciate it, so that we can address it before the lot gets paid for and sent out. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert Lifson
Robert Edward Auctions, LLC


From: Robert Lifson [info@robertedwardauctions.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 5:56 PM
To: cycleback@cycleback.com
Subject: REA Auction Problem Lot?

Hi David!
A participant in our auction has contacted us about a potential problem lot in our auction. Apparently there is a chat room site in which photographs in the auction are being discussed and he said that you said that a photograph in our sale was not authentic. He didn't have the information as to which lot was at issue. We really appreciate any feedback about problem lots we can get. If this is accurate could you tell me what photograph is a potential forgery so I can look into it immediately? We have just sent out invoices but if we have made an error we would very much like to address immediately. Of course I hope that the communication regarding there being such a problem is in error, or if it is not that you have made an error, but there is always the possibility that there is an error and the error is ours, so all I can do is follow up with direct communication with you so I can address the issue. I know you are very knowlegable about photographs so when this information comes from you there is all the more reason to follow up and try to get more information. I tried to call you but the # was busy, I hope you will get this email and be able to get back to me soon. Thank you!
Sincerely,
Robert Lifson
www.RobertEdwardAuctions.com


From: cycleback@cycleback.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:37 PM
To: Robert Lifson
Subject: Re: REA Auction Problem Lot?

Hello,

I have decided to drop the entire issue. I'm sure you guys are working too hard to need me budding my nose into your work. In short, don't let the issue be of bother.

In the future, if you wish me to quickly review actions before they come live, I would be happy to do that. I can effectively weed out many mistakes and do 'quality control' before the auction starts From a personal standpoint, I prefer to address issues before an auction starts rather than face the inevitable controversy (like the President of the auction house emailing me!) when bringing up issues when the action has started or the auction has ended. I have advised Kevin Struss for MastroNet and have examined some photos via mail for Kevin.

Glad to see that your auction did well. Never dreamed of seeing a Boston Garter Mathewson!

Best wishes
David Rudd
www.cycleback.com


From: Robert Lifson [info@robertedwardauctions.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 9:53 PM
To: cycleback@cycleback.com
Subject: Re: REA Auction Problem Lot?


Hi David! We are never working too hard to address significant mistakes! We don't consider feedback about mistakes "budding" in, we consider it a great service. Many times issues have been brought to my attention by readers. The collective knowledge of the entire world will always be greater than my own knowledge, so that really makes sense. I even go so far as to invite feedback from collectors in our catalog guide text. People who know more than I do about items we have catalogued where we have made a mistake are an incredibly valuable resource which I very much appreciate. This may be a little different approach than some take. It has always been my approach. When I am perfect and beyond making an error, I'm sure I will be properly recognized by the Vatican, but until then I will just try to do the best job I can!

If we have a photo that you think might not be real, I would really like to know which it is and why. Of course I would have liked to have known earlier, before the auction went live, but I did not learn of a potential issue until today. If there is a fake photo in the auction, I would like to not have it sold to the winner. That would be the only responsible thing to do of course. Maybe I would not agree with you about the item. Maybe I would reexamine it and say, "Gosh, what a stupid mistake I made". Or maybe it is not an obvious problem, and one that I would have never caught without your assistance. In either of these cases, I would still appreciate your feedback. That's how we find out about some problems that we would otherwise not learn about, and otherwise never address.

If we have a fake in the auction, it would be infinitely more desirable to learn of this and to verify this and to rectify this now, rather than later (months or years later, or perhaps never), after the buyer has paid, and after the consignor has been paid. I hope you can help point us to the lot in question, and if it not obvious, give us information about why it is a fake (if that is the issue with the photo).

Sincerely,
Robert Lifson

PS Remind me tell my wife how important I am when I am doing the dishes and taking out the garbage later tonight, thanks!


From: Cycleback [cycleback@cycleback.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 1:20 AM
To: Robert Lifson
Subject: Re: REA Auction Problem Lot?

Robert, again I've decided to drop the issue. If you ever wish me to review material before the auction's start I will be happy to do that.

Of side note, I've been working on again/off again working on a page concerning the deification, dating and authentication of photographs. Stuffing as much stuff per square inch as possible, and hope to eventually provide material up to today's photographs (Probably at 1930s now). http://www.cycleback.com/photoguide/

Thanks again
David


From: Robert Lifson [info@robertedwardauctions.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2004 9:59 AM
To: cycleback@cycleback.com
Subject: Re: REA Auction Problem Lot?

Hi David! I have been directed to the Network 54 message posting site in question. I believe that it is very irresponsible for you to be posting claims of this type in a public forum. We don't have a problem with you communicating about problem lots. We obviously encourage this. But for such anyone, let alone a very knowlegable person such as yourself, to post in a public forum that we are selling fake items, and to not communicate directly with us about the item in question to allow us to assess and address the potential problem, and then to refuse to tell us what you are talking about even when we contact you, well, this is irresponsible. This makes Robert Edward Auctions look very bad. Simply put, this is unfair to us. This is America, and if you choose to not tell us about a potential mistake, that is your choice. It is not what we would like and does not make any sense to us, but it is of course your choice. But if you insist on not sharing this information with us, then it is not appropriate or reasonable or responsible for you to be telling the world in mysterious posts that we are selling fake items. This is not right. I'm not sure what else to say other than I believe that while I have no doubt your intentions were only the best and you were, I think, trying to provide some type of service to the collecting world, from my perspective you have provided a great disservice to Robert Edward Auctions (and, if you are correct that an item we are selling is in fact not authentic, a great disservice to a purchaser as well), and promoted an air of distrust in the collecting community with our catalog descriptions that we do not desreve. I hope you will appreciate my reasoning. I am not trying to be argumentative, just trying to communicate my thoughts on this matter from one gentleman to another. Sincerely, Robert Lifson





-----Original Message-----
From: Cycleback [cycleback@cycleback.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 6:15 PM
To: Robert Lifson
Subject: Re: REA Auction Problem Lot?



Hello Robert, I've retracted everything I said about any photograph and I wish you would forget the entire issue. I removed or fixed everything I said on the board. Almost no one has shown any interest in what I said and, except for you, no one has contacted me about this subject. Though I've done a lot of work concerning photographs and prints over the years, I've never gotten any sort of salary (as in about $0). This is why I specifically balk at getting involved in controversies and why I regret making a post on the subject at all. I plan on not commenting on any ongoing auctions at all anymore, unless a bidder has a specific query.

I'm sorry for any trouble this may have caused and I wish I had never
brought up the subject in the first place.
Thanks
David

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Bob

".....I have been directed to the Network 54 message posting site in question. I believe that it is very irresponsible for you to be posting claims of this type in a public forum. "

I strongly agree with Robert on this.

David, please speak up and share the knowledge if u really think those photos are fake. You have to be responsible of what u said.
If you personally like Mastro over REA and trying to ruin their reputation....that would be a big no no man.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bill Cornell

FYI - David removed his comments by his own choice, after which I deleted the thread because the replies didn't have any meaning on their own.

If you personally like Mastro over REA and trying to ruin their reputation....that would be a big no no man.

Scott Bob (?) - don't throw bombs if you don't know who they're aimed at. This is way off-base.

Bill

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

the fact that Rob came on the board and addressed this situation. Regardless of what David did or did not say and what may or may not be the situation of the photo. I fully understand that Rob, Bill Mastro, Josh Evans or many of the other principals of these auction houses can't address each and every thread about questionable auction material but I certainly respect his posting questions and concerns on this board. I know Doug Allen from Mastronet has posted very sparsely a couple of times on things vaguely similar. This is about the only vintage baseball forum out there and there are very knowledgeable people on here who have spent many hundreds of thousands if not millions in REA, Mastronet and many more auctions. Nice to see someone address concerns.......JMO.......

[Archive]

Posted By: petecld

David can delete all the posts he wants but the truth is he did go public with another little one of his teases and implied REA was offering a questionable item.

His statements may have cost REA and the consignor money. Seems now because he isn't being paid he wants to take his proverbial ball and go home. David, if Robert Lifson were to write you a check would you then decide the issue is "worth" addressing? Do we need to take up a collection just to get an answer?

I have no problem with a professional charging for their expertise, they certainly should, but if you're going to open up a so-called can-of-worms in a public forum they should be professional enough to back up what they say.

I do wish David nothing but success in selling his books but we are all adults here, even though we don't always sound like we are, and need to be responsible for what we say.

Posts can be deleted but never REALLY be taken back.

[Archive]

Posted By: HalleyGator

I think this thread is a great example of everything that is RIGHT about this board!!!!

1) We have one of the leading vintage photography experts in the country who comes on here and gives us his expert opinions and knowledge about certain items! Is he always going to be right? Maybe not ... but in the rare instance when he may not be right, he simply retracts his statements and hopefully continues to help all of us in the future with his insight. I have no doubt that he TRULY thought that he was correct when he made his post, and did so without malice. I suspect he will admit this in due time. CONCLUSION: The board is much better off with his input.

2) We have the head of one of the leading vintage card auction houses coming onto our board and recognizing the power and wealth of information that we possess! Could he have just ignored the claims that were being made about his multi-million dollar venture? Sure ... but he came to OUR board of all places to address the issue. CONCLUSION: This is the place for serious vintage card collectors.

3) We have a moderator who had the good sense to delete a particular thread that could have been harmful to a seemingly good auction house AND to one of our great board members. Rather than fan the flames and throw bombs at either person ... he simply moved us all along past the issue. CONCLUSION: This will never again become the "free-for-all" that it once was back at the old site!

4) I am here. That has to count for something.

[Archive]

Posted By: hankron

I feel terrible about this whole situation, and wish I had not started it. My question was about a DiMaggio streak photograph with a UPI stamp (UPI being formed at a later date) on the back. I then realized (and should have decided in the first place, which was my main error) that the photo should not be judged from afar, and there can be legitimate reasons for the UPI stamp to be there. I regularly preach that one has to see an item in person to well judge and should have followed my own advice. As REA had viewed it in person, they would have the best judgement on it and I now 100% defer judgement on the photo to REA. This is why I dropped the issue and asked everyone to ignore everything I said. This is also why I asked Mr Lifson to to ignore the issue and made retraction of my opinions. I had honestly wished everyone would forget I said anything and render my original thoughts as moot.

If REA feels the photo is fine, that's the only opinion anyone should be concerned with.

I was in error in mentioning the issue, and what I said should not have reflection on on REA. Mr Lifson's pursuance of the issue reflects well on his company.

Again, I acted poorly in this episode and should have never offered an opinion on this matter. The eposide has demostrated that I am not a right fit for the baseball hobby and visa versa. I've decided that it's best for all parties that I bow out of the baseball hobby and no longer offer opinions on baseball photographs. My interests had shifted to other areas and this episode is a helpful push in the right direction. I never got paid in the first place, which likely is a good indication that my opinions were not valued (other than casually) in the first place.

Best wishes
David

[Archive]

Posted By: BOtn

David,

I enjoy reading your posts as I know very little about baseball photographs. You obviously have a vast knowledge on the subject and therefore have a great deal to share with the board. There are others who post here who have absolutely nothing to offer the hobby yet they have a need "run" their mouths. The board certainly does not need more of that.

The last "person" to leave did so twice and sadly came back. In your case, I hope that you will reconsider.

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob L

David,

Stick with us. You have offered incredible insights into this hobby and it seems to me that REA took this episode in the wrong light. This is a forum for the discussion of the vintage baseball hobby and therefore is a forum of opinion. There is absolutely nothing wrong for you to state your opinion. I believe you are the one that is constantly reminding people to check things out carefully before buying. The fact that the buyer asked REA about the photo based of your initial opinion shows that the buyer is using common sense. If the photo is authentic, REA should have no problem making the buyer comfortable with his/her purchase. If the buyer did receive the photo and later determined that the photo was not authentic, he/she would return it for a refund anyways. The fact that you retracted your statements and made that very clear should have comforted REA with regards to the authenticity of the photo.

I, for one, have appreciated the information you have given me on everything from tintypes I have purchased to an early baseball. I hope you stick around.

Rob

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Forrest

...

[Archive]

Posted By: Robert_Lifson

Dear David,
There is nothing to feel terrible about. I have no problem with you bringing a potential problem photograph to our attention – I encourage it. You did not make an error in mentioning the issue. From my perspective, I only had a problem when you wouldn’t tell us what the item was for us to potentially address. This is very different issue. I certainly do not agree with you that you are “not a right fit for the baseball hobby.” On the contrary, I value your opinion greatly. I even use your book on photography for reference. It is precisely because I value your opinion that I went to such great lengths to find out from you what lot should be more closely examined. I phoned. I emailed. I did everything but show up at your door. Do these sound like the actions of someone that does not value your opinion? To me, it is exactly the opposite. With reference to compensation for your consulting services, I did not (and still do not) interpret anything you said to even imply that you were asking for any compensation. On the contrary, I actually interpreted your statement that you have received in your career a total compensation of zero dollars for giving your opinion about photographs to suggest that you did not ask for or want compensation for this. I have taken the photograph in question out and upon close examination find some qualities about it very unusual and interesting. David, you may very well be 100% right on with reference to this photo. It may be a problem. I will want someone more knowledgeable than I about photography to reexamine this photograph. There is no one I would prefer to do this than you – David Rudd, and it would be an honor for Robert Edward Auctions to be the first to pay you for the service of rendering an opinion on a baseball photograph. May I have your permission to send the photograph to you by Federal Express along with a check for your services and a return airbill? (and I know that being the gentleman you are, if you agree, you would say that it is OK to send the photo but only if I do not send a check – and to that I must respectfully cut you off at the pass and say that I insist, because it is important to me, and I do need you to accommodate me on that small issue). If you are for any reason not willing to look at the photograph, I will send the photo to another expert to examine. There are unusual qualities about the photo, which combined with your pointing it out as a potential forgery, make it essential for us to have this item readdressed in person by a photography specialist. In either case, I thank you for making us aware of which item might be a problem, it is greatly appreciated. Your concern regarding this item will probably prove to be well founded, and I hope you will give me permission to send it to you for your in-person opinion, which I value greatly.

My best to you and the board,
Sincerely,
Robert Lifson

[Archive]

Posted By: Elliot

As Hal said, this thread is all that is "right" with this forum. It sure makes putting up with the some of the petty arguments all very worthwhile.

I also think (for anybody that cares about my 2 cents) that it's wonderful to see how the matter was handled by Rob Lifson. This should give us all confidence in bidding in REA auctions.

David, if what Rob wrote doesn't convince you that you are a valued member of the baseball memorabilia clan, then I don't know what will, but I certainly value your opinion, not to mention the price ($0) that you have always charged me. I also think that it was appropriate for you to bring the matter up on the forum. After all, it was an opinion (and a learned one) which is what this board is all about. I would have preferred to see you leave the original post up. Just because nobody on the board corresponded with you, only showed a lack of interest in the item by board members, not with your opinion.

[Archive]

Posted By: petecld

David,

It would really be a shame if you or anyone else stopped contributing to this board. The fact that people remember what you say here tells me your opinion DOES have value unfortunately it doesn't equate into income. Hey, it's a hobby to most of us, what can ya do?

Your response probably took little time at all to convey, sounded very legitimate and really cleared this whole thing up quite quickly. I just don't understand why you didn't just say your piece in the first place. I don't think ANYONE would have faulted you for voicing your concern, dealing privately with REA and then updating the thread with a conformation or correction about your concern.

I questioned the legitimacy of a card being sold by another forum member and he sent me the card, it was good, and I told him I was wrong. No harm was done to anyone. I'm glad that I have been able to help others and I appreciate that others have been there to help me. This hobby is a much better place when you have people to turn to for answers (or just opinions) to your questions and concerns.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Seabon

Robert Lifson = one class act

[Archive]

Posted By: Jimmy Leiderman

Hope other auction houses start dealing the way Rob has been doing it for many years. A class act and always open to help fellow hobbyists with his vast knowledge.

I think all of us board users can learn a lot from this discussion.

Back to lurking mode...

[Archive]

Posted By: Ryan Christoff

David,

I appreciate your willingness to acknowledge that your original post accusing REA of selling a forgery may have been made in haste before you'd really given it enough thought to come to a fair conclusion. I don't believe you meant any harm and it seems it was simply a mistake. People or businesses who own up to their mistakes always gain credibility with me.

Unfortunately, there was a clear negative impact (unfairly) on Robert Edward Auctions by the implication of forgeries being sold as real. There is so much crap like that in the hobby today I think we're all justifiably paranoid about it. Or growing wiser.

I just wanted to post that prior to the auction, I discussed with Rob Lifson similar concerns I had regarding an item that I happened to know the history of and believed to be questionable. It was not a simple matter of a fake item, but an authentic one that had been altered into something that would have been more valuable (a postcard back added to an original photograph).

To make a long story short(er), Rob did exactly what I would hope every auction house would: he was open-minded enough to listen to what I was saying, but still examined it himself to come to his own conclusion. Ultimately, he agreed with me and the item was not listed in the auction. Had he not pulled the item it would probably not have been returned as it was not an obvious fraud. But the right thing to do was to return it to the consignor. And that's what was done.

I'm glad to see that David and Rob might be working together as it could only help the hobby to have to credible individuals on the same team, so to speak.

-Ryan

[Archive]

Posted By: 823dek

Wow...what an experience of back and forth drama hardly or seldom seen between 2 that both only tried to do right for all. There is an unmatched itegrity level of true professionals in their respected fields...bringing us to light!

I wasn't going to post to this as I try not to offer opinion on what doesn't concern me, the world is already quite full of that.

There are some movies that can take you into its emotions and you have to catch up to yourself and say its only a movie. I was sorta taken in these responses and felt the dramatics to it all and it boiled down to 2 people that really care enough about each other with a great of hobby admiration.

I would like to add a comical side to it all and say it now makes me feel like going out and buying a new dog and naming it BUTTONS ! I'm humbled and would like to close with ......ALLS WELL THAT ENDS WELL !

[Archive]

Posted By: TBob

is how the heads of the bigger auction houses aren't aware of this board! If you take a look at some of the regular posters here, along with the posts by the occasional lurkers, you not only have a who's who of bidders on ebay but some of the major players in the hobby. The combined knowledge of the participants here exceeds anything I have ever seen elsewhere and I believe it directly impacts the hobby and encourages the newbies who wander on the board to become more interested in collecting vintage cards and learning more about the cards they collect.
I know Bill Mastro through Doug Allen is aware of this board, as are Lew Lipset, Barry Sloate and others but it still surprises me when other heads of major auction houses are unaware of this board's existence.

[Archive]

Posted By: HalleyGator

David: Please let us know that you will stay on and continue to contribute to the board. Mr. Lifson himself has now told you that we all need your expertise ... and he has even welcomed your comments in the future (in private to him).

Without you here ... the only people who "win" are the scammers on EBay who sell fake vintage baseball photographs because we won't have you here to point them out!

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

the heads of the auction houses ARE aware of this board. To some extent. I know Doug Allen is and I would be extremely suprised if Mastro and some of the other folks there are not. I know Kevin Struss is, Lipset posted here once, Sloate and those guys. I think it's just too difficult and potentially dangerous for them to post here. I know Doug Allen posted once and said something like it would be the last time he posted regarding a lot or something. With as much concern as there was on that massive lot of 'E' cards in the last Mastronet auction that went for 20K you would have thought someone from Mastronet would have responded. Theres much more to lose by posting than to gain I think..........

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

But the right type post, such as the ones Rob Lifson made, go a long way towards proving the integrity and professionalism of a company. How many people that read this board that were indifferent or maybe had a low opinion of REA have now changed their minds becuase of his posts? They don't need post about every concern, but but done right, can win lots of fans here. And influencial ones at that.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: Harry

No one can be an expert on everything. It is nice to see Robert seek the opinions of other experts.

[Archive]

Posted By: Halleygator

Dear Mr. Lifson:

I think the 1868 Henry Chadwick book that I bought in your auction is also a "fake." Accordingly, please sell it to me for $9 instead of $9,000, OK?

[Archive]

Posted By: hankron

I would like to thank all, including Mr. Lifson, for the kind words. He and I have communicated and the whole situation is resolved. My judgment error was in not detailing the issue, but I'd never had the President of an auction house or PSA or such inquire (repeatedly!) about a post I made and, I must admit, I've always liked to be coy (i.e. the mystery of my icon). Of course the way Robert acted commments well on REA, when compared to many other institutions. I know that no other auction house or grading president would have pressed the issue as he did. That I clammed up and didn't wish to discuss the issue was largely a natural reaction. I promised Robert that I would contact him directly with any future issue.

I wish to note that I never thought or said I thought the photograph was a forgery. Forgery was a word others used. I had originally thought it an official photograph but not from 1941. If you wish to see where my thought process came from, review http://www.cycleback.com/newsservice/four.html

I've decided to take a vacation from the whole basebeball hobby, though am always happy to address individual collector's questions about something they own or are considering buying. I also regularly work on my website, adding new information there.

Best wishes
David