Problems with two championship rings in upcoming Heritage Auction

[slidekellyslide]

And we would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you meddling kids....


I feel like most auction houses appreciate the help that Net54 provides in rooting out bad items or misidentified photos, et cetera....I've always gotten the feeling that we are a thorn in the side of Heritage and they'd prefer we stop investigating their auctions. At the very least they stopped sending out the condescending jackwagon they used to have as their Net54 mouthpiece.

[sports-rings]

Thanks everyone for the (mostly) kind words and for the support.

I just want to address what a couple of you brought up - my timing issue and how I should have given them more time.

I agree with one of the posters - the rings were tampered with - this can not be disputed. Chris said he needed to speak with Mr. Edwards to make a final determination on the items and if the descriptions should be modified.

In one of my posts, I asked Chris, what could he possibly hear from Mr. Edwards that could change the fact or Chris's already determined agreement with me that the ring engravings were not original.

This investigation did not rise to the level of Watergate or the IRS scandal. I gave Chris time to deal with this but I felt that the community needed fair time to be warned about these problems.

If you track what super bowl rings typically sell for, these two items could have realistically sold for 20,000 - 50,000 each. My experience in speaking with and dealing with these types of buyers is that they are very busy with work, careers, and other pursuits in life and are not glued to the internet or hobby.

They could easily miss the update (yes I know Chris explained his process for making sure this would not happen, but it's not full proof and no guarantee bidders will see it). And yes I know, the responsability lies with the bidder and he/she should be their research.

[sports-rings]

Originally Posted by bobfreedman

For the same reasons that I listed above;
1. There are two sides to every story
2. They wanted to get in contact with the consigner
3. Why rush to take it down if no harm is done to leave it up?
4. Just because their pace of investigating is not what you would consider fast enough doesn't make them guilty of anything.

If you were the consigner here and they took the items down without so much as an email, how pissed would you be?

4. - I am not saying they are guilty of anything. I stated that Chris and I have different opinions on the timing. These are opinions and I don't think either of us are right or wrong.

If I was the consigner how would I feel? I am glad you asked:

He contacted me prior to putting the items in the auction as I have purchased rings from him in the past.

I sent him pictures of real rings and told him that Donnie Edwards was not a player. The consigner chose to proceed anyway and put the items in the auction.

The consigner is a "buyer" of jewelry and decided to try to unload these rings on an unsuspecting public.

[sports-rings]

If you were the consigner here and they took the items down without so much as an email, how pissed would you be?

One last thing....

Remember, I am saying that Chris and I have a different opinion on to proper timing of this investigation and Chris and his company did their investigation and took down the rings.

How about blaming the consigner?

When I presented evidence to him about Donnie Edwards not being a player, and no such thing as practice squads in the 1970s, and the bad engraving he decided to keep the story in-tact and send the rings off to auction.

I work with Ken Goldin at Goldin Auctions and have given Ken football memorabilia to put in his auction.

The last thing I want to do is embarrass Ken, or have an item returned to Ken.

I don't want to get one over on the auction house or the winning bidder. I want Ken to want my business and consider me a good partner in future auctions.

So I tell Ken, ahead of time about any claims or issues. I then rely on Ken and his experience to either:

1) not accept the item
2) write up a description explaining any issues
3) guide me how to be honest and handle that situation.

I was able to sell in Ken's auction that National Champions ring from the person who claimed to be on the team but wasn't.

Ken and his crew wrote up an honest description and the ring sold.

I believe Heritage will rewrite the description and put the rings in a future auction and that's fine. Everyone except the consigner, who should have at least warned Heritage that there could be issues, will be better off - including the eventual winning bidders of the two rings.

[bobfreedman]

So what it all boiled down to Michael, is that you didn't like the way HA went about their own business and how they decided to do their jobs? They did not do things fast enough for you is what all boils down to.

[jgmp123]

Originally Posted by bobfreedman

So what it all boiled down to Michael, is that you didn't like the way HA went about their own business and how they decided to do their jobs? They did not do things fast enough for you is what all boils down to.

I think what it boils down to is that HA was going to sell rings that belonged to a player that didn't exist. The failure to do that research before accepting the consignment is asinine to me.

Pretty simple really.

[sports-rings]

Originally Posted by bobfreedman

So what it all boiled down to Michael, is that you didn't like the way HA went about their own business and how they decided to do their jobs? They did not do things fast enough for you is what all boils down to.

Bob are you just stirring the pot and twisting things to conform what you want to conclude?

It boils down to the consigner tried to get one over on the auction house and the collecting community.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by sports-rings

Bob are you just stirring the pot and twisting things to conform what you want to conclude?

It boils down to the consigner tried to get one over on the auction house and the collecting community.

And to think that this is such an honorable business.

[ramram]

Is it possible that an auction house might want to drag their feet on an investigation until after the auction concludes and only then clean up the mess with the winning bidder? Then it's not out there, before the auction concludes, for the masses to see? Just a thought.

Rob M.

[sports-rings]

Is it possible that an auction house might want to drag their feet on an investigation until after the auction concludes and only then clean up the mess with the winning bidder? Then it's not out there, before the auction concludes, for the masses to see? Just a thought.

If the winning bidder had a strict budget and was unable to bid on other items later in the auction or while attending the National after thinking he won an item. Should he be upset?

Would he be wrong to say "why didn't you guys tell me ahead of time there was an issue???"

And as far as proclaiming that Heritage did not follow my timetable - what would happen if I never heard back from Heritage and they never changed the auction? When is a good time to alert the community?

Five minutes before the live bidding starts on net54 so no one will see it?

An hour after the auction?

A day?

A week?

Bob, no offense but you have lost your objectivity on this matter. I realize I see things different than perhaps your clients do but your opinion seems to be in the minority here.

[jgmp123]

Originally Posted by ramram

Is it possible that an auction house might want to drag their feet on an investigation until after the auction concludes and only then clean up the mess with the winning bidder? Then it's not out there, before the auction concludes, for the masses to see? Just a thought.

Rob M.

That's a very unethical approach to handling this type of situation.

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by ramram

Is it possible that an auction house might want to drag their feet on an investigation until after the auction concludes and only then clean up the mess with the winning bidder? Then it's not out there, before the auction concludes, for the masses to see? Just a thought.

Rob M.

That would be a very poor decision on the part of any auction house. The resulting bad PR from having knowingly "sold" a bad item (even if it never actually changed hands) would be far worse than any blowback from pulling a bad item from the auction. They might conduct their investigation and then pull the item without giving a reason, but to knowingly sell a bad item to someone with the intention of clearing up the matter with them behind closed doors after the auction is over is a lose lose proposition. They would still wind up getting bad PR, would not get commission from the sale of the bad item, and would lose out on whatever other bids the "winning bidder" would have placed in the auction had they not thought their funds tied up with the bad item.

[shelly]

It does seem tha HA has done this before. Wait to the last minute to remove and item. I do not think that it takes a month to get a hold of a consigner of such high valued rings. Same with the watch. It does start to get old.
I also see that an item that is truely suspected to be a forgery is consigned by one of the big shots at HA. I really think that is convlict of interest. Keeping an item in because your own guy is selling it.
Last thing. When it came to the rings even a person who has never dealt with rings could see that they where altered. It really would have made them look good if they just taken them down when this all started.

[earlywynnfan]

I think this would have been a great time to let the rings sell, keeping the facts hidden. (Obviously, the winning bidder would be notified immediately!) $60K worth of fraud is noteworthy. After the sale, trace the rings back to the consignor with the threat of jail time, and have him give up where he got them. Trace them all the way back to the source. Somehow we need to find out where all this garbage is coming from, and try to put and end to it. It appears the Cooperstown Forger is off pursuing journalistic activities, but many have stepped up to take his place.

Ken

PS: I, for one, am glad this whole thing was brought out publicly.

PPS: Ken Goldin's name has been brought into this thread. It seems Goldin will pull an auction at first hint of trouble, even if it means he's pulling what turns out to be a real item. Based on his hammer totals, being proactive does not hamper the bottom line!

[shelly]

He already commited fraud when he placed them in auction as authentic.

[sports-rings]

Originally Posted by bobfreedman

So what it all boiled down to Michael, is that you didn't like the way HA went about their own business and how they decided to do their jobs? They did not do things fast enough for you is what all boils down to.

Bob, everyone on here has been quite supportive except you. The more I think about your reply above the more I boil.

Bob, when you proclaimed above what it boils down to, you got it wrong.

Here's what your response boils down to: No software product is perfect. Even your software has its issues.

My feeling is you are siding with the auction house view solely because you don't have the guts or objectivity to look at this matter from the collector's point of view.

Which is it?

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by sports-rings

Bob, everyone on here has been quite supportive except you. The more I think about your reply above the more I boil.

Bob, when you proclaimed above what it boils down to, you got it wrong.

Here's what your response boils down to: No software product is perfect. Even your software has its issues.

My feeling is you are siding with the auction house view solely because you don't have the guts or objectivity to look at this matter from the collector's point of view.

Which is it?

Michael -
Don't let the bad guys get you down. Shelley, Chris and myself have fought through so much bullshit from guys who are obviously bad guys. Trying to nail the Florida ring has caused us nothing but grief so far but we are still hoping our efforts will be worthwhile.

[sports-rings]

Thanks Richard,

and glad to hear that you are feeling better!

[shelly]

Bob, they did a piss poor job. This could have been done in a few days not weeks.
There is no two sides to this arguement.

[bobfreedman]

Michael, your dead wrong - again, re-read my initial thread where I say you did a great job. My only point in all of this is that you were too impatient and you wanted HA to move at your speed and when they did not you acted like a spoiled kid and kicked and screamed. In fact, when no one replied to your initial thread, you posted again asking if anyone cares?

I am not sure what your comment about software has anything to with this thread but if you want to jab at it go ahead.

And there ARE two sides to every argument. HA did what they were supposed to do and that is to proceed at a pace that they deemed proper and not yours nor anyone else's. You say I don't have the guts to agree with you because of my lack of objectivity is another rat hole that you want people to chase. I never said I agreed with HA all I said is that you should be patient and stop crying that the sky is falling because HA did not act in a timely manner that you deemed proper. You were impatient who screamed louder when you did not get your way.

[sports-rings]

Originally Posted by bobfreedman

My only point in all of this is that you were too impatient and you wanted HA to move at your speed and when they did not you acted like a spoiled kid and kicked and screamed. In fact, when no one replied to your initial thread, you posted again asking if anyone cares?

And there ARE two sides to every argument. HA did what they were supposed to do and that is to proceed at a pace that they deemed proper and not yours nor anyone else's..... I never said I agreed with HA all I said is that you should be patient and stop crying that the sky is falling because HA did not act in a timely manner that you deemed proper. You were impatient who screamed louder when you did not get your way.

Bob - when do you think it's acceptable to alert the collecting community? A day before the auction goes live?

Or an hour before?

How about moments after the auction?

or a day or week after the auction?

which is it?

You would have a much stronger argument, and I would agree with you if I called out an auction that had a piece that was challenging to authenticate.

Bob, how hard was this piece to verify? This is the equivalent of a Babe Ruth autograph being auctioned that did not look anything like a Babe Ruth signature.

So I can be a better participator in the collecting community, please answer my question about proper timing - this is the second time I have posted this question to you.

[bobfreedman]

Michael, you and I both know that there is no set time. It is not like you are dealing with Coaches Corner here. Chris said he was on it and that should have been good enough for you. If he had ignored you or told you to leave him alone, then tell the world but he didn't and IMO, you should have been satisfied with that but, I guess you wanted the accolades that go along with outing them so you waited a week(not sure about the time here ?) and posted about it not once but twice and your second post was a whole 11 hours later.

[sports-rings]

If I wanted accolades than why even attempt to deal with Chris and Heritage privately?

If I wanted accolades, why should I admit that there are others out there who know more than I do.

Bob, you're great at telling me what I did wrong - not for a third time, I'm asking: when is it appropriate to bring a bad auction to net54?

[bobfreedman]

Originally Posted by sports-rings

If I wanted accolades than why even attempt to deal with Chris and Heritage privately?

If I wanted accolades, why should I admit that there are others out there who know more than I do.

Bob, you're great at telling me what I did wrong - not for a third time, I'm asking: when is it appropriate to bring a bad auction to net54?

Just re-read my last post, I am not re-hashing it again

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by sports-rings

Bob - when do you think it's acceptable to alert the collecting community? A day before the auction goes live?

Or an hour before?

How about moments after the auction?

or a day or week after the auction?

which is it?

You would have a much stronger argument, and I would agree with you if I called out an auction that had a piece that was challenging to authenticate.

Bob, how hard was this piece to verify? This is the equivalent of a Babe Ruth autograph being auctioned that did not look anything like a Babe Ruth signature.

So I can be a better participator in the collecting community, please answer my question about proper timing - this is the second time I have posted this question to you.

Michael,
I agree with Chris and Bob. Their timeframe for action was reasonable, but did not meet your desire for immediacy. If they had ignored you or told you to pound sand, the course you took would be more than appropriate. You were being a pain in the ass. Look at the situation objectively and 'Own it'. Many of us have been in your place many times. I have learned that being in a righteous position does not always lead me to my best behavior.

[William Farrell]

Originally Posted by bobfreedman

It is not like you are dealing with Coaches Corner here. Chris said he was on it and that should have been good enough for you.

Whether a faux item is being sold by the Prince of Thieves of ill repute or a major auction house of good reputation, and whether this faux item is being represented as authentic deliberately, or through incompetence, the end-result is the same if the faux item is not removed from sale. The buyer of the faux item has been defrauded.

The more research put into an auction piece, the more the hobby's consumers will benefit from it.

[sports-rings]

Originally Posted by Deertick

Michael,
I agree with Chris and Bob. Their timeframe for action was reasonable, but did not meet your desire for immediacy. If they had ignored you or told you to pound sand, the course you took would be more than appropriate. You were being a pain in the ass. Look at the situation objectively and 'Own it'. Many of us have been in your place many times. I have learned that being in a righteous position does not always lead me to my best behavior.

Bob won't answer the question but perhaps you will:

when is a good time to alert the community? a day or two before the live auction? a day? an hour? or a week after?

[William Farrell]

Originally Posted by sports-rings

Bob won't answer the question but perhaps you will:

when is a good time to alert the community? a day or two before the live auction? a day? an hour? or a week after?

IMO, you did just fine. A selfless gesture to save some poor schnook from taking a long ride off of a short pier.

[JMEnglish27]

Originally Posted by William Farrell

IMO, you did just fine. A selfless gesture to save some poor schnook from taking a long ride off of a short pier.

This.

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by sports-rings

I wanted to alert the collecting community to two items in the upcoming Heritage Platinum Night live and internet Auction to take place during the National.

I believe there is evidence that I am going to show below that these two rings have been tampered with and the story that goes along with the rings has a few holes in them.
Heritage was told the stories by the consigner, so in a sense, Heritage is not embellishing anything, just repeating the claims of the consigner.

Before I go further, I'd like to make some disclosures.

I consider my relationship at the current moment with Heritage to be in good standing. I won a high-ticket item in their last live sports auction and I have consigned football rings with them in the past (the last item I consigned with them was NY Jets super bowl ring that sold for over 53,000 during a live NY City auction).

I truly hope that Heritage will not ban me from participating as a bidder in future auctions for this post. If I am banned then it would have to be from this post.

I hope that Heritage will modify the two listings to more accurately describe the rings, or pull them since they have been heavily modified from their original state.

I further want to disclose that I was contacted by the consigner of these two rings and invited to buy them from him before he placed them in this auction. I was very excited about the opportunity to purchase these rings as we have done business together over the years.

As soon as he sent me pictures of the rings and I verified the story about these rings, it became obvious that they were modified and that the story does not make sense. I declined to purchase the rings at any price and the seller decided his best course of action was to send them to Heritage for auction.

I contacted Chris Ivy at Heritage and emailed him pictures and my concerns. Chris has been great, returning my emails and letting me know that they are investigating the two rings. I don't understand why the investigation is taking as long as it is and Chris's response on this is that they want to get the changes correctly and that they have time to modify it before the auction.

Chris did indicate in one of the first emails to me that he agreed with me, that the rings looked to have been modified.

It seems like this is taking much too long and I worry someone will buy the ring, not realizing the issues.

I believe these were real rings (probably salesman sample rings) but Mr. Edwards had his name engraved on them.

Mr. Edwards claimed he tried to make the teams but didn't make the roster. He told the consigner of these rings that Ownership really liked him and kept him around on the practice squad. This claim is stated in both Heritage lots.

Please examine the photos below. The "Edwards" rings in the auction are shown on the left. To the right of each ring are examples of real rings.

The "44" on the XIII ring is wrong, and the dots on his helmet are square, not round. The "44" is too big, and there are some issues with the lettering in both rings.

The "DB" looks wrong too on the xiii ring.

Yet, the markings on the super bowl XIII ring are good, but the lettering/engraving is awful. And why is the black paint so much more shiny than it should be?

On the super bowl X ring, His "A" and "W" are not the same as two real rings I have in my database. And don't get me started on the "S"

And, there is absolutely no person named "Don or Donald Edwards who played for the Steelers, and no "Don or Donald Edwards" in college football other than a qb who played years before.

I also researched practice squads from this era and it looks like practice squads were not used during the time Mr. Edwards claimed to be on the squad. You either made the team or you were cut. I believe the practice squad concept started in the 1980's or 1990's when teams reduced players on the team to save salary. It was a way to deal with injuries to active players while keeping team payroll lower.

What do you net54 folks think?

The above would have been sufficient, and your timeframe was fine if this was the extent of it. Adding your research would be fine (and helpful) also. All eyes would have been on HA to see what they would do. The subsequent stomping of your feet when they didn't act in your timeframe, when they clearly indicated that they heard your concerns, is what I feel you should acknowledge to yourself (not necessarily to anyone else). Again, I get it and I've been there. Trust me, I have learned from my impatience and it has helped me in my efforts. JMO

[William Farrell]

Originally Posted by Deertick

The above would have been sufficient..

The subsequent stomping of your feet when they didn't act in your timeframe, when they clearly indicated that they heard your concerns, is what I feel you should acknowledge to yourself (not necessarily to anyone else).

And IMO, since there was a distinct chain of causality that effected the withdrawal, there's no way to know for certain what the effect would have been had any of the cause leading up to the withdrawal effect been different, is there?

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by William Farrell

And IMO, since there was a distinct chain of causality that effected the withdrawal, there's no way to know for certain what the effect would have been had any of the cause leading up to the withdrawal effect been different, is there?

You are correct.

On an entirely unrelated matter, my wife "reminded" me several times to mow the lawn during my week off as we had a commitment for the weekend. Prior to her first "reminder", I had already planned to do it on Thurs. I told her I would mow on Thurs. I mowed on Thurs. In her mind, she was responsible for getting the lawn mowed.

[William Farrell]

Originally Posted by Deertick

You are correct.

On an entirely unrelated matter, my wife "reminded" me several times to mow the lawn during my week off as we had a commitment for the weekend. Prior to her first "reminder", I had already planned to do it on Thurs. I told her I would mow on Thurs. I mowed on Thurs. In her mind, she was responsible for getting the lawn mowed.

But there wasn't an auction clock running on the fate of your lawn and nothing really was at stake, unless you consider your lawn's perspective on the issue.

[Runscott]

After a 12 day absence I was looking at the lawn today and wondering what my girlfriend's expectations would be when she got home. I decided to sleep on it.

Sent from my SM-G730V using Tapatalk

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by William Farrell

But there wasn't an auction clock running on the fate of your lawn and nothing really was at stake, unless you consider your lawn's perspective on the issue.

This new guy is a hoot!

I'm new, too....but not as new, or funny, as William.