Issues with a Heritage National Auction Item.

[sports-rings]

Heritage is auctioning off a Superbowl II ring at their National Platinum Auction. The ring and the story have been in the news lately as player Frederick "Fuzzy" Thurston was a player on the superbowl I and II teams. The IRS seized the ring as Mr. Thurston owed back taxes to the IRS.

The ring came from Mr. Thurston and the auction is already up to $35,000 ($41,825 with the buyers premium).

Heritage states in the description "Presented is the very ring he earned for his participation in the very last game of his career..."

While I am sure the ring was Mr. Thurston's ring, and I am sure it was made by Jostens, this is not the original ring presented to him.

The original rings were all made of 14K gold, and inside the ring, the company Jostens, who made the rings engraved "(C)JOSTEN 14K". Back in the 60's Jostens engraved "JOSTEN" and later on, in the 1970's started to engrave "JOSTENS".

Heritageg describes the ring they are auctioning as 10K and engraved with "JOSTENS 10K". I emailed them that this could not be the original ring as I have an original ring and have seen other original rings and they are all 14K and have the origianl engraving of "JOSTEN".

Lengendary last summer had a player ring belonging to Dave Dunaway and they had to change the auction description after it was brought to their attention that the ring was made years after superbowl II. Mr Dunaway, who received the ring years later because he was traded late in the year and did not play in superbowl II. The ring he received was also was made of 10K and had the newer "JOSTENS" engraved inside the ring.

I emailed Heritage last week and mentioned these facts and invited them to contact me or other ring collectors for conformation. So far I have not heard from Heritage and they have not updated their auction on this matter.

[Leon]

Word back this morning is that Heritage is currently working on this issue....

[sports-rings]

this must be some big and complex issue if they are still working on it. The description has not been updated.

I remember about a year or two ago Heritage had a trophy that I had concerns over. I wanted to post an entry at Net54 about my concerns and I was told I could be in leagal trouble if I did.

Funny thing was I asked them if they "went the extra mile" and contacted the trophy manufacturer to validate the trophy (another words if they were proactive) and I was told that they had no plans to reach out to the manufacturer.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by sports-rings

this must be some big and complex issue if they are still working on it. The description has not been updated.

I remember about a year or two ago Heritage had a trophy that I had concerns over. I wanted to post an entry at Net54 about my concerns and I was told I could be in leagal trouble if I did.

Funny thing was I asked them if they "went the extra mile" and contacted the trophy manufacturer to validate the trophy (another words if they were proactive) and I was told that they had no plans to reach out to the manufacturer.

Really, legal trouble for expressing a concern? I guess I am always in trouble so I don't really know the difference. I think the best thing about this board is that we can all express concerns about anything. That being said, it bears repeating, everyone is legally liable for what they say on the board (or any place for that matter). best regards

[sports-rings]

Word back this morning is that Heritage is currently working on this issue....

Well here we are a few days later and the description has not been updated.

Leon, this is not a difficult research assignment. Any knowledable ring collector would come to the same conclusion I did. The team received 14K rings (not 10K rings like the one offered in this auction) and the original rings were engraved "JOSTEN" not "JOSTENS".

Who could fault any collector monitoring this auction and error from thinking Heritage would rather get the highest price than get the listing correct?

[ss]

I wonder why the guy from Heritage, who always makes sure to tell everyone that he's a lot smarter than the rest of us, hasn't chimed in yet. His silence is almost as amusing as his arrogance.

[Heritage Sports]

Thank you for the continued interest in this Platinum Night auction. We are extremely proud of the sale and remain very grateful to our consignors who have chosen our service above the many others to present some of the most important privately owned sporting artifacts in the world.

With that gratitude comes a very serious responsibility, and even though the consignor for this ring is the United States government we at Heritage believe we owe them the same due diligence we provide to our good friends within the hobby. This ring was presented to the IRS as Thurston’s Super Bowl II ring, and that is how it was presented to us. If this proves to be inaccurate, Heritage will make the necessary adjustments to the auction copy and to any bidding thus far.

I hope the board will forgive us when we say that our response to this matter cannot be dictated by its timetable, but rather by the progression of our own investigation, which reveals a matter quite a bit more complicated than that which has been described here. We have located “Jostens” (as opposed to “Josten”) stamping on a number of pre-1970 rings. We have also located both 10k and 14k examples of otherwise identical/period Championship rings. We are working with one of the leading Championship ring experts in the hobby to get to the bottom of the issue.

Rest assured that if there is indeed an issue with the listing that needs to be updated, then we will inform the bidders and update the listing accordingly. So stay tuned, and, again, thanks so much for keeping Heritage on your radar. I hope to meet many of you at the National next week, so please do come by and introduce yourselves. And please help out the Ronald McDonald House of Chicago with a $100 donation if you would like to join us for the Platinum Night auction on Thursday August 4th. It’s going to be one of the biggest hobby events of the year.

[sports-rings]

Sadly for us ring collectors, there are so few ring experts in the market place. I spoke to the one person in the ring community who knows more than anyone I have ever met and he mentioned he was not contacted by your organization. Jonathan, would you mind sharing with me who you contacted?

Do you need a name of the person to contact at Jostens? I can provide that too.

In all the years I have collected rings and done hundreds of hours of research, I have never encounted a championship team where some players received 10K rings and some 14K rings at the time they were originally awarded.

[slidekellyslide]

Mark's (Bmarlowe1) avatar he uses here is the Joe Jackson lookalike that appeared in a photo that Heritage refused to pull even though it was obviously not Joe Jackson in the photo....I think he's had trouble getting Heritage to cooperate on other dubious photos they've auctioned in the past as well.

[packs]

I have a question about auction house responsibilities. Especially on the heels of the Halper fakes stories. If a consignor presents an item to the auction house, doesn't the auction house have a responsibility to investigate the item's authenticity regardless of who the consignor is? And prior to the actual auction? It doesn't seem fair to the bidders if an auction house lists an item based on a consignor's reputation.

[ruth-gehrig]

I totally agree however it doesn't seem it always works that way

[Leon]

Originally Posted by packs

I have a question about auction house responsibilities. Especially on the heels of the Halper fakes stories. If a consignor presents an item to the auction house, doesn't the auction house have a responsibility to investigate the item's authenticity regardless of who the consignor is? And prior to the actual auction? It doesn't seem fair to the bidders if an auction house lists an item based on a consignor's reputation.

I can only speak for myself but I would not take a reputation into account on an item. I take the item on it's own. IF Scott and I don't feel comfortable with it then we aren't going to auction it. It's very easy.

As far as prior to the auction? Of course, but new information does come out after auctions start and that information is as important as any and can play a role in the continuance, or not, of that lot. Every auction house faces those same obstacles.

[packs]

Very true. These kinds of auctions attract collectors whose insight goes beyond even the most advanced hobbyists. Its great to see houses handle these situations professionally.

[sports-rings]

As of Sunday morning, Heritage still has not updated their auction description for this ring.

As we get closer to the auction, it looks more likely that there is a possibility they will not even acknowledge that it's not the original ring.

With the winning bidder paying over $40,000 with the buyer's premium, I hope the winning bidder learns that the ring is not original and demands that Heritage take the ring back.

Although I offered to provide contact information for the "real experts" at Jostens (the company that made the original ring), I have not heard from Jonathan or anyone else at Heritage.

Jonathan wrote on this thread that they are investigating this issue. This is some investigation on their part. How long should it take? I am the only person I know of who has won an original superbowl II ring at auction and they have not asked me anything about the ring.

Legendary last year auctioned off a Superbowl II Packer ring that was made some years later, and much to their credit, quickly acknowledged this by changing their original auction description.

I was never a fan of Heritage, now I think even less of them.

[bobbyw8469]

This is really crappy.....

[Heritage Sports]

We have spoken with multiple championship ring experts in the hobby as well as a contact at Jostens regarding this ring. While the prevailing opinion does appear to match the basis of your argument that “Back in the 60's Jostens engraved "JOSTEN" and later on, in the 1970's started to engrave "JOSTENS,” a bit of research has located a number of rings dating from the 1940’s to the late 1960’s that are stamped “JOSTENS,” indicating a rather significant flaw in this opinion. This cannot be explained by anyone with whom we have discussed the matter. In fact, we have also located 1960’s championship rings from the same NFL team and year noted as stamped “JOSTENS” with both 10K and 14K gold. While the issue is being characterized by certain posters on this board as being black-and-white-definitive, it simply is not the case.

We stand by our copy as written and every statement is factually correct. This is Fuzzy Thurston’s ring. It was presented to him for his participation in the 1967 Super Bowl II. It is stamped “Jostens 10K.” It was confiscated by the IRS and consigned to Heritage to recoup back taxes. Here is a link to the full description should you wish to review it: http://sports.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7037&lotNo=80061

We are human and errors will rarely but inevitably occur when dealing with over 10,000 sports lots annually. The Joe Jackson photo that Dan Bretta posted about was pulled from auction and was never sold by Heritage, despite his statement to the contrary. Please feel free to check our nearly 60,000 lots in our completed auction archives to verify. We appreciate the feedback that we receive from knowledgeable hobbyists. We review the information that is provided and we sometimes update a lot when it is deemed as warranted or choose to leave the description as it is when we feel that it is accurate. Heritage Auctions is a service business and we have grown to be the world’s largest collectibles auctioneer over the past 35 years by building trust and providing quality service to the thirty collectible fields in which we work. This will be our last post on this thread but please feel free to email myself or any Heritage sports consignment director should you have any further questions about the Platinum Night event next week.

[calvindog]

Ugh. I'd hate to be the sucker who's buying this ring.

[packs]

On what other types of rings did you find the JOSTENS variable? This is a super bowl championship ring. I wouldn't compare its make up to just any ring carrying a JOSTENS stamp dating to the same time period.

[sports-rings]

Please share with me (this is my 2nd request) who your ring experts are. There are so few out there I would hope I know them.

In all the years I have collected rings, and the experts I have met, no one has ever mentioned that a team has issued some players 14K rings and others 10K. This is an amazing revelation and I would like to confirm this.

thank you,

[shelly]

This is addressed to Jonathan Scheier of Heritage Auctions.

This is in reference to the Superbowl II ring that you have up for auction.

Mr. Scheier, you have an authority and expert here on Net54 on sports rings in Mr. Michael Borkin. Heritage Auctions has some beautiful memorabilia up for auction right now valued in the millions. Your one auction for that Super Bowl II ring is going to make potential bidders possibly question the authenticity of your other items. Why not continue your investigation of that particular Super Bowl II ring, take down the auction and save it for your next auction if you discover that it is as you claim.

Mr. Michael Borkin has given you enough reason for you to have the question that Super Bowl II ring. Please don't allow one possible bad apple to infect your other beautiful auctions. I know many of your authenticators, I would suggest that this is not a fight you would win.


Shelly

[sports-rings]

Shelly,

thanks for your kind words. I am not really an expert when it comes to rings. they are my passion and I try to research and document every ring major ring that comes to auction.

I only know a couple of "Ring Experts" (maybe two or three). Scott Welkowsky knows more about ring than anyone I know, and I have a helpful source at Jostens. Scott was not contacted. There is TJ, who authenticates rings for PSA-DNA, but sadly, he knows less about rings and is so unfriendly myself and others stay away from him.

So I asked Jonathan who his ring experts were and I have not heard back from him.

The way they handled this issue all I can think is what a lousy way to tarnish a good reputation.

[gnaz01]

Michael,

Is that the same Scott Welkowsky that used to work at California Numismatics years ago?

[jsage]

Originally Posted by gnaz01

Michael,

Is that the same Scott Welkowsky that used to work at California Numismatics years ago?

Yes Scott Welkowsky did work at California Numismatics. He has been out on his own for many years.

[tinkereversandme]

I agree with Shelly and nice work Michael and disappointed in Heritage. Guys, when something like this comes up, it's wise to sometimes listen, or you risk bad publicity. Everytime you come on here now, seemingly someone will bring this up. Why risk it, for a seemingly small amount? I don't get it.

Larry

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by Heritage Sports

We have spoken with multiple championship ring experts in the hobby as well as a contact at Jostens regarding this ring. While the prevailing opinion does appear to match the basis of your argument that “Back in the 60's Jostens engraved "JOSTEN" and later on, in the 1970's started to engrave "JOSTENS,” a bit of research has located a number of rings dating from the 1940’s to the late 1960’s that are stamped “JOSTENS,” indicating a rather significant flaw in this opinion. This cannot be explained by anyone with whom we have discussed the matter. In fact, we have also located 1960’s championship rings from the same NFL team and year noted as stamped “JOSTENS” with both 10K and 14K gold. While the issue is being characterized by certain posters on this board as being black-and-white-definitive, it simply is not the case.

We stand by our copy as written and every statement is factually correct. This is Fuzzy Thurston’s ring. It was presented to him for his participation in the 1967 Super Bowl II. It is stamped “Jostens 10K.” It was confiscated by the IRS and consigned to Heritage to recoup back taxes. Here is a link to the full description should you wish to review it: http://sports.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7037&lotNo=80061

We are human and errors will rarely but inevitably occur when dealing with over 10,000 sports lots annually. The Joe Jackson photo that Dan Bretta posted about was pulled from auction and was never sold by Heritage, despite his statement to the contrary. Please feel free to check our nearly 60,000 lots in our completed auction archives to verify. We appreciate the feedback that we receive from knowledgeable hobbyists. We review the information that is provided and we sometimes update a lot when it is deemed as warranted or choose to leave the description as it is when we feel that it is accurate. Heritage Auctions is a service business and we have grown to be the world’s largest collectibles auctioneer over the past 35 years by building trust and providing quality service to the thirty collectible fields in which we work. This will be our last post on this thread but please feel free to email myself or any Heritage sports consignment director should you have any further questions about the Platinum Night event next week.

Instead of pulling the piece, as some suggest, it seems to me there is a very obvious solution to this dilemma: post these findings. If you have located genuine rings that match yours, show us all where. If you have located early rings that says "JOSTENS," then show us where. Take away any 'trust' factor involved, and give every bit of data available, then let the educated public decide. Otherwise, you're asking us to believe your word when the argument against you is not only compelling, some might say it's damning.
Ken
earlywynnfan5@hotmail.com

[bobbyw8469]

Why risk it, for a seemingly small amount? I don't get it.

Wasn't the federal guberment the consignor???? Not like Heritage wanted to piss them off - however, the winning buyer took it on the chin on that one sounds like. What else is new?

[sports-rings]

I sent a link of this post to "an auction expert" (after all, they got their "ring experts" involved). The owner of a major auction house told me he was stunned by their reasoning and response.

Again, I ask, who are the ring experts that vouched for the ring being original? If a possible bidder is deciding on bidding on the item, wouldn't it make sense to name who your experts are? This is done all the time when auction houses use PSA or JSA.

Something does not seem right or add up.

[danc]

I don't understand why a multi-multi million dollar company (that goes well beyond sports) would risk their reputation on something like this?

On a side note that has nothing to do with this. I heard a long time ago about a valuable consignor who kept feeding an auction house. One day, one of the items he consigned got a lot of flack and the auction house wanted to pull the item. The consignor was outraged and noted that if this was done, he would never consign with them again. They let the item fly to appease the consignor.

DanC

[Matt]

Originally Posted by danc

I don't understand why a multi-multi million dollar company (that goes well beyond sports) would risk their reputation on something like this?

Perhaps they recognize they encounter this situation pretty frequently and if they respond to this one, then they may feel compelled to all the other similar situations as well.

[thecatspajamas]

Just caught the live webcast of the auction, and the auctioneer did make a statement about the ring to the effect of: "This was Fuzzy Thurston's ring. He lost the original ring given to him in 1967 and this was made for him in the 70's. But this was Fuzzy's ring, and he did wear it."

The situation was handled fairly in my opinion, and bidding advanced beyond the opening internet pre-bid, so assumedly the winner knew exactly what he was getting.

[sports-rings]

glad to hear that they explained the ring was given to him in the 70's. i have no doubt that it is a real ring, made by jostens and belonged to the player. I stopped by their booth at the National on Thursday and wound up having a loud and heated debate. They believe I have an "agenda" against them, and they told me who there two ring experts were. They picked two people who, in my opinion are not qualified to assist them. The contact at Jostons they spoke to is my contact also. They asked her "Do you have records of what was presented to Fuzzy in 1968" and Heritage was told the records were lost years ago.

In my heated debate they stuck to their guns and they insisted they were fine with their research. I asked them to visit Scott Welkowsky who had a booth a row or two from theirs and they would learn more about the superbowl II ring than they ever knew. They said they would do this.

Glad they did the right thing and finally acknowledged the ring is not original. This is best for them and the US Governnment (the consigner) as the ring will not be returned.

For the record, I don;t have an agenda other than I would like auction houses to keep an open mind when presented with evidence that an item description needs to be changed sometimes.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by danc

On a side note that has nothing to do with this. I heard a long time ago about a valuable consignor who kept feeding an auction house. One day, one of the items he consigned got a lot of flack and the auction house wanted to pull the item. The consignor was outraged and noted that if this was done, he would never consign with them again. They let the item fly to appease the consignor.

DanC

I am shocked, shocked to find out that an auction house would not do the right thing but would rather appease the consignor and keep the revenue stream alive.
Round up the usual suspects.