From first-hand experience I can tell you that statement is far from the truth. After being involved in a lawsuit concerning the autograph of multiple boxing champion Robert Fitzsimmons...

http://www.fighttoys.com/lawsuit.htm

... I had the audacity and balls to point out a fake autograph of the subject to the "executives" at Heritage.

http://www.fighttoys.com/Fitzsimmons...itage%20SR.jpg

No incessant pestering or name calling, just indubitable evidence supporting my findings. Sometime afterwards I made a web page with the evidence I presented to Heritage in an effort to explain to my customers why I do not honor or respect the opinions of any self proclaimed third party authenticators...

http://www.fighttoys.com/lawsuit%20Fitz%20wife.htm

http://www.fighttoys.com/lawsuit%20Fitz%20wifeb.htm

... One day I try to log on to Heritage and it states my account has been suspended and I need to contact their credit department. I call the number given thinking my credit card needed updating and was told I need to call another number and talk to a Chris Ivey. I call and there is no answer, I call a second time and again, no answer. I call the original number and the person on the line tells me that my account needs to remain suspended. No reason or explanation given.

Was my account suspended because of a credit issue as stated on the Heritage site or was my account suspended because of the posts I made on my web site?

Heritage, is my account suspension just or is it your child-like behavior simply trying to make an opposing opinion go away? Other than my opposing opinions please come on here and post all the evidence you can revealing any frauds, scams, or lies I've committed in this hobby thus far.

Mark O.
Schenectady, NY

can heritage answer that.

i am the one who email the executive, namely steve ivy, the boss. and i didnt pester him, i sent one email explaining how the sports dept. was failing in doing a good job, especially in boxing.

you can post the email if you want to. i didnt even name anyones name, never mentioned chris ivy in the email, as to not give the impression i am picking on someones kid. I just mentioned 'sports dept"

what they dont realize is that we tried over and over and over and over again to help heritage the nice way, and they fixed nothing, kept doing the same junk over and over again. basically tells you to get lost and keep walking pal.

they put up a wife signed fitzsimmons that psa certs, now psa has that same autograph on their psaautographfacts page, and i emailed orlando and grad as well as posted here and elsewhere that its bogus, and I show proof.

And it is still up on the autograph facts page as a genuine fitzsimmons autograph. This is what you get from these organizations when they they just dont care and are deaf to the hobby.

They still have the marciano signed letter as an exemplar on autograph facts also. they know its no good, but they arent going to admit they made a mistake.

Also recently Heritage sold an Spinks/Ali scorecard from their first fight, and Heritage said that Spinks gave up his championship belt in order to fight Ali.

Of course not doing their full homework, this is incorrect, Spinks only surrendered the WBC belt, not the WBA belt, which Ali subsequently won in their second matchup in order to be the first 3 time world heavyweight champion.

Now it's funny because I told Heritage of their clumsy error, but I didn't email Chris Ivy of the mistake, I emailed Steve Ivy, the boss and Heritage corrected the description. Now if I am banned, and Steve Ivy was so mad that I emailed him the first time letting him know how the sports dept. leaves much to be desired, why wasn't my email address in his delete/junk file, and why didn't he delete my email as soon as he saw it. He didn't, he read it and go the description changed. This is hardly pestering or abusing senior executives. If helping them out like this and correcting a description due to their lack of knowledge of boxing history is pestering, I am guilty.

Heritage doesn't know what to say. They say what they think you will believe. If you buy their line, then that's thier official line they are going to go with.

http://www.psaautographfacts.com/Aut...ob-fitzsimmons

http://www.psaautographfacts.com/Aut...rocky-marciano

Still up on autograph facts website, or is it autograph fiction? NOt only that, they say that joe frazier didnt change his autograph from the 1960's onward, (incorrect), and that Robert Fitzsimmons sometimes signed as Robt. Fitzsimmons, (incorrect).
Who is in charge over there, I let orlando and grad know and they don't do anything, so they must not be in charge.

No promises but I will see what I can find out.

A few points to update.

Travis- I don't believe your suspension has to do with authentication at all. I think you did something Chris asked you not to do. Since I wasn't there I am not going into it anymore.

Mark- Auction houses can say who they do and don't want bidding in their auctions. Their issue has nothing to do with any specific authentication. I can't really go into it publicly though, since it's a delicate area. It's nothing too egregious, imo, but suffice it to say they don't want you bidding in their auctions. I would imagine if you email Chris he will at least respond, unless he has told you before. And btw, the one piece you are talking about, according to them, got pulled...even though it had a PSA/DNA LOA....and I understand you were thanked for your help with it.

LL

Name another auction house that does it this way? none. they told me it is the way big auction houses run auctions. (telling people it is jsa auction loa when they hadn't looked at it yet?) they must be the only big auction house then.

leon, they are clueless at boxing in my opinion. but putting up the fakes ahead of time applies to every genre, not just boxing, but since i know boxing, it really sticks out like a sore thumb. i have contacted many different auction houses over the years, this is the only one that treats people like this. i would get an email from someone and i would say "they treated you like that too, me too!" it was uncanny how they take your suggestion or correction, then condescend and no other auction house does that. they all say thank you, then make the correction, not tell you how big auction houses do business and essentially you can go take a hike, thanks but no thanks, dont call us we'll call you. That's the feeling you get when you try to help this auction house. You feel like you are talking to someone who takes it personally and thinks he is being exposed as not being a big boxing guy when I could care less, I just want it right for the consumers sake so he tries to make you feel small. they sell 800 million $$$ a year in collectibles and can't run it through someone first who knows autographs and boxing history so they can write accurate descriptions and make sure the bad stuff stays off the site? This is exactly why people are mad at ebay, when any piece of carp shows up and they try to contact ebay about it but it can't get taken down.

Those two Muhammad Ali Operation bullpen autographs are still up at the auction house and they know about them. why?

http://sports.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleN...lotIdNo=111002

http://sports.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleN...&lotIdNo=45010

A few points to update.

Travis- I don't believe your suspension has to do with authentication at all. I think you did something Chris asked you not to do. Since I wasn't there I am not going into it anymore.

Mark- Auction houses can say who they do and don't want bidding in their auctions. Their issue has nothing to do with any specific authentication. I can't really go into it publicly though, since it's a delicate area. It's nothing too egregious, imo, but suffice it to say they don't want you bidding in their auctions. I would imagine if you email Chris he will at least respond, unless he has told you before. And btw, the one piece you are talking about, according to them, got pulled...even though it had a PSA/DNA LOA....and I understand you were thanked for your help with it.

LL



Leon, you know nothing about it, okay, that's for sure.


Jonathon told this board a few months ago that it was my email to steve ivy that did it. well, post the email for everyone to see. i got nothing to hide. so now it is something else? chris never told me not to email his dad. i emailed the higher ups because the lower downs didnt care at all, and i never said the words "chris ivy" to the dad, because i didnt want it to be personal, i only said sports dept. so is it the email or not? you don't know, they keep switching their story every month. it's a guessing game. Why did jonathon say one thing, now leon is saying something else, because he heard it from ? and ? and chris won't even come on here, he's too busy with whatever. Come on here chris, post the email, give your side, lets go!

Nice to know you are telling us why we got banned when you even say you dont know for sure, and wont go into it any further, when WE weren't even told by heritage directly why, but we know why, we dont need to hear rumors from you.

thanks for telling mark why he got banned, oh thats right, you didnt. you dont know anything about it. if you know, let's hear specfiics. what a joke. are you their spokesman? now go confer with heritage before you give you next non-answer.

Settle down Travis. Are you foaming at the mouth? You are writing that way. It is very unbecoming of you.

First of all it doesnt have anything to do with you. now you're condescending towards me when no one carbon copied you on any email concerning any of this.

how were you ever in the loop? you weren't.

now trying to shame me because you want others to think i am writing this in an unbecoming way. it's ridiculous. Me and others have valid concerns that go unaddressed by them and we are the bad guys. nice. if that's what you need to believe to go on with your day, fine. Just what does it have to do with you anyway? why don't you start an I love heritage thread? who is stopping you?

On the contrary, Leon, I think it's quite becoming of Travis, but, of course, I could be full of carp......

Attachment 110806

Very odd situation we have: on the one hand you have JSA and PSA, and the mutually beneficial ($$$) relationship they have with the major auction houses, which requires very little actual autograph expertise. On the other hand you have the real autograph experts right here on Net 54, who have no relationship with the major auction houses, or in some cases, bad relationships.

Then you have the customers, relying for the most part on the auction houses to supply them with autographs. The ones who don't hang out here are basically screwed, or at least have a greater than 50/50 chance of getting screwed each time they make a purchase. The others are either getting screwed knowingly and are happy with it, or are relying on their own expertise and that of the Net 54 experts, to not get screwed.

There has to be a better way.

What makes me upset leon is that jonathan comes on here says one thing, then now you say another, and people dont know the truth. can you two guys get your story straght?

Why is it Mr. huggins can come on here, Doug Allen can, Mr. Goldin, but not Mr Ivy? Are you his surrogate, you dont even know any sides of the story. You certainly don't know what was said to me. did you know when Chris Ivy said that Heritage took care of the jsa auction loa premature listings, he said that they were responding to collectors concerns and were proactive, etc. etc. what he didnt say is that I alerted him to the problem 8 months prior and was given the cold shoulder. Why is that?

That wasn't the truth. It just got big enough and enough of a story that they had to do something about it, not because they "cared". They could have "cared" 8 months prior when it was brought up and an article even written about it. but since the article didnt get wide exposure, they felt they didnt have to address it. Then when they felt they had to, all of the sudden they are an auction house who wants to do everything they can to help the customer. you just have to give me a break leon. you know what i write is true. quit taking the blame for them. it's not worth it.

Travis- Chris doesn't post on message boards. That's his call.

I am relaying what was told to me. He told you not to email any executive. You did. You are banned for that. It had nothing to do with the content of the email. It is the fact you emailed at all. How can you possibly not be able to interpret what I just said?

To be clear, yes you only sent one email. Chris said he made it very clear to you that your account would be suspended if you emailed an exec. You did and your account was suspended.

Huggins and Scott had several autos up in their last preview that were redacted after PSA looked at them. I can post a link to the thread on these boards discussing it. I think it makes them look sloppy and wish they wouldn't do it, but I do not view it as egregious or fraudulent in any way.

Your link does not discuss the outcome of the lawsuit. Why?

It certainly does. The court found for the defendant, and against PSA.

Ah, I had to go back and I now see the link within the link that says as much.

Very glad to see that. The court should very well have found what they did. However, I do feel the need to point out that they did not find anything against PSA. The court merely and rightfully stated that PSA is rendering an opinion, nothing more or less, which is not enough to show that the defendant acted fraudulently.

You are correct, Wayne. I shouldn't have phrased it as I did.

psa didnt show up in court to help bolster the plaintiffs case, they werent required to, but they didnt break their legs trying to get to the courthouse either, if you know what i mean.

all the defendant had to do is show the multitude of prior errors by the authentication company. He showed the court that the opinion of the company, with no reasoning or proof to back up their opinion other than vague terms that mean nothing, was backed by nothing meaningful and their so called expertise should be thrown out, which it was.

but it was not a good day for the validity of psa rejection letters as far as a court is concerned, and if psa would have went there to testify on behalf of the plaintiff, then you really would have seen a show for better or for worse. I would love to question them as to their processes and procedures.

But see, this is just it: PSA is the first to say that their opinion SHOULD NOT hold up in a court of law. The dumbass who tried to sue your boy wasted his money twice.

It would do a lot of people in this hobby good to read about that joke of a civil lawsuit.

I assume that person will not be wasting his money on those pretty sorry authenticaters again.

Was that a small claims case? The pleadings look like small claims but I don't know that jurisdictions forms.

Leon, two conflicting statements from you? I take it you now realize it doesn't take a ton to get banned from Heritage. A representative from Heritage has posted their nonsensical reasons on this board in the past why at least two other people have had their accounts suspended so why not come back on here and explain why mine has. Yes, it's a delicate area because Heritage would have to fabricate or make something up to justify their child-like behavior in suspending my account.

Heritage rep, come on here and explain. Be honest, be real, you have my permission to post any and all evidence to support your decision. Leon stop band-aiding their asses and let them speak for themselves. Let’s get to know their company a learn a little about their character. I’m open and willing to answer any questions they might have for me.

Yes, small claims and the amount was $4,500

Taking what I said out of context is weak Mark. In general I think it probably takes a lot to get banned.

Then after that statement, I saw why Chris said YOU are banned, and I didn't think that was too egregious. That doesn't change the way I feel overall.

Maybe you would like to share what that was, Leon. Let others be the judge.
Otherwise it's all baloney.

Personally, I think the question is "why should heritage allow Travis and Mark to bid" rather than why not. All you do is criticize and try and hurt their business(which doesnt work). You know what their process is(nothing to deceive people) yet you bring up and post pre-auction items over and over again. It is a free country(good or you)but they can also chose who they sell to. I would ban you and not give you the time of day either. I really do not see why they need to give any explanation based on your actions here. AT ALL.

It's all baloney Travis. I am sure Mark knows why, ask him. If not, he can email Chris and find out.
I have already been taken out of context and I am done with this thread.

he already asked heritage, they didnt answer him.

no need to quit, it didnt have anything to do with you from the beginning and heritage should not be sharing confidential information about their account holders with you or anyone.

That's fine but that is not the reason they are giving for the banning. they specifically said it was not regarding authentication. They won't tell us the real reason but they tell Leon. nice. Leon, can we cut the baloney and give the reason mark was banned already? He said he didnt know and he called them up and they wouldnt tell him.

the dumb thing is that banning only fanned the fire.

Don't call them pre-auction item as many of those auction items with the jsa auction loa designation were OPEN for internet bidding and had bids on them, and jsa hadnt looked at the items, but they had a jsa auction loa description to the item.

You fell for their line and couldn't get it right either, that is exactly why we continue to bring this up. so the truth can get out about these items. there were bids on these items with the premature auction loa tags.

why does the sports dept. do this? I don;t know. the fine art dept. has it too, a disclaimer that items may not be properly vetted, but i bet you any amount of money that if a picasso or renoir came in, it wouldnt go up unless they were sure it was legit. All it would take is a couple of ridiculous art pieces for the art dept. to look like fools too.

Those Ali signed photos are STILL up and heritage knows they are no good.

They will take them down when it flows through their process( if they are bad). It is you who fell into wasting all your time on the same meaningless bs.

First, for Mark to be grouped with Travis is a Travesty for him because the later is the most disruptive, grating, irritating & unfeeling dope you'd ever want to meet. He should be banned on that alone.

Business owners have a right to do business with anyone they want. How's this analogy boy... If I had a hamburger stand and Big, dumb and stupid showed up and said he'd kindly pay tomorrow for a hamburger today, I'd spit my coke on him and tell him to get lost....Just like Heritage did.

Chuck not sure what you saying:D

Attachment 110997

I was pretty sure I was banned from Heritage...they were not happy with me and the let it be known...I logged in recently and was surprised that I had not been banned. I even bid on an item and won it, so I know for sure that I am not banned. :D

Anyway why is Travis ignoring what Leon told him? He was told he would be banned if he emailed any Heritage execs and he did. That got him banned, so why is he on here telling us that he doesn't know why he got banned?

How does Coaches Corner treat you? Do they take the items down? Do they make corrections?

Coaches Corner finds reps who witnessed George Washington Private Signings and uses their LOA's. We call them the Valley Forgers

:D;):p:o:)

JimStinson
 

The guy in the boat 2nd from right does look VERY suspicious !!!!
_______________
jim@stinsonsports.com

Jim Stinson Buying & Selling Baseball Autographs
stinsonsports.com

I am glad you made the comparison between heritage (auction house) and CC (???) and not me.

and actually they have made corrections, believe it or not, as funny as that sounds.

But heritage is an auction house like i have never seen. If you want to get brushed off, try to help heritage. This is my experience.

You know, it's funny that you mentioned this..

I love Heritage, I always have. I frequent it more than eBay, I have spent more than I care to share and I do not mind how they conduct their business in the slightest. As for Coaches Corner, I have only bid on an item ONCE.

Now, I have had only ONE problem with Heritage and ONE problem with CC in my history with both. Surprisingly, Coaches Corner was the one to resolve the issue while Heritage left a sour taste in my mouth:

I bought a 1986 Fleer Jordan PSA 8 from Coaches Corner (stupid, I know). When I got it in the mail I noticed the case had obviously been tampered with. Surprisingly, CC immediately refunded my money and took the item back. I was happy to break even on that one.

I once bought a "Complete" 1959 Fleer Ted Williams set from Heritage. It was NM and I spent over $1,000 for it. A lot for the set. Well, I get the set in the mail and I notice the "Ted Signs" card (a valuable SP) is a counterfeit. I email Heritage and the response I get was rather rude:

BTW the title of the auction was "1959 Fleer Ted Williams High Grade Complete Set (79)"

"The set you purchased was a 79-card complete set and clearly says so in the title. There is no mention of card #68 being included because it is not. As is the case with the short-print ’33 Goudey Lajoie the is considered complete without it because of its scarcity. Did you really think that a sports auction house would not have mentioned the most valuable card in the set? …nor include it in the imaged cards? As a counterfeit, the card has no value and was included just to fill the space and is just an extra card. Including an extra card is not grounds for a refund. We were well aware it was not a real card; we did not mention it as we felt it added no value. For grading, all cards in sheets are reviewed regardless if they are in the pocket alone or sheeted back-to-back. I am sorry but we feel you received exactly what was listed in the title and the description. In the future if you feel a description is in the least ambiguous, both catalog and monthly auctions offer a three to four week bidding period designed to answer any questions."


Stupid me, I didn't realize that "complete" meant "missing the most important card in the set" and that this set is universally known as "complete" while missing the most valuable card! Not to mention comparing 1959 Fleer #68 to the Goudey Lajoie is absolutely ridiculous!

By simply stating "79 cards", not "79/80" or anything like that is completely misleading. I now know there are 80 cards in this set.

Aside from the overall condecending tone, I also was rather insulted by the remark "Including an extra card is not grounds for a refund." Yes, thank you, that is why I was upset, because you had the generosity to include an extra card in your otherwise "complete" set.


For me, Heritage is a love/hate relationship. I find nothing wrong with their auction previews. I do however, find some issues with how they treat their customers. I have placed $100,000's worth of bids, it shocks me that such a small issue is handled so poorly on their part.

Jason

I made no comparison, I just wondered how Coaches Corner treats you and if they are receptive to your suggestions. I would think they would keep you much busier than Heritage, but I guess not because I never see you post about them.

Jason, did the final bid reflect what the set should have brought if it had included the real #68?

Also, the comparison of a single CC experience to a Heritage experience is very misleading. I know plenty of disreputable scammers who ALWAYS politely fix all complaints. What you are missing is they make their money off the people who buy fakes and are too ignorant to complain. You hear people here all the time stating that you don't judge a company by its mistakes, but rather by how it fixes them. Scammers feast on such philosophers.

I 100% agree. Like I said, I have bid on one item with CC and had one issue, while I have bid on 1000's of items with HA, but have had only one problem. I believe CC is the lowest of the low and I did not mean to compare them, it's just, while we were on the subject....

And to answer your question previously asked, yes. I bid an amount I thought was fair if #68 was included.

I see what you are saying.

Then that really sucks. I am certain that most of the auction houses try to create descriptions that are misleading (either with text or photos), in an effort to secure more for their consignors. I also believe that they think it's okay, as long as they are technically truthful, and they often use a large grey area when it comes to "technically truthful." That probably sounds like a bold statement, but I've dealt with three clear-cut examples, from three different auction houses, in the last year alone.

I look at it this way - if I buy something with a misleading description, and decided to sell it at some point, would I feel comfortable using the same description used to sell it to me? If the answer is "no", then I got screwed. In all three instance alluded to above, I would have had to be much more honest about the description than the auction houses were with me.

were the 59 Fleers graded?

I know exactly "0" collectors who consider the 1959 Fleer set complete @ 79 cards.

Can you send a link to the lot?

Wow...not sure I'd ever deal with them again if I were you...lots of places to find good stuff out there.

So true. I've dealt with quite a few fraudsters in my practice and the true pros will always quickly and quietly settle the dispute. They know that there are other suckers out there and it doesn't pay in the end to slug it out with the 10% who actually complain.