![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I've waited a day and a half to make any comment on this thread as it would most likely be perceived to be self-serving; that being said, there are a few points I'd like to make:
First, I've been representing Dave on this issue with Mastro/Legendary since March of 2009; my thoughts about Bill Mastro and Doug Allen have been pretty much consistent for at least 3 years now and are probably in line with about 90% of the people in the hobby. Of course, as Dave's lawyer I'm biased towards his position; but my point is that since becoming his attorney my position on Mastro and Doug have not changed one iota. I wish other posters' biases and motives could be as transparent. Unfortunately, the news about the lawsuit has provided the opportunity for many to take shots at Dave due to personal problems they may have with him having nothing to do with SGC or, in other instances, to support Mastro/Doug despite being either financially involved with them or otherwise a part of some of their mess over the years. Second, the lawsuit was filed on June 25. Today is July 6 and I have yet to hear from Mastro's attorneys about the suit despite having been in touch with them since March. Dave has also not been served with a copy of the lawsuit. I learned about the lawsuit from Mike O'Keeffe who provided me with a copy of it -- it was clearly given to him by an interested party (can you guess who?). Needless to say, it is more than troubling to learn about a lawsuit from a reporter (as well as from a number of apparently hand-picked hobbyists who also alerted me) instead of from attorneys. Make from that what you will but I will say that this is a curious way to try to settle a dispute - assuming that settling the dispute was the desired goal with the lawsuit. And remember: we didn't bring a lawsuit against Mastro; we're defending it. Unless we did everything that Mastro wanted, we had no choice in the matter here; they sued Dave without warning, not the other way around. Next, I'm not going to litigate the legal issues on this board despite the great desire here for such a show. There's no point in it. And while there are a number of “judges” here who have already pronounced their verdicts based solely on a newspaper article written by a guy who before yesterday hated cards more than he hates bin Laden, you'll excuse me if I don't feel the strong desire to make my arguments to them. Needless to say, the article hardly provides all the information required to come to any fair conclusion. And again, there are unrevealed biases here and opinions should be taken with a grain of salt -- many (but not all) of the people bashing Dave and SGC here have made clear to me their dislike for him well before any of the legal issues arose. Finally, anyone who has any intimate dealings with SGC knows that Dave has been nowhere near the grading room for months and months and months and is not a daily presence in the running of the company. I'm not going to get into a defense of the company, however, because I'm Dave's lawyer and I otherwise don't know how the operation works there. All I can say is take a look at SGC's track record, their customer service, their product since Dave took over. You might even want to compare it to the track record for integrity that existed/exists at Mastro/Legendary. Regardless, if you have any questions, call the guys at SGC. I've submitted cards to both SGC and PSA so what do I know but I think SGC's product has been generally favored on this board and those reasons still exist regardless of Dave's problems with Mastro and Doug. As for perceived conflicts of interest, there are real and perceived conflicts of interest all over this hobby. With SGC cards, however, the proof is in the pudding. If cards are overgraded, doesn't SGC have a track record of buying them back? (Although I don't know many people that complain of having overgraded SGC cards) The argument that suddenly even the appearance of impropriety is awful, if extended logically, would knock out every auction house and grading company in existence. In the end, you have to trust the grading of your cards...and as I've said before, call SGC up if you have any questions, they do answer their phones -- even without dogs barking in the background.
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/sets Last edited by calvindog; 07-06-2009 at 07:12 PM. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Jeff I appreciate your remarks and perspective, but with all due respect I disagree with you on appearance of conflict. For one thing overgrading is not the only potential problem with slabbing cards, and even then, it is subjective. But leaving that aside, assuming Dave does buy and sell cards, which you haven't denied I don't think, I for one don't want a grading service run by a card dealer whose grading service is grading his cards. It just raises too many questions, where basically we have to take his word (or those of his employees) that it is all on the up and up. And it may well be, but it is unnecessary.
And your statement that there are other conflicts, while perhaps true, does not excuse this one. Joe Orlando is not, to my knowlege or anyone else's, buying and selling cards. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
While I know you have many fascinating things to say about this case; as a lawyer who is aware of facts that we are not; I think you have the right to stay out of this thread
![]() And I was out at dinner with wife and her friends last nite -- Had to go; she was very antsy after being home bound since Tuesday when her knee got scoped. Which is why I missed your show last nite. Why does ABC need that Imus guy anyway for. ![]() All I ask; is when it is legally prudent for you to do so; to post the suit (and counter-suit if there is one) with a link. ![]() Regards Rich Last edited by Rich Klein; 07-06-2009 at 07:51 PM. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
WOW! again, this is some crazy info. You are defending Dave, that is great. But did he win lots he hasn't paid for or not? That is the main question here I think. Why else could Mastro Inc sue him? dan.
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Anyone can sue anyone at anytime.
And Mastro still isn't paying consignors... but they are certainly pointing the finger at others for all sorts of things. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Since you made this statement can you please list the names here of the folks you are referring to? As far as I am aware every person that contacted me has been contacted and has had arrangements made to be paid or has been paid. I am sure there might be more out there but since you are the one posting then I would like to know. This will help them get paid quicker (which I totally agree that they should have already been paid). Thanks much
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1970-71 Dayton Daily News cards | Archive | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 0 | 05-28-2008 10:12 AM |
Vintage Press Photos from Daily News Yankees, Mets and Dodgers | Archive | Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T | 0 | 03-29-2008 10:03 AM |
Article in 2/19 NY Daily News about UD controversy | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 02-22-2006 09:18 AM |
NY Daily News Artcile | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 66 | 01-22-2005 01:30 AM |
Today's Origins of the Game Article (ESPN.com) | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 05-11-2004 05:04 PM |