Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>MarkH56</b><p>Steve, I need to see certified funds (bank check or cashier's check) sent to myself or my attorney in the amount of $18,775.32 by 5pm EDT on April 4th, 2007. If not, I will be filing a lawsuit to recoup my money. I hope to hear from you soon. Mark Haverkos

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Steve M.</b><p>inappropriate.

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Wesley</b><p>I will be very surprised if this is really the "final answer"

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>ScottIngold</b><p>Why post this here ?

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Larry</b><p>No matter what occurred and no matter who is right, this thread should be deleted, it has nothing positive to add to the forum.

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Bryan Long</b><p>This needs to be taken off this forum until an end occurs. I would like to know how it ends and what the findings are, but I don't care or want to know the inner workings of this deal. This is up to Steve, Mark and now Leon, I think.<br><br>.

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Let's talk about this for a second.....Isn't this a hobby issue? Hasn't the whole thing been played out, by all parties, on the board? I advised Mark to consult his lawyer, and that he could post it here if he wanted to. I also said he might send a registered letter to Steve as is probably customary in this kind of situation. All along I have asked him to consult his lawyer...and I believe he has been. If everyone thinks it should not be on the board then I can talk to Mark and delete it. I am not sure I see the problem though (maybe I am blind and if so I am sure I will be convinced soon).....For some reason I can't figure the board out sometimes.....I guess I am in left field? regards

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Peter Spaeth</b><p>This whole dispute has been aired in public, by both sides. Any eventual lawsuit will be a matter of public record. What is so sacred about a demand?

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>peter ullman</b><p>it seems to me...that the tone of this letter adressed to steve verkman...and the subject matter are somewhat personal. Granted, all has been aired on this board regarding this topic BUT...it just doesn't seem right for all of us to be seeing this...probably before Steve V. If a lawsuit is imminent...so be it...we will all find out about it sooner than later...but before the defendant even knows about it? Just doesn't seem appropriate.<br /><br />pete in mn

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>When the story was fresh and gruesome it drew us in and we gave it full opinion as it related to the hobby. <br />Now though it just feels tacky - as if we were being shown the dirty underwear after the divorce. We don't need to see their underwear, do we??<br /><br /><br />Daniel

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Denny</b><p>It is a hobby issue! & we've heard it all to this point...Why not see it thru til the end? Even if it seems inappropriate...Didn't it seem inappropriate a long time ago? I'm very interested in seeing the outcome. Only for righteousness sake, not for the Controversy...<br /><br />Life's Grand,<br />Denny Walsh

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Dan</b><p>If this bad boy goes to court, unfortunately the only real winner in that situation is whomever represents both sides. For example, the amount is $18k, now, of course the suit will be for the entire amount and both sides will put up a good fight, now, no matter who wins and who loses, there will be an appeal. Now, we are in to round two of the famed 30 Goudey and no one has been paid except the "representatives", not the clients. Round two ends in another win or possibly a flip-flop of the original judgement and yep, you guessed it, appeal or threat of an appeal and as with round one, no one has been paid except the "representatives", not the clients and thus is the problem with this entire thing, Steve has lost at least 5 times this amount in credibility even if he is right and Mark has lost 4/5'ths of the money originally paid out to lawyer fees. In the end, no one wins and the hobbyist's lose all the way around. <br /><br />Gentlemen, maybe it is time to pull out a set of dueling pistols and settle this like men, over a beer, lots and lots of beer, then go find the jerk that originally put this thing up for auction and make him buy the next 10 rounds of beers until everyone agrees on what to do and how to handle it. Trust me, I think 20 or so rounds of beers among enemies is a much less expensive route and in the end, someone is holding someones hair out of the way; like friends should.

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>John</b><p>This is a pointless post, although pointed towards Steve obviously. Steve will never respond to this post, if he has half a brain or even better an attorney with one. He’s not going to respond in a public forum where he is being threatened to be sued, even the lamest of attorneys would advise at this point talking and or discussing anything with Mark. <br /><br />I deal with this stuff in business all the time, a basic rule of thumb if you want to see discussions stop, and your problem most likely never get resolved mention the word lawsuit.<br />

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Steve knows a lawsuit is imminent. I don't blame Mark for bringing one too....as has been discussed here. It seems like everyone jumped on the bandwagon before but now they don't want to see the final chapter? Personally, I don't care one way or the other but I am pretty sure everyone does want to know the outcome......I know I do. I have told Steve, as recently as the last day, that the issue is with the card AND his guarantee.....not one or the other at this point. I am not saying I will not bid in Steve's auctions but I guess I will be more careful. I am not sure what his guarantee means?

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>General Hospital<br />As the World Turns<br />The Young and the Restless<br /><br />Mark, Steve and the Babe<br /><br /><b><font size=+1>I suppose if they can't talk to each other on the phone then I guess they will talk here. In the future can both parties please type in conjecture, feeling and emotion so we can all "feel" for what is going on in both of your heads. If you feel like swearing, please, by all means, swear... if you feel like shouting then PLEASE PUT ON YOUR CAPS LOCK... I enjoy being a part of this and I can't wait to read about the outcome, but for now, I'd really like to get a "feel" for what's going on...</font></b>

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Koteles</b><p>so much drama in the LBC its kinda hard being a SNOOP d.o double "G"<br /><br />How many times are those gonna repeat themselves here ?

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>John</b><p>"Steve knows a lawsuit is imminent."<br /><br />Of course he does Leon, and if he’s smart he wont put him self at any more risk to be misquoted, or having any post be open to interpretation by Mark’s attorney. That’s all I’m saying, the word lawsuit makes people go turtle.

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>I was unaware the worm had turned....<br />Last I heard (or read in his own hand/post) on this forum Steve had both agreed to put the money in an escrow account, AND promised that Mark wouldn't be out any money.<br />What did I miss in episode 26?<br /><br />Daniel

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Rob Dewolf</b><p>I'm still trying to decide if I'd give you $5 for this card ...

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Dave</b><p>uh oh....another 300 posts...and there was something I was actually wanting to watch on TV tonight.

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Dan</b><p>Nevermind

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>...was to try to use the Board again for leverage to get what the purported plaintiff wants. His one shot at that should be enough for him. At this point, he is actually showing his cards that he would very much prefer not to file a lawsuit. Which is not a particularly strong stance to be taking.<br /><br />Having Steve served with a complaint and summons is taking a bold move. Making a repetitive post on an internet chat board is the opposite of that.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Mark has said, to me, that since no less than 6 experts have opined the card is not real, that he doesn't want the card regardless of paper/ink testing. I have also told Steve, this morning or last night via email, that I wouldn't want to buy a card that all of those experts have said is fake, unless it can be proven it was actually printed circa 1930. Since, without other evidence, it's impossible, I wouldn't want to buy the card. Would anyone on the board want to buy the card even if it was tested to have 1930's ink and 1930's cardstock given the written letters, and other opinions we know of, about this card? Like I have said all along... If it were a real 1930 card I would love to have it...I don't see this thread getting deleted unless I hear more overwhelming, convincing arguments why it should be. Brian M. and myself try very hard to make this as open a forum as possible. best regards

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Andy</b><p>I agree with Steve M. The reason this post is innappropiate is because this post isn't an update of what HAS happened. It is a message (threat?) from one party to the other, which is of no business to anyone except them. Mark hasn't addressed any of the readers of this board to respond as was done earlier when he wanted opinions on the subject. He is sending a message to Steve that only Steve needs to be reading.<br /><br />This isn't the proper venue for this message and I think everyone knows that. <br /><br />My two cents.<br><br>Thanks,<br /><br />Andy

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>the harder time I will have in trying to consign my 1942 Upper Deck Jackie Robinson Autographed Refractor with uniform patch 1/1, with Fleer-issued hologram & COA from the ultra-rare Before They Were Anybody set, which was actually issued in the Fall of 1941. It has a beautiful sunset background, printed in black & white on thick card stock with a calendar of 1946 on reverse.<br /><br />

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>I do think after reading Leon's post there has been a change in the story and its likely outcome, and perhaps Mark was just synopsizing all of that in his shot across the bow statement above. He probably could have just said that Steve and he no longer had any agreement going at all, and that short of getting a refund by a certain date he would indeed begin litigation. <br />I think everyone probably would've been ok with a post like that, no?<br /><br /><br />Daniel

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Mark</b><p>Leon, can't you see that your entire board has been manipulated for personal ends? if this was a hobby issue, it is no more-now it is a commercial dispute and you are being used...and the board being abused<br><br>Mark

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Peter Spaeth</b><p>In my opinion, the ongoing dispute and its adjudication/resolution reflects on the integrity of a significant auction house and therefore has continued relevance as a hobby issue.

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Wesley</b><p>When Mark files suit, it will take months to resolve. Do we really need weekly updates regarding his demands, final demands, summary judgment motions, mediations, etc? He has already posted about his demand and request for escrow in the other two threads. He already threatened litigation in the other two threads. <br /><br />Can't Mark just post the results when this is finally resolved?<br /><br />

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Frank Evanov</b><p>This type of post is inappropriate. Take it outside gentlemen.<br><br>Frank

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Wesley</b><p>Why can't all the posts be more like the ones in the "Most Amazing Sunset" thread?<br /><br />

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Bruce Babcock</b><p>Dave, what did you find to watch on TV tonight?

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>bcornell</b><p>It's the usual forum grandstanding. If you're going to threaten legal action, do it through the normal channels, i.e., not here. <br /><br />Bill

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Dave</b><p>Bruce....I'd rather not say...ahem (my wife makes me!)

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>steve yawitz</b><p>Any thread that elicits an allusion to Gin 'n' Juice can't be all bad.<br><br><a href="http://imageevent.com/yawie99" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://imageevent.com/yawie99</a>

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>You can tell us Dave. We're all friends here. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Actually Wednesday is a good day for TV - you have to have a Tivo or DVR though because both shows are on at the same time. I like to watch Jericho - fun and campy......and....the best show on TV by far in my opinion is Friday Night Lights. I fear that it may get cancelled so you guys need to start watching it.<br /><br />And to get back on topic I don't have a problem with the situation being discussed here, but Mark should have just told us what his plans were and not addressed Steve in the fashion he did.

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>so sensitive! Mark is updating us on whats going on currently with a terrible situation that he's been put in. This is a major story in the hobby, like Leon said. It doesnt violate any rules for being a post topic. If you feel the issue has been played out and are no longer interested in it, just tune out on this thred. I for one am very interested in the resolution of this

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Cobby33</b><p>Anybody need any pro bono clients? I'm kind of tapped out.

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Steve f</b><p>The Office Marathon on NBC tonight! <br /><br /> I completely understand Marks outburst... I'd been ripped off for far less and wanted a pound of flesh. If Mark's first post had been worded objectively, I believe it wouldn't be such a turn off to the board. <br /><br /> Mark, it's obvious you'd been screwed hard. You already won support here. No need to manipulate, it cheapens your cause. <br /><br /> I'd like to keep updated on this saga -without theatrics. This auction house's past and future questionable items could end up in any of our shoeboxes through second hand auctions. <br />

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Paul Moss</b><p>Since when does posting a demand on a message board constitute a valid notification for a civil matter?<br /><br />Where are the legal eagles in the house? All I can say is that were I involved, my attorney would have slapped me over the head a few times for even discussing the matter over the phone with someone, let alone playing out the hand in a public forum for one and all to see as has transpired here. For that, I'd have been on the receiving end of his Louisville Slugger. <br /><br />God, I do so love a soap opera!<br /><br />Drama, we need more drama!

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>Paul,<br /><br />I totally disagree with you!!!<br /><br />That is the problem with this country right now, everybody wants drama and excitement instead of being boring and doing the right thing.<br /><br />Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, Nicole Richey and Lyndsay Lohan get more publicity for going out and being bad girls than they do by making an album, movie or TV show. Drama and excitement instead of being productive, doing their jobs and making something.<br /><br />Lying politicians and Attorney Generals. Drama and excitement instead of doing thier jobs leading this country and upholding the law.<br /><br />Mark (the buyer) and Steve (the seller) drama and excitement. If Mark had asked more questions and if Steve had sent this "card" off to be authenticated, then this whole mess wouldn't be where it is now. I am sure both Mark and Steve would rather not have gone done this path but they have and they have both added drama and excitement to a bad situation.<br /><br /><br />David

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Ken McMillan</b><p>Sue, Sue, sue........the great american way. Don't you think it would be better if we all communicated and worked things out vs making threats. Thats why the court system is so overwelmed these days. What is wrong with our society!!!! And all this over cardboard. Why don't we collect for fun anymore? What a joke.<br /><br />Ken

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />We've discussed the topic a number of times in this forum, as hobbyists we should maintain a tone of civility towards each other.<br /><br />As far as I'm concerned there is nothing civil about threatening a lawsuit in a public forum. It shouldn't be done. I agree with those that want to either lock or delete this thread.<br /><br />Peter

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Josh Adams</b><p>So let me get this straight.<br /><br />First, people get upset at Leon because he creats a thread, and then locks it.<br />Now, people want to lock a thread, concerning that very same subject matter. <br /><br />Oh the irony!

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>Mark got cheated out of $18,000+ by a dealer who won't live up to his written guarantee on an item that every credible expert who's seen it thinks is fake. What would you suggest Mark do besides go to court to get his money back, stand outside Verkman's office and sing Kumbaya? Take a baseball bat to his knees? <br /><br />You know, contrary to many peoples' misguided beliefs, not all lawsuits are frivolous...

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Adam,<br /><br />There's no doubt that Mark has a legitimate complaint. The question is whether he should threaten a lawsuit on this forum.<br /><br />The answer should be no.<br /><br />We should not be a party to the threats by condoning Mark's behavior.<br /><br />Peter

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I have written 3 responses and not hit the respond button. All I will say is "thanks" for everyone's input.....I appreciate it. I hope the situation gets worked out soon. I wish the whole mess would have never happened....as do most others......best regards

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Ken McMillan</b><p>Peter gets my point in my earlier post. Some things are legitimate to sue over, but to make threats on a public forum is rediculous. That behavior belongs elsewhere!!!!! Too many people use the I'm going to sue card way too much. That is a huge issue in our society. As a practicing veterinarian, I have had many clients that bad mouth other colleagues and want my staff and myself to get involved in this behavior. I personally refuse to do so and have a disdain for people that idolly use this threat. If you truely have been wronged it is fine to sue, but don't air your complaint publicly. It ruins your credibility!!!!

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Noel</b><p>Ken, <br /><br />With all do respect I think you may change your mind a little if you were the one out $18,000 for a card you purchased for "fun" and found out it was nothing more than a fake or reprint. The seller/auctioneer of the card needs to either provide some proof that the card is legit (which seems an exercise in futility at this point) or make good the money in a timely fashion as his guarantee states. I never seize to be amazed at some of the business practices of people who hope to continue to sell and build up their client base. What is Steves most hopeful outcome to this stiuation i wonder?

Mark Haverkos Final Answer to 1930 Ruth Card Controversy
 

Posted By: <b>Steve M.</b><p>"A lot of interest has been shown on the 1930 Goudey calendar card situation so I just wanted to give all a quick update. We reached an agreement for an escrow and testing. To date the escrow funds have not been deposited nor has testing commenced. Hopefully we can get this resolved soon. /s/ Mark"<br /><br /><br /><br />