Problems with two championship rings in upcoming Heritage Auction

[sports-rings]

Heritage has removed the two auction items.

I appreciate Chris investigating this matter and then removing the items upon their findings.

In his response that he posted on net54, I interpreted one of his comments to be a hint that there could be a lawsuit against me because of their policy to protect their consigners' best interests.

I hope Chris remembers that I am a winning bidder and participator in many of their auctions and that I have consigned some high-end football rings in the past to his auction house.

After dealing with this matter and a hint of possible legal action I can see why others are not always so fast to jump in and alert the collecting community to problems.

As Chris stated in his response, I tried to alert him privately about this matter. My intension was to help them - not to hurt them.

I only took this matter publicly when I felt that we were nearing the auction. Chris and I see the timing differently, and I feel that my opinion should count too - I feel I was justified to no longer wait but to alert the collecting community. Chris feels differently and has stated why in his response on this board.

So I hope, when Chris sits down and decides who to protect, I hope he remembers that I have helped contribute to their bottom line and I hope they don't ruin our relationship with banning me or worse a lawsuit. That would hurt their bottom line too.

[Duluth Eskimo]

I think of the old saying, "don't bite the hand that feeds you". Wait, you have been feeding them for quite some time with your bidding and consigning. I guess the other old saying comes in to play, "what have you done for me lately".

I took the same thing from his comments. It's really too bad. I know very little about rings, but know quite a bit of vintage memorabilia in general. I think your detail and description of the items in question was quite overwhelming to your point. In the end, I think you did the right thing. Jason

[jgmp123]

Originally Posted by sports-rings

Heritage has removed the two auction items.

I appreciate Chris investigating this matter and then removing the items upon their findings.

In his response that he posted on net54, I interpreted one of his comments to be a hint that there could be a lawsuit against me because of their policy to protect their consigners' best interests.

I hope Chris remembers that I am a winning bidder and participator in many of their auctions and that I have consigned some high-end football rings in the past to his auction house.

After dealing with this matter and a hint of possible legal action I can see why others are not always so fast to jump in and alert the collecting community to problems.

As Chris stated in his response, I tried to alert him privately about this matter. My intension was to help them - not to hurt them.

I only took this matter publicly when I felt that we were nearing the auction. Chris and I see the timing differently, and I feel that my opinion should count too - I feel I was justified to no longer wait but to alert the collecting community. Chris feels differently and has stated why in his response on this board.

So I hope, when Chris sits down and decides who to protect, I hope he remembers that I have helped contribute to their bottom line and I hope they don't ruin our relationship with banning me or worse a lawsuit. That would hurt their bottom line too.

Michael,
You did the right thing. Net54 is a community and you were simply warning people of some inconsistencies in an item that could possibly be had at a large amount of money. I don't understand bringing a lawsuit against someone based on "protecting the consignors best interest" - I mean, what does that even mean? It's always drove me crazy when Heritage sends item to "print" for their catalog that haven't been fully checked out. I'm sorry, but if I am going to spend that kind of money on an item, then it better be fully sealed with no cracks at all in the story. This had too many cracks and who knows if the posts here forced their hand at removing the items.

[William Farrell]

Originally Posted by sports-rings

I ruin our relationship with banning me or worse a lawsuit.

A lawsuit based on what? For posting facts in a discussion on a discussion forum concerning auction items that you had good reason to believe were of a questionable nature?

[ooo-ribay]

Awesome work, Michael.

I learned a lot from this thread. The hobby needs good policemen like you. I don't have an opinion, one way or another, on Heritage but we all know that some auction houses have been less than forthcoming in the past.

As a bonus, the thread read like a good "whodunit."

[shelly]

I did not read law suite. I did read what I felt was a lot of hot air. You only need five minutes with Mr. Edwards tell him you think the rings are bogus and unless he can prove without a doubt they are not remove them from the auction. No other statements needed.

[bobfreedman]

While I understand that Michael did a great job on the rings, I do not understand why you feel that Heritage needs to jump and do things in a manner and pace that you feel is proper? Chris Ivy sent you a reply and told you that they were investigating the manner and for me, that is good enough. Why do they need to do things by your schedule? They have an obligation to the consigner to figure things out and, that does not happen in a day or a week sometimes. They do, believe it or not have other things to do other than this one task. As Chris said, the consigner was not immediately available. What would have happened if they pulled the rings, talked to the consigner and figured out one of the two rings were good? Were they then supposed to put it back up for auction? It's up for auction, it's down, it's back up etc....

You did your job and told Chris but, that was not good enough for you, you were not happy that they were doing things at their pace and not your perceived time frame therefore, you felt the need to "call" them out. Heritage IMO did nothing wrong and did a great job in the end. Michael , I don't know you and I do not want to start something here with you but, I just think that people need to be patient and not so quick to jump to the worst conclusion. You were in communications with Chris and he told you that he was on it. Why was that not good enough for you?

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by bobfreedman

While I understand that Michael did a great job on the rings, I do not understand why you feel that Heritage needs to jump and do things in a manner and pace that you feel is proper? Chris Ivy sent you a reply and told you that they were investigating the manner and for me, that is good enough. Why do they need to do things by your schedule? They have an obligation to the consigner to figure things out and, that does not happen in a day or a week sometimes. They do, believe it or not have other things to do other than this one task. As Chris said, the consigner was not immediately available. What would have happened if they pulled the rings, talked to the consigner and figured out one of the two rings were good? Were they then supposed to put it back up for auction? It's up for auction, it's down, it's back up etc....

You did your job and told Chris but, that was not good enough for you, you were not happy that they were doing things at their pace and not your perceived time frame therefore, you felt the need to "call" them out. Heritage IMO did nothing wrong and did a great job in the end. Michael , I don't know you and I do not want to start something here with you but, I just think that people need to be patient and not so quick to jump to the worst conclusion. You were in communications with Chris and he told you that he was on it. Why was that not good enough for you?

Agree with this, too, even tho I stand by my opinion of Michael as a good watchdog. I think Michael may have been frustrated because it seemed like a no brainer to pull the auction. That said, I understand Heritage's position as well. God, I'm wishy washy!

[Duluth Eskimo]

If it wasn't so blatantly ridiculous I would agree with you guys. The problem is anyone with any sports knowledge can look at the evidence and say, we got a problem here. Why sit on it and let people continue to bid. I understand what you are saying that in the end there was no foul, but come on. Really?