Posted By:
JoannI guess I read it more broadly. I didn't think they were limiting action to debates over their opinion on memorabilia. They are saying that auction houses have to fully disclose, *in the auction description*, any and all changes they have made to an item, including specficially:
"With respect to cards and similar items, trimming, pressing, or the removal of stains, glue, gum, etc… or writing that are designed to improve the appeal of an item or return it an improved state."
To me that is a really big deal, isn't it? I'm thinking I gotta be missing something, because I think it's huge. So if Mastro or REA or lelands or anyone else refuses to disclose anything they have done to a card to improve its appearance, they can't use MEARS to authenticate memorabilia in 2008 at all.
Also the auction houses have to agree to disclose ownership of items auctioned, as well as track bidding to assure that there isn't any self-interested bidding going on.
Conflict of interest, shill bidding and card alteration to improve grade. Isn't that the Big 3 of the discussion on this board regarding auction houses for the past year? Here is a company saying that they will not allow an auction house to submit for authentication unless the house agrees to clean up these issues, and even has to agree to audits to confirm compliance.
I must really be out in left field on this one. I thought this would be right up Main Street as far as this board goes.
Joann