Rose apology signed balls in REA- WITHDRAWN

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Here is the article:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2592359>

Jay

I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.



EDITED title to reflect them being withdrawn

[Archive]

Posted By: paulstratton

That guy would do anything for a buck. What a scumbag.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

The first thrity will sell and if there's a market for them they'll release another batch. If there's still a market they'll release yet another batch. When they can't find people stupid enough to pony up a grand for a confession ball they'll probably change the confession to the Series 2 confession balls where he says he's sorry that Bart Giamatti had a heart attack. After the series 2, 3, 4 and so on balls wont sell anymore they'll drop the price to $500 a ball and start over until there aren't people stupid enough to pay $500 for the balls.

It's about the $$$... don't mix up $$$ with historical significance. That's complete hor$e $hit. I've got to give REA and Pete Rose credit, it's a great way to sell a $5 ball for $1,000... I guess that's the name of the game here. $150 = $30K, not bad.

I don't think any less of Rose for doing this because in my mind he's just trying to make a buck and all the people that buy the balls are supporting him. This is America, that's their right.

Boy could he play ball.

[Archive]

Posted By: paulstratton

It doesn't change my opinion either because it's not possible to think any less of Rose.

He was a great ballplayer though and played as hard as anyone who ever laced 'em up. Maybe it was because he was "greenied" up...but you gotta do what you gotta do I guess.

It still pains me that he broke Cobb's hit record.

[Archive]

Posted By: DJ

Simply pathetic and desparate. I don't particularily like the fellow either.

You do know that if you go to Las Vegas, Pete is signing almost every day in one of the sports memorabilia Fourm shops at Caesar's Palace. He sits there behind a desk...I believe four days a week, morning to mid-afternoon.

One of my friends got him in March on a ball. I think he said it was like $45 or $50.

DJ

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

If I could sign my name and make $40 I would do it. As it is now, I sign my name, and lose thousands . (darn restaurants)....

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Evanov

How about Lifson here? Profiting on such tawdry material. Isn't he the guy who refused to sell Kobe Bryant stuff because of the Rape case. Will Rob be offering OJ "I did it!" steak knives next?

Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

No, next up will be someone selling, "I didn't take the money. Joe Jackson." balls on ebay. Probably will be signed with a sharpie...

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

Thanks Frank, that was good!

[Archive]

Posted By: Larry

In all fairness to Robert, these "balls" signed by Rose were consigned by the Halper Family as 30 individual lots along with many other items,from the Halper Estate for auction..Robert did not get these items from Pete Rose directly...I am sure Robert was told to auction these one at a time at the bequest of the Halper family.

There is no doubt that the Halper's have been loyal to Robert since the early days of collecting and this was not done as a publicity stunt, this story was picked up by the newspapers and it does make unique reading, as tacky as it seems, It is news.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Unless anyting is being misrepresented I have no problem at all with Rob offering the items. He isn't forcing anyone to bid, and he isn't selling a murder weapon or plane wreckage or anything that truly would be offensive to someone's family.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

There's no reason to remove from auction balls with the inscription "I'm sorry I bet on baseball," as there's nothing offensive about the phrase. If you can prevent the sale of that inscription, you can prevent the sale of about any inscription.

[Archive]

Posted By: paulstratton

Rose now says since he won't profit from these balls going to auction that he will sign this for anyone who pays him for it...essentially making the REA balls common.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Something tells me for an extra $10 he would put that he loved betting on games......

[Archive]

Posted By: Brett

paulstratton,

Yeah, too bad he broke Cobbs hit record. It only took him over 2500 more at bats...

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul Moss

Now available on Rose's site, personalized to you for only 349.95.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

No offense...

but isn't this EXACTLY what MLB told Rose to do??

Wasn't he ordered to "ADMIT" that he bet on baseball and "APOLOGIZE" for doing so??

It looks to me like he is doing just that.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay

Balls are $299, if not personalized,on Pete's web site.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

We get a good sports comic in the Minneapolis Tribune called in the bleached that is very funny. Yesterday it was about a sports auction house that was auctioning off the actual person that caught the "greatest homerun ever". I thought how appropriate.

I wonder what a Bartman would got for?

Lee

[Archive]

Posted By: judd hamlin

The man couldn't spell "shame" if you spotted him the s,h,a and m which also makes for a nice coincidence as I type it out. But some yahoo out there will bid on them...

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve M.

email received today:

Dear Stephen,

It has been widely reported that thirty baseballs signed by Pete Rose with the
inscription “I’m sorry I bet on baseball” were discovered among the Barry Halper
Collection materials which will be featured in Robert Edward Auctions’ spring
sale. These thirty baseballs have been withdrawn from auction. An offer to
purchase all thirty Pete Rose baseballs for $30,000 was made to us by ESI
Entertainment Systems Inc., a gaming service industry company from British
Columbia, Canada. REA has never before withdrawn an item from auction that has
been scheduled for auction, but in this unique instance, in light of the fact
that Pete Rose is now selling baseballs signed in an identical manner on his
website for $299, we advised our consignors (the Halper family) that it was our
opinion that this offer should be accepted. We were given the authority to
proceed in whatever manner we felt best. Our job is to make the best decisions
possible for our consignors, and we have therefore executed the sale of the
thirty baseballs to ESI Entertainment Systems Inc for thirty thousand dollars.
We apologize for any inconvenience to the hundreds of collectors who have
contacted us during the week regarding these Pete Rose baseballs, but in this
very unusual circumstance we believe that it was appropriate to recommend an
outright sale. We are confident that collectors will appreciate our thought
process, and hope that any inconvenience is more than remedied by the fact that
baseballs bearing this identical inscription can now be purchased directly from
Pete Rose at www.PeteRose.com. Please note that the buyer was made fully aware
by Robert Edward Auctions that baseballs signed in an identical manner could be
purchased directly from Pete Rose, but they specifically wanted the REA auction
examples. We wish Pete Rose all the best and we will be referring all future
(and previously received) inquiries regarding Pete Rose baseballs to
www.PeteRose.com. For information about the withdrawn thirty baseballs, which
will always have a special historical significance as the original thirty Pete
Rose balls discovered in Barry Halper’s basement, contact: ESI Entertainment
Systems Inc. (TSX:ESY), 15th Floor, 4710 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia,
Canada V5H 4M2.

Sincerely,

Robert Edward Auctions LLC

www.RobertEdwardAuctions.com

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

It's more than exemplary that Rob Lifson sent out an email apologizing for withdrawing the balls since his auction doesn't commence for another six months.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh Adams

It may be "exemplary" that he issued a form letter, but one may think that if REA used a little discretion, there would not have been a need for such a letter.
Auction houses, much like Rose, will do anything for a buck.

Go Go White Sox
2005 World Series Champions!

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

Seems to me that REA has been entirely above board on this whole matter. They gave a professional opinion to their consignor that it was in the consignor's best interests to withdraw the balls from the auction and sell them privately. I think REA had a responsibility to give such advice. To those who might feel REA should never have accepted the balls in the first place, in my view these balls don't cross the threshhold of being inappropriate objects to sell.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Please let me know which, for profit businesses, aren't out to make a buck? This wasn't even that big of an issue, imho. If someone wants to buy them, so what?

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Evanov

Just a face-saving measure. Once Rose pulled his stunt, he had no other option, but to withdraw them and do damage control.

Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

It's not like this was wreckage from Roberto Clemente's plane. It was 30 balls signed by Pete Rose admitting that he bet on baseball. 30 Balls I might add that were not obtained from Pete Rose. While most of us may despise Rose I doubt many, if anyone would be complaining if REA was auctioning off a confession letter by Tris Speaker or Ty Cobb for gambling on games.

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

I agree with Dan.

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

REA just consigned a seemingly unique set of items with impeccable provenance. No different that the "F*** you" balls Mantle occasionally signed. The only difference here is that Rose is still alive and is enough of a cockroach to capitalize on the REA publicity by offering his own inscribed balls. All I can say about my former childhood hero Pete Rose is that each act he undertakes further tarnishes his achievements on the field and further betrays his total lack of character. As Joseph Welch said to Joe McCarthy: "You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

The irony of the situation is that Rose's television defense of himself was that
he made no money from the inscriptions, but, in the end, he is the one making
the money from the inscriptions ... Which isn't to suggest that former ball
players don't have a right to sell their memorabilia for profit.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay

David--what are you talking about? IMHO, the scumbags are the people who got Rose to sign these balls originally. Rose's offering similar balls on his web site simply limited the upside potential of the original balls(and possibly made him some money). The only money that we know has been made so far has been made by (1)the original guy who sold the balls to Halper, and (2)possibly by the Halper family when they sold these balls. We don't know if Rose has made a penny doing this. Has anyone here bought one of these balls?

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

It's true that Rose is capitalizing on this...as was Barry Halper when he apparently asked Rose for 30....count them....THIRTY!!!! baseballs with a confession on them. Pete Rose is a blight on baseball - IMO they should put him in the Hall of Fame so he would just shut up and go away.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Though the prices tend to be high, I think it's a good for collectors that ball players
have their own web sites to sell their autographs. For the collector it's known
as good provenance. I had a Stan Musial signed photo from his website and the COA
was also signed by Musial. Not often that the COA is worth framing ... So I have
nothing against someone like Pete Rose or Barry Bonds selling autographs from
their websites.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

on this issue........

I read somewhere that Rose signed a bunch of them for the guys in Cooperstown at whose store he signs each year around induction ceremonies. I would assume that THEY sold them to Halper or one of their intermediaries and then they sat in the basement till someone decided to call Rob Lifson on them.

Being about 85 miles down the road from Cincinnati, Rose was one of my heroes too and I struggle with his predicament. But there's at least one person in the HOF now who killed someone, drug addicts, others associated with Casino's, Alcoholics, etc, etc. Another thread for debating those merits.....

Rose was obviously (and arguably justifiably) pissed off that someone else was profiting off these balls. Reading a few articles around the time of the Halper sale, he wasn't the only one that was a little miffed that Halper sold a lot of the stuff he'd been given.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay

Tom--we always agree

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike

Twenty years from now: Barry Bonds signed baseballs with the inscription " Yes, I took steroids ".

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

I'd be interested to know who the Hall of Famer is that killed someone.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

As they say, "Sport is a game of rules." It isn't "Sport is a game of laws."

If the rules are clear and written out (Must touch a base to be safe, football field
is 100 yards, 9 players only on field, banned for life if bet on baseball), these
are what are to be followed. Speed limits and drugs laws are beside the point, unless
they are part of the rules. Baseball never said betting on baseball was against the law,
they said it was against the rules. And the rules are what a sport follows.

I always find dubious the arguments that Rose should be allowed back baseball for betting,
because so-and-so did drugs or didn't pay alimony or otherwise broke
the law. The betting rule is exclusing from drug and tax laws. Baseball's betting rule has nothing
to do with the US or State laws, just as the distance between bases has nothing
to do with the law. Baseball knows that it's legal to bet on sports and gamble in
many areas. But, because they feel it is important for the game, they have a rule
that forbids players and managers betting on MLB games, and the rule spells out
the punishment.

I've never heard anyone argue that a player should be called safe even though he
didn't touch the base, because other baserunners do coccaine. The rule about baserunning
is clear and written out and, obviously, others' coccaine use is irrlevant to tagging base.
Yet, I hear drug laws and tax laws quoted when discussing baseball following
it's long standing rules about betting. That Fergie Jenkins did coccaine and Duke Snider skipped his taxes
may be interesting and applicable to other situations, but have nothing to do with baseball's
rule on betting.

The other dubious argument is when a fan says, "Well, I can bet on baseball." This factoid
has nothing to do with MLB's betting rules. Despite MLB's rules, this
fan can also play backyard baseball with an aluminum bat, wearing jeans, no shirt,
have a 1" pitching mound, have 5 players per team, set a game at 5 innings and smoke
a pipe while pitching. It is true you can do these things and aren't required
to wear a athletic cup at your job, but this has little relevance to MLB and its
rules. MLB makes its rules for its members only, and isn't even pretending that
their rules should influence or mirror the fans' rules at work and home, or that
their base stealing rules were derived by studing New York Federal Court cases.

In short, for MLB and its members, when it comes to deciding if a player is safe, a
strike is a strike or what is the baseball punishment for betting on MLB, it doesn't matter what
is the law in Pheonix or Fargo or Paris. It matters what are the rules in MLB.

[Archive]

Posted By: NickM

It's his family who consigned portions of his collection to auction.