Issues with a Heritage National Auction Item.

[packs]

I have a question about auction house responsibilities. Especially on the heels of the Halper fakes stories. If a consignor presents an item to the auction house, doesn't the auction house have a responsibility to investigate the item's authenticity regardless of who the consignor is? And prior to the actual auction? It doesn't seem fair to the bidders if an auction house lists an item based on a consignor's reputation.

[ruth-gehrig]

I totally agree however it doesn't seem it always works that way

[Leon]

Originally Posted by packs

I have a question about auction house responsibilities. Especially on the heels of the Halper fakes stories. If a consignor presents an item to the auction house, doesn't the auction house have a responsibility to investigate the item's authenticity regardless of who the consignor is? And prior to the actual auction? It doesn't seem fair to the bidders if an auction house lists an item based on a consignor's reputation.

I can only speak for myself but I would not take a reputation into account on an item. I take the item on it's own. IF Scott and I don't feel comfortable with it then we aren't going to auction it. It's very easy.

As far as prior to the auction? Of course, but new information does come out after auctions start and that information is as important as any and can play a role in the continuance, or not, of that lot. Every auction house faces those same obstacles.

[packs]

Very true. These kinds of auctions attract collectors whose insight goes beyond even the most advanced hobbyists. Its great to see houses handle these situations professionally.

[sports-rings]

As of Sunday morning, Heritage still has not updated their auction description for this ring.

As we get closer to the auction, it looks more likely that there is a possibility they will not even acknowledge that it's not the original ring.

With the winning bidder paying over $40,000 with the buyer's premium, I hope the winning bidder learns that the ring is not original and demands that Heritage take the ring back.

Although I offered to provide contact information for the "real experts" at Jostens (the company that made the original ring), I have not heard from Jonathan or anyone else at Heritage.

Jonathan wrote on this thread that they are investigating this issue. This is some investigation on their part. How long should it take? I am the only person I know of who has won an original superbowl II ring at auction and they have not asked me anything about the ring.

Legendary last year auctioned off a Superbowl II Packer ring that was made some years later, and much to their credit, quickly acknowledged this by changing their original auction description.

I was never a fan of Heritage, now I think even less of them.

[bobbyw8469]

This is really crappy.....

[Heritage Sports]

We have spoken with multiple championship ring experts in the hobby as well as a contact at Jostens regarding this ring. While the prevailing opinion does appear to match the basis of your argument that “Back in the 60's Jostens engraved "JOSTEN" and later on, in the 1970's started to engrave "JOSTENS,” a bit of research has located a number of rings dating from the 1940’s to the late 1960’s that are stamped “JOSTENS,” indicating a rather significant flaw in this opinion. This cannot be explained by anyone with whom we have discussed the matter. In fact, we have also located 1960’s championship rings from the same NFL team and year noted as stamped “JOSTENS” with both 10K and 14K gold. While the issue is being characterized by certain posters on this board as being black-and-white-definitive, it simply is not the case.

We stand by our copy as written and every statement is factually correct. This is Fuzzy Thurston’s ring. It was presented to him for his participation in the 1967 Super Bowl II. It is stamped “Jostens 10K.” It was confiscated by the IRS and consigned to Heritage to recoup back taxes. Here is a link to the full description should you wish to review it: http://sports.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7037&lotNo=80061

We are human and errors will rarely but inevitably occur when dealing with over 10,000 sports lots annually. The Joe Jackson photo that Dan Bretta posted about was pulled from auction and was never sold by Heritage, despite his statement to the contrary. Please feel free to check our nearly 60,000 lots in our completed auction archives to verify. We appreciate the feedback that we receive from knowledgeable hobbyists. We review the information that is provided and we sometimes update a lot when it is deemed as warranted or choose to leave the description as it is when we feel that it is accurate. Heritage Auctions is a service business and we have grown to be the world’s largest collectibles auctioneer over the past 35 years by building trust and providing quality service to the thirty collectible fields in which we work. This will be our last post on this thread but please feel free to email myself or any Heritage sports consignment director should you have any further questions about the Platinum Night event next week.

[calvindog]

Ugh. I'd hate to be the sucker who's buying this ring.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by Heritage Sports

We have spoken with multiple championship ring experts in the hobby as well as a contact at Jostens regarding this ring. While the prevailing opinion does appear to match the basis of your argument that “Back in the 60's Jostens engraved "JOSTEN" and later on, in the 1970's started to engrave "JOSTENS,” a bit of research has located a number of rings dating from the 1940’s to the late 1960’s that are stamped “JOSTENS,” indicating a rather significant flaw in this opinion. This cannot be explained by anyone with whom we have discussed the matter. In fact, we have also located 1960’s championship rings from the same NFL team and year noted as stamped “JOSTENS” with both 10K and 14K gold. While the issue is being characterized by certain posters on this board as being black-and-white-definitive, it simply is not the case.

We stand by our copy as written and every statement is factually correct. This is Fuzzy Thurston’s ring. It was presented to him for his participation in the 1967 Super Bowl II. It is stamped “Jostens 10K.” It was confiscated by the IRS and consigned to Heritage to recoup back taxes. Here is a link to the full description should you wish to review it: http://sports.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7037&lotNo=80061

We are human and errors will rarely but inevitably occur when dealing with over 10,000 sports lots annually. The Joe Jackson photo that Dan Bretta posted about was pulled from auction and was never sold by Heritage, despite his statement to the contrary. Please feel free to check our nearly 60,000 lots in our completed auction archives to verify. We appreciate the feedback that we receive from knowledgeable hobbyists. We review the information that is provided and we sometimes update a lot when it is deemed as warranted or choose to leave the description as it is when we feel that it is accurate. Heritage Auctions is a service business and we have grown to be the world’s largest collectibles auctioneer over the past 35 years by building trust and providing quality service to the thirty collectible fields in which we work. This will be our last post on this thread but please feel free to email myself or any Heritage sports consignment director should you have any further questions about the Platinum Night event next week.

Instead of pulling the piece, as some suggest, it seems to me there is a very obvious solution to this dilemma: post these findings. If you have located genuine rings that match yours, show us all where. If you have located early rings that says "JOSTENS," then show us where. Take away any 'trust' factor involved, and give every bit of data available, then let the educated public decide. Otherwise, you're asking us to believe your word when the argument against you is not only compelling, some might say it's damning.
Ken
earlywynnfan5@hotmail.com