Two hour interview with.... Bill Mastro

[pbspelly]

Originally Posted by perezfan

+1

Every time Mastro started to elaborate or say something interesting, he was abruptly cut off and/or redirected. A good interviewer lets the interviewee do 80% of the talking. This was the exact opposite. Difficult to sit through it and I would have loved to hear more from Bill about how he grew Mastro Auctions into the "empire" it once was.

I used to be a reporter. It's closer to 95%, unless the interviewee won't say anything or gives you one word answers, which is not a problem you have with Bill Mastro. I understand that Brian is not a reporter, but he was way too much of an "agree-er" and explainer (and almost an outright apologist), for Mastro, rather then just letting him talk. That whole fawning part about wanting Mastro in the Hall of Fame was painful to listen to. Mastro didn't need that. He did fine on his own, and I came away with more respect for him. I do think the landscape was very different back then before grading companies came into play, and there emerged such a focus on pristine unaltered cards. I think back then there was more of a focus on present appearance than on provenance and original condition. And he's right that most of the legendary paintings in museums have been restored and touched-up in some way. I actually believe that Mastro may not have had devious intent from the beginning. But he should probably have spoken up at some earlier point. I am also very curious whether the guy who bought it from Mastro for $100,000 asked him if it had been altered in any way, and if so, how did Mastro respond. That is a question Brian should have asked. Because that goes to the heart of his culpability, perhaps more than the actual act of cutting the card. But I did find myself liking Mastro. We are all imperfect.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by pbspelly

I actually believe that Mastro may not have had devious intent from the beginning. But he should probably have spoken up at some earlier point. I am also very curious whether the guy who bought it from Mastro for $100,000 asked him if it had been altered in any way, and if so, how did Mastro respond. That is a question Brian should have asked. Because that goes to the heart of his culpability, perhaps more than the actual act of cutting the card. But I did find myself liking Mastro. We are all imperfect.

Paul, respectfully, read his indictment. He committed every type of fraud known to the hobby and robbed his friends. He then got caught, cooperated against his co-conspirator/friends and paid none of his victims back (including his victim/friends) unless he got sued and was forced to cough some up. He's just another criminal in the hobby, just on a much higher level. The two years he received in prison was a gift, it should have been much more.

[Brent G.]

Originally Posted by pbspelly

I used to be a reporter. It's closer to 95%, unless the interviewee won't say anything or gives you one word answers, which is not a problem you have with Bill Mastro. I understand that Brian is not a reporter, but he was way too much of an "agree-er" and explainer (and almost an outright apologist), for Mastro, rather then just letting him talk. That whole fawning part about wanting Mastro in the Hall of Fame was painful to listen to. Mastro didn't need that. He did fine on his own, and I came away with more respect for him. I do think the landscape was very different back then before grading companies came into play, and there emerged such a focus on pristine unaltered cards. I think back then there was more of a focus on present appearance than on provenance and original condition. And he's right that most of the legendary paintings in museums have been restored and touched-up in some way. I actually believe that Mastro may not have had devious intent from the beginning. But he should probably have spoken up at some earlier point. I am also very curious whether the guy who bought it from Mastro for $100,000 asked him if it had been altered in any way, and if so, how did Mastro respond. That is a question Brian should have asked. Because that goes to the heart of his culpability, perhaps more than the actual act of cutting the card. But I did find myself liking Mastro. We are all imperfect.

As a former journalist — I agree in full. With something like this, you ask a question and get out of the way. Wayyy too much talking over the person everyone is here to see.

[111gecko]

So painful to watch... Bill was in a mood to just tell stories about stuff we all wanted to know about and I found myself screaming at the screen to "shut up!!" over and over again.. I will give him credit for getting the interview though.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by 111gecko

So painful to watch... Bill was in a mood to just tell stories about stuff we all wanted to know about and I found myself screaming at the screen to "shut up!!" over and over again.. I will give him credit for getting the interview though.

That's exactly what I was screaming multiple times listening to it in my car yesterday.

[Yoda]

Wasn't part of Bill's sentencing is that he is forever prohibited from engaging in the sport's card industry either as a dealer and auctioneer?

[bleeckerstreetcards]

I came away mostly wanting to hear more about the early days of hobby types / sets becoming "discovered" or "popularized", what that was like to uncover these rare regional sets and some of the early collectors who gave them their attention and deemed them valuable. so much hobby knowledge today is just accepted without learning much of the origins and how things came to be favored or desirable.

I also want to see the collection of John Ramirez (sp?), who Mastro said has everything and has been collecting forever.

[bleeckerstreetcards]

Originally Posted by pbspelly

I used to be a reporter. It's closer to 95%, unless the interviewee won't say anything or gives you one word answers, which is not a problem you have with Bill Mastro. I understand that Brian is not a reporter, but he was way too much of an "agree-er" and explainer (and almost an outright apologist), for Mastro, rather then just letting him talk. That whole fawning part about wanting Mastro in the Hall of Fame was painful to listen to. Mastro didn't need that. He did fine on his own, and I came away with more respect for him. I do think the landscape was very different back then before grading companies came into play, and there emerged such a focus on pristine unaltered cards. I think back then there was more of a focus on present appearance than on provenance and original condition. And he's right that most of the legendary paintings in museums have been restored and touched-up in some way. I actually believe that Mastro may not have had devious intent from the beginning. But he should probably have spoken up at some earlier point. I am also very curious whether the guy who bought it from Mastro for $100,000 asked him if it had been altered in any way, and if so, how did Mastro respond. That is a question Brian should have asked. Because that goes to the heart of his culpability, perhaps more than the actual act of cutting the card. But I did find myself liking Mastro. We are all imperfect.

"The T206-series Wagner card is considered one of the world’s most expensive trading cards. Mastro admitted in the plea agreement that he cut the card’s side borders, and then concealed this information when he sold the card in 1987. Mastro again failed to disclose his alteration even after participating in subsequent auctions of the card in 1991 and 2000. The sale in 2000 produced a purchase price of more than $1 million, according to the plea agreement. Mastro also failed to disclose that he cut the Wagner card again in 1992, even though he was aware that the card had been submitted to become the first baseball card assigned a grade based on the condition of the card."

cut from here the below link seems to answer your question:
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr...l-bidding-scam

[Peter_Spaeth]

Here is an excerpt from the actual indictment. As evidenced by a thread last year, there is a lot of misunderstanding of this proceeding and the role of the Wagner. Bottom line, people who claim it had NOTHING to do with the case are flat out wrong, but at the same time, it certainly was not the focus of it. The focus was clearly shill bidding.

11. It was further part of the scheme that in marketing materials distributed
on behalf of Mastro Auctions, which were intended to portray Mastro Auctions to
potential bidders and consignors as a premier seller of valuable items for which a
strong market existed, defendant MASTRO represented that Mastro Auctions had sold
the most expensive baseball card in the world, a Honus Wagner T-206 card. In making
this representation, however, defendant MASTRO knowingly omitted the material fact
that defendant MASTRO had altered the baseball card by cutting the sides of the card
in a manner that, if disclosed, would have significantly reduced the value of the card.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Here is an excerpt from the actual indictment. As evidenced by a thread last year, there is a lot of misunderstanding of this proceeding and the role of the Wagner. Bottom line, people who claim it had NOTHING to do with the case are flat out wrong, but at the same time, it certainly was not the focus of it. The focus was clearly shill bidding.

11. It was further part of the scheme that in marketing materials distributed
on behalf of Mastro Auctions, which were intended to portray Mastro Auctions to
potential bidders and consignors as a premier seller of valuable items for which a
strong market existed, defendant MASTRO represented that Mastro Auctions had sold
the most expensive baseball card in the world, a Honus Wagner T-206 card. In making
this representation, however, defendant MASTRO knowingly omitted the material fact
that defendant MASTRO had altered the baseball card by cutting the sides of the card
in a manner that, if disclosed, would have significantly reduced the value of the card.

I seem to recall the claim made by myself and others wasn't that it had nothing to do with the case but rather that it had nothing to do with the sentencing. He wasn't charged for trimming the Wagner and he wasn't sentenced for it. It seems to have only come up because he was trying to propose a plea deal and/or as a way to demonstrate what sort of character he was.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I seem to recall the claim made by myself and others wasn't that it had nothing to do with the case but rather that it had nothing to do with the sentencing. He wasn't charged for trimming the Wagner and he wasn't sentenced for it. It seems to have only come up because he was trying to propose a plea deal and/or as a way to demonstrate what sort of character he was.

I just quoted from the indictment, which IS the charge. We went through this at length before. I suggest that before you continue down the same wrong road, you reread the prior thread where virtually everything you thought was shown to be objectively wrong by reference to the case documents. He did not bring it up, the government did. And he responded. Now technically he was not charged with the actual trimming of the card, which of course is not a crime, he was charged with not disclosing the trimming in marketing materials where he touted Mastronet's prior sales of the Wagner. In other words, fraud. Again, it was not the focus of the case, shill bidding was. And I would presume shill bidding is what the judge was focused on in sentencing Mastro, although there was some discussion of the Wagner charge in the relevant sentencing documents, also referenced in the other thread.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...ght=memorandum

Dayenu.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I just quoted from the indictment, which IS the charge. We went through this at length before. I suggest that before you continue down the same wrong road, you reread the prior thread where virtually everything you thought was shown to be objectively wrong by reference to the case documents. He did not bring it up, the government did. And he responded. Now technically he was not charged with the actual trimming of the card, which of course is not a crime, he was charged with not disclosing the trimming in marketing materials where he touted Mastronet's prior sales of the Wagner. In other words, fraud. Again, it was not the focus of the case, shill bidding was. And I would presume shill bidding is what the judge was focused on in sentencing Mastro, although there was some discussion of the Wagner charge in the relevant sentencing documents, also referenced in the other thread.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...ght=memorandum

Dayenu.

LOLOLOL. So are you suggesting that this was not a good double down bet by Snowman?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

LOLOLOL. So are you suggesting that this was not a good double down bet by Snowman?

I'll go one step further. I'm tripling down on my claim. Peter's take is bullshit. And there are numerous lawyers in the hobby that disagree with his take as well. Mastro was not charged or sentenced for trimming the Wagner or for not disclosing said trimming. Period.

[bdk1976]

defendant MASTRO had altered the baseball card by cutting the sides of the card
in a manner that, if disclosed, would have significantly reduced the value of the card.

Is this really the case with this specific card? What would the value of the card be if it had not been trimmed?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bdk1976

Is this really the case with this specific card? What would the value of the card be if it had not been trimmed?

It would be worth much less now if Mastro had not touched it, it would just be a nice sheet cut (AUTHENTIC) but still rare Wagner. But keep in mind it's the notoriety of the card driving its extreme value (IMO), not that anyone thinks it's a real pack-issued 8.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It would be worth much less now if Mastro had not touched it, it would just be a nice sheet cut (AUTHENTIC) but still rare Wagner. But keep in mind it's the notoriety of the card driving its extreme value (IMO), not that anyone thinks it's a real pack-issued 8.

Here's my conspiracy hypothetical. I think there is a near-zero chance that it would have survived as a sheet to this day had those guys not cut it up prior to selling it to Mastro. Even if it had come to market as a sheet in a large public auction, someone would have cut it out. My guess is that arrangements would have been made by someone with connections to have it cut "professionally" and then PSA would have agreed to slab it with a numeric grade but would put "Hand Cut" on the label. So it still would be a PSA 8 but just designated "Hand Cut" lol.

[G1911]

Ray may have been lying for some reason, but he is the only actual primary source I have ever seen able to recount the origin. His testimony appears to be the only actual evidence. I have been told there is some evidence of the Long Island origin but nobody is able to produce it when questioned about what it is. So strange.


Mastro was obviously guilty of very serious criminal fraud. Imperfect is putting it far too lightly. But criminal fraud is not seen as a big deal in this hobby for some reason ($$$), so I guess that is not a big problem. What's wrong with having auctions and auction houses run by convicted fraudsters? Nothing!


The 'trimming' is kind of irrelevant, since it was cut by hand from a "sheet" (deductively, almost certainly not an actual sheet, perhaps a panel or strip). Its only added value is that the card was effectively cut illegitimately twice and PSA still pretends it's an 8, adding to the comic absurdity of their money-printing claim to this day. If a corporation says up is down, this hobby will decide that up is close enough to down that it is fine as long as money can be made.


A card that is altered in reality is... altered, independent of any single person's knowledge of said alteration. Not being caught doing something does not mean that thing did not in actual objective reality ever happen or it somehow does not count.


The real tragedy of the saga is that possibly the only piece of uncut material from the set production runs to survive to modernity was destroyed without any documentation of the layout, size, what was on it, etc. There are only a handful of uncut T strips/sheets/panels that anyone can show (mostly Obak), and none for T206. Some other T sheets we know survived to modernity have been destroyed, like the T25 sheet and the T204 sheet.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Where did Ray discuss the origin? I know I have read this but cannot now recall except to vaguely remember it was something about Florida.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Where did Ray discuss the origin? I know I have read this but cannot now recall except to vaguely remember it was something about Florida.

Off memory - Ray's version of events is recounted in O'Keefe's book, who I believe he spoke to for an article or two from a couple years before the book. I believe there are other places it's been, but I'm not sure when it first appeared as it was probably before my time. I'm pretty sure we dived into Ray and the card in the thread here a couple years ago.

As I recall the details (I'm not home, I can't go through my archive right now), the Florida origin was stated by Ray to be from a flea market. The sheet was bought at the flea market for an unstated pittance, and then brought up north where the cutting and selling (1985) happened via Ray. Ray, of course, is probably the only person who would really have any real information on the origin. I would never assume people are honest, but there's no other evidence and nothing that contradicts.

The claims from Long Island have been made by multiple people. None have ever been able to provide a shred of evidence or real information beyond just insisting they are right because they are.

NY is closer to the production facility (we do not actually know, despite many claims to the contrary, for a certain fact which facility actually printed T206 - probably it was multiple, and not all of them may have been direct on paper facilities of the ALC), but in the course of 70 something years items move around. Plenty of New Yorkers have retired to Florida and brought their possessions with them. I have found 1910 T card sheets (actually a series of panels in two sheets for two different sets) and traced them to a NY origin, but things can be found in other places too and be legitimate. I don't see any problem with a sheet popping up in Florida.

[Peter_Spaeth]

In this 2001 piece by O'Keeffe, Ray refused to say where he got it. Also note Mastro's adamant denial.

https://www.t206museum.com/page/periodical_19.html

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

In this 2001 piece by O'Keeffe, Ray refused to say where he got it. Also note Mastro's adamant denial.

https://www.t206museum.com/page/periodical_19.html

I do not have a copy of O’Keefe’s book anymore, I recycled mine. The Florida speculation/story is included and mentioned in some articles in promotion of the book you can pull online if you want. I doubt I can trace it to the first appearance, and I doubt O’Keefe was the first claimant as I’ve heard this since the late 90’s.

The Long Island claimant was asked for evidence they claimed to posses over and over on this board and refused to ever divulge it. This was a lie, it possibly is from NY (it probably was in 1909!) but it isn’t because of this claim.

I have no clue what the actual truth is, and nobody has ever given anything to prove it. I have no reason to doubt the long standing story especially, nor to argue that it is the truth. I don’t know where it is actually from, we probably never really will at this remove. That’s the point, that we lost a lot of history that we aren’t likely to be able to find anywhere else because this unique item of immense value to research was cut up and ruined for some bucks, and no information preserved. It is quite unfortunate for us all.

[GasHouseGang]

Originally Posted by G1911

The real tragedy of the saga is that possibly the only piece of uncut material from the set production runs to survive to modernity was destroyed without any documentation of the layout, size, what was on it, etc. There are only a handful of uncut T strips/sheets/panels that anyone can show (mostly Obak), and none for T206. Some other T sheets we know survived to modernity have been destroyed, like the T25 sheet and the T204 sheet.

I think this is the only panel of T206 cards I have ever seen. But this panel appears to be a proof, not from a production sheet.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

I think this is the only panel of T206 cards I have ever seen. But this panel appears to be a proof, not from a production sheet.

This panel is exactly why I phrased it as production. This is a very strange piece, I have never seen anything like it among the other uncut T card material available to us in other non-baseball sets. The few pre-production proofing sheets I own or have seen of ATC T cards are all on normal stock the same or (or indistinguishably similar) to the production cards. Same for solitary 'proof' cards that have come down to us.

If this wasn't apparently found in Wagners estate, I'd have a lot of doubts about it. To my eyes this piece is way more interesting and cool than the PSA 8 Wagner.

[GasHouseGang]

I would agree Greg. This panel is very odd. Have you ever seen any T205 uncut sheets or panels?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

I would agree Greg. This panel is very odd. Have you ever seen any T205 uncut sheets or panels?

I wish! I love the gold borders.

For baseball there are a few Obak sheets and panels, but I believe this set was produced by an unrelated lithographer on the west coast. American Lithography was a lot more circumspect than the ATC was about a monopoly. A number of print shops are working with ALC and doing things that make no sense (one series of records I found in a card related court case has the ALC outsourcing a small project to 2 different 'independent' firms) if they didn't own a number of their 'competitors'. The documents suggest to me that the ALC didn't put on paper its ownership of firms like Brett Lithography that produced a number of the T card sets, but that in actual practice these firms were acting as subsidiaries.


I will edit this list if I am forgetting any, but I believe these are our surviving T sheets of the 1909-1912 ATC project. Finding even one panel or sheet of east coast printed T cards the same size as T205/6 could be very helpful.

Small Size Proof sheets, testing only a handful of cards, focused on colors and alignment and clearly not the size that would have been used for mass production:
T107
T62 (at least 2 different)
T51


Full size sheets or nearly full size sheets:
T212 Obaks

T25 - Auctioned and then cut up into strips and/or singles. (I have 2 strips of it).

T220 Silver - Proof cards cut into 8 panels long ago before 'discovery'. (I have 23 of the 24 surviving fragments).

E229 - cut into panels before discovery, from the same find as the T220 set. Candy set, but at least 1 of its backs is a licorice owned by the ATC and it was done by the same printers at the same place at the same time as T cards, probably using the same contracts, so I would bucket this as relevant, unlike the E90 sheets or the E93 sheet). These are probably proof cards, but there are no changes I have noticed. (I own most but not all of the panels).

T204 Ramly - cut up into singles that SGC slabbed, no picture or documentation was ever shown publicly (as far I am aware, I am no Ramly expert). These are probably not helpful to ATC card sheets.

T206 Panel - Cut up by Mastro in 1985. The presence of a single Wagner and Plank very strongly suggests this was not a "sheet" in the full sense, but a panel of some sort


The Wagner strip from his estate really doesn't fit with any. I would love to handle it raw and examine, but that ain't ever happening.


We would know a lot more than we do now about the ATC card project if we could find even a few sheets of random sets. That there are so few from any of the dozens of ATC sets and that some of those very few that did survive were not even documented before being destroyed saddens me. A lot of knowledge was lost, slowing research but perhaps preventing us from ever getting that information elsewhere. There may not be another sheet to discover and learn from, and we will forever be stuck squinting at miscuts and trying to deduce which cuts went with what sheet layout and its overall size etc.

[UKCardGuy]

Originally Posted by G1911

The real tragedy of the saga is that possibly the only piece of uncut material from the set production runs to survive to modernity was destroyed without any documentation of the layout, size, what was on it, etc. There are only a handful of uncut T strips/sheets/panels that anyone can show (mostly Obak), and none for T206. Some other T sheets we know survived to modernity have been destroyed, like the T25 sheet and the T204 sheet.

100%. As I was watching the video, I kept thinking "WHAT, there was an uncut sheet of T206s and somebody cut it up????"

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by UKCardGuy

100%. As I was watching the video, I kept thinking "WHAT, there was an uncut sheet of T206s and somebody cut it up????"

A halfway decent interviewer would automatically have gone there. Mastro was jovial and in a talkative mood. The interviewer should have asked more about the original uncut sheet with a single question… and then shut up and let Mastro expound on it. But because he was mercilessly interrupted, cut-off and redirected (for the interviewer to talk about himself) I guess this critical part of the story has to remain a mystery.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Enough about you. Now, let's talk about ME.