Heritage Auction problem

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by Leon

Unfortunately the person stating this, and you are agreeing with, is an admitted liar and shill bidder. So agreeing with him is maybe not as highly thought of as it was. I have spoken with a few long time board members about Heritage in the last several days. They have also stated as I believe, Heritage is an honest company that has/had some operational issues. They also should consider changing the messenger on our board. Another messenger might be more widely accepted. Each and every time I have spoken with Chris Ivy about the banning of board members from their auctions I have concluded his reasoning was sound. They have never banned anyone for only questioning an item. They will ban folks that go overboard which many of our members do. Time and time again I might add. It's all in the delivery. I can't say I blame them either. As far as saying Richard is in cahoots with an alleged forger, criminal, wanted person and allegedly the biggest crook ever in the hobby, Peter Nash, well, if information is being supplied to him then I don't know what you would call it? Maybe someone can help out here. What do you call a person that gives information to allegedly the biggest fraudster in the sports memorabilia business? I am just asking a question not making any accusations.

I want to add that I think, and have always thought, Richard is a very honest person. I am merely asking a legitimate, devils advocate question above.

Here we go with the "allegedly" again. Proof should be needed before banning someone from Heritage based on an allegation.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by travrosty

Here we go with the "allegedly" again. Proof should be needed before banning someone from Heritage based on an allegation.

As soon as you own an auction house you can make the rules. Until then you can continue to do whatever else you want to. And as for me saying "allegedly" it is because I don't have first hand knowledge. However, here is a line cut and pasted from the story I posted from SI...

"The court found in favor of Lifson, and eventually Nash signed a court order in which he admitted to having committed fraud, without specifying how"


So again, with that quote, how is Richard not working with a fraudster?