How would you react to a personal attack (by SGC)?

[bbcard1]

One of my mantras is that email is a fine way to impart information but a lousy way to communicate. Intent can be misconstrued. I can think of two clients (at least) that I have lost because of hasty emails by my staff that were misconstrued. Sometime talking is better. Maybe you should have your dad call the person he has been communicating with with openness and start over.

As for what I do when I am attacked personally, I usually go with the crane kick. When you do it right, no can defense.

[Sterling Sports Auctions]

Correct me if I am wrong Scott, but I believe you and your dad have owned and maybe wtill own legitimate T206 brown backs (your dad once sent me pictures one 2). If this is the case than you should have been able to tell when you received this card that it was not a legit brown back.

If this is the case, I think you need to assess your decision to try and resell the card as a brown back and not return it when you initially received the card.

Lee

[Abravefan11]

I know the card was up for auction before being pulled but beyond that is there another thread containing the Who/What/When/Where of this card and the dispute?

[chaddurbin]

seems like you are taking an overly-defensive stance to what sgc said. with your family knowledge and hobby connections of t206s i would think you can differentiate between a black and brown OM and not have to rely on SGC. knowing only bits and pieces here and there (maybe intended)...so i could be wrong about the details but it's bad practice to pass this off to another auction house when rea has already rejected it.

imo sgc meant no malice with that statement as anybody with common sense reading the other thread can see other veteran t206 collectors in a very respectful and nice manner as to not step on any toes asking how the card made its way to auction with the history and ownership behind it.

[cfc1909]

look for

Goodwin is up

[Abravefan11]

Found it Jim, Thanks.

After reading through that thread there seems to be a lot of unknown details (at least to me) that make it difficult to have an opinion on this.

[uffda51]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

One of my mantras is that email is a fine way to impart information but a lousy way to communicate. Intent can be misconstrued.

Amen to that.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The card did not look remotely brown to me. Just saying.

[Misunderestimated]

I'm with Gary etc. on interpreting the email. Without the entire context its hard to say what someone intended to say and this is especially so in an email which is a less than exact form of communication.
Although it may be too late now you might want to ask Sean what me meant by his comment before construing it as malicious and insulting....
The remark seems a bit snarky to me, but that's all. Hopefully you and your father will be able to resolve your real problem with SGC without creating a satellite conflict.....
If I sound too harsh, remember I don't know the entire story and context.

[wonkaticket]

Scott, it’s not a brown Old Mill IMO.I would bet that the top 10 T206 guys I know would agree with me on this.

As for having knowledgeable collectors review it?

With one phone call you and your dad could have had plenty of folks look over this card who know T206’s you know that.

Also you guys own browns you could compare them side by side not many folks can do that. I find it odd that you of all collectors would think this is brown? I can’t tell you how many times you guys have shared cards with the strangest of tiny little details of oddity but this one slips by?

So why would you consign this card to Goodwin and be so bummed that it was pulled when it’s so obvious it’s not brown? Why Scott?

As for compensation there is no way you guys have anything close to brown Old Mill money in this card, so looking for anything close to that is like winning the lottery on SGC’s labeling mistake. SGC should give you guys a few hundred bucks for the trouble a more than fair rate for a G-VG southern league card.

Then all of you SGC, Goodwin and you and your dad should be glad nobody got dealt a bogus card in a mislabeled holder.

You of all folks should know the sting of getting a card in a holder which isn’t legit.

Cheers,

John

P.S. Quan is right there are quite a few facts being left out here......

[danmckee]

Lee B., Peter, Jim R. Wonka. 4 direct strikes to the head of the nail.

[Peter_Spaeth]

No one can assess this situation without basic facts which were not provided, apparently intentionally.

[JasonL]

I don't see how that quote provided can be insulting or deemed to be a personal attack. I guess without a full context of the conversation or some of the oter background, perhaps, but that doesn't look at all even aggressive as I read it.

[Kotton King]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

No one can assess this situation without basic facts which were not provided, apparently intentionally.

Yes indeed....

[scottglevy]

Basic facts were not omitted intentionally, but rather to simplify a complex situation. Nonetheless here they are:

1. At some point years ago my dad purchased a slabbed SGC card labeled as a brown old mill. I vaguely remember my dad telling me about it but I certainly don't remember how, from who or at what price he purchased it.

2. The card was held for several years and recently my dad wanted to sell it.

3. We know quite a bit about T206s and understand that the 'typical' brown backed old mills are both trimmed and very light in color -- which this card admittedly does not have.

4. When this card was consigned to Bill Goodwin for his auction - My dad made sure to mention these particular issues AND ALSO mentioned that when he compared it side by side against other typical old mill cards with a loupe --- all the others were black while this one was brown. My dad asked Mr. Goodwin to consider listing the card on this basis. Bill then inspected the card, agreed with my dad's assessment and listed it in his auction.

5. Questions were (not surprisingly) raised about the card being auctioned and SGC requested to review the card.

6. SGC decided that the card should not have been labeled as a brown old mill.....a claim that my dad disagrees with --- but given that it was submitted to SGC, I suppose that is their call.

7. SGC asked for what the purchase price of the card was and when it was bought. Here's where the fireworks started. My dad did not have any records of the purchase price or even when or from whom it was bought. Dealer's might think that's foolish --- but we collect primarily for fun. I know that I've personally almost never kept a record of any card that I've bought --- simply because it doesn't matter to me.

8. SGC and my dad discussed compensation and couldn't agree to a number. Both parties were at an impasse. And the matter just kind of hung there for about two months.

Those are the facts from as unbiased a standpoint as I am capable of presenting them. Up until that point I saw no fault with how either SGC or my dad conducted themselves.....

THEN - SGC started to personally attack the character of my dad, with snide and childish / antagonistic remarks. I'm sure that my dad is just as frustrated with not having the situation resolved as SGC is ... but he didn't assault SGC's character, because up until that point it was just a business issue. That is the point that I have issue with.

SGC has the right to feel differently about how the situation should be resolved - but their insults are out of line.