![]() |
okay, dont trust me on autographs, i dont care. The people that KNOW me can trust me on them or not.
Recently a very experienced guy with 50 years collecting boxing asked me my opinion on a boxing autograph, that's all i need to know if I know my trade, not dan bretta's approval. I never heard Bretta's name in boxing autograph circles. go figure. Evidently he's a big collector of boxing autographs. If you don't like Nash, so what? That's their business. Long on wind only. If you got info, let's see it. Meanwhile I still don't see anyone refuting the articles on HOS, so they make up red herrings to misdirect. Again, if it were me or anyone else with the same stories, people would still be mad as wet hens because it exposes what people don't want it to expose, so then I or whoever else would just be the target of whatever anybody wanted to bring up about the "messenger". But the message on the website would be the same, which remains uncontested. No one could be the author of the HOS articles without taking the beating some are intent on giving. |
Anyway
Does anybody have anything on White Betsy? Like, who wrote the blog, where did it go, and why? |
I can see it now.
50 year boxing autograph collector - "Travis, I have known you for a long time and I would like you to take your 20+ years experience and look at this old boxing autograph and let me know what you think." Travis - "But Dan Bretta on net54 isn't sure about my skills" 50 years boxing collector - "Why didn't you say so, well then forget it" |
For someone that insists on TPA's owning up to every mistake, you sure are willing to give Nash a free pass on his own legally proven, backed by evidence, misdeeds. The OP still has not been addressed.
Hypocrisy at it's finest. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
http://web.archive.org/web/201201210...wordpress.com/ |
Quote:
Sorry - that is all I will say on this matter. Josh |
Quote:
I'm shocked........... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
And how is this for ironic, Travis you post on here ranting on and on, over and over again about how PSA and JSA never divulge or specify who looks at and authenticates a particular autograph, yet you apparently gladly give Nash a pass when in his stories he always uses ambiguous terms such as "sources say" and "experts we spoke to agreed". Why can't Nash specify who these sources are and who these experts he spoke to are? But again as always, you won't answer ANY direct questions posed to you about Nash. You'll ignore them, picking and choosing to reply to only certain questions directed at you. Why? Are you afraid that your responses to these questions might impinge upon Nash's "good" name? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Is there any chance that the auction houses that initially offered what turned out to be forgeries, such as the trophy balls, Jennings SS ball, and other high-end items, would reveal the names of the consignors?
If the item was resold I would not expect to find out who. But whoever consigned the items in the first place to Christie's, Mastro, etc., will know who the forgers likely are, if they are not themselves the forgers. HIPPA, lawyer-client, and confessional issues do not apply here. It's probably rhetorical to ask, but it seems like the major auction houses know who the forgers are, but their buyers are not allowed to. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:12 PM. |