Mr. Verkman – Keep your Word - Letters From Bill Mastro, Joe Orlando, & Marshall Fogel

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

Wow - an honest dispute about authenticity can really bring up some emotions. Allow me to make a few points please:

(1) The TCMA type card appears to be the same pose. That does mean a lot as we all know many pre-war cards used file photos as images; ie we see the same pose of Cobb and others on many cards. This is interesting but CERTAINLY NOT definitive.

(2) Return policy. I completely where people are coming from on this but please understand my position on this: (1) This is a unique situation and we all know grading services can change their mind; (2) This part of our web site did not exist when this card was auctioned; (3) Mr Haverkos bid by phone and not on the internet; (4) We are willing to accept a return but we want to know the actual age of the card first.

(3) Winning bidder/board. I have been pushing to have this card tested since last October. If you step back from the situation and think about it, why does Mr Haverkos not want to test the card? Surely with three letters in his mind there can only be one outcome. He has been offered this for six months and has resisted it at every turn. You really make it hard to for someone to establish authenticity without access to the item. Everyone on this board knows I would never run a bait and switch and keep his card and the money; further, as I pointed out to him repeatedly, I would personally sign for any package.

(3a) Mr Haverkos ABSOLUTELY was manipulative with his first and post and even with his second. While the internet is great for free exchanges of information, it really is troubling when people (as other board members have pointed out) make HUGE OMISSIONS. If he is so sure of his position and is a straight guy, why resort to these tactics? I never ignored him or make a single promise that I did not keep.

(4) General. What is the real issue here? I think it is whether the card is real and I will overnight him a check immediately if this can be proven by aging the card. The basic rationale for rejecting this card is that we have not seen this before; NO-ONE HAS DONE A THOROUGH ANALYSIS. If and when this is tested, I plan on comparing this larger size Goudey Ruth items like an R309-1 and even Ruth bookplate images from the 1930s.

(5) Testing. I am not running a scam operation here and have never; this is simply an honest disagreement and desire to know the answer from science. I will have the ink AND paper test, both front and back. I believe the suspect T206 Wagner may be a real back with a fake front as I believe only the back was tested; this is a very common tactic among people who fix and alter early cards.

(6) I agree 1000% to the terms set by Judge Fred, who is the only one who is really trying to be fair to both parties here (I do know him, but perhaps he is a wise real judge!).
I will in fact pay the cost of the testing regardless of the outcome; in other words, if it comes back from the period, it is on my dime. I will go further and say publicly that if the authenticity cannot be determined by testing (after an actual attempt), I will also issue a refund.


Bottom line: is this about finding out if the card is real or running a smear campaign? All I am after is indisputable truth and if that is not possible, I will issue a complete refund.