Brooklyn CDV

Saco River Auction · #1 01-11-2013, 01:47 PM

As I said yesterday I am going to try to stay out of the discussions on this forum from now on. Unfortunately I do not like being called out by Scott and Others. You can say what you want about this card and take your shots at the process or whatever. But do not take shots at the credibility of me or this auction hall. We have a unblemished reputation and I will not remain silent when I see Scott trying to smear our reputation over the bean eaters photo. For the record we are not experts on every item that walks through the door. Alot of the provenance and history of items come directly from the consignor. At times and on items that are not big hit items we rely on the statements of the consignor to formulate our descriptions for individual items. The bean eaters photo was explained to me that it was "a print taken off the original negative". We listed it as such, and withing days of the auction realized(based on the interest) that something was wrong. It was worded in a way in our description that lead people to believe that it was an original photo. We looked at it under high power magnification and determined that this was a very modern re-production of the original photo. We decided to pull the item from the sale and cancel all bids as we do not want our customers buying an item that we do not believe in. Pardon us Scott for making a mistake and correcting it before anyone was affected financially. I guess that gives us a bad reputation. Also Scott you are becoming very paranoid as everything to you is a forgery. I am shocked to learn that you feel that because a 19th century photo was re-produced for a decorative piece, there must be bad intentions behind it.

Lastly I have an appointment and have for days with SGC to re-holder the card. Scott at SGC has agreed to do it and it will be done long before the sale. We haven't been able to send it out yet because the press has been here at our hall looking to view the card and shoot their stories. He is going to verify that the card is the same one he authenticated in the first place and re-holder it for safety.

I feel that you all would love for me to stop posting on this site, and I would rather not post on here until after the sale, but I refuse to listen to a giant smear campaign of my reputation and the auction halls reputation without responding accordingly.

Troy

novakjr · #2 01-11-2013, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saco River Auction

As I said yesterday I am going to try to stay out of the discussions on this forum from now on. Unfortunately I do not like being called out by Scott and Others. You can say what you want about this card and take your shots at the process or whatever. But do not take shots at the credibility of me or this auction hall. We have a unblemished reputation and I will not remain silent when I see Scott trying to smear our reputation over the bean eaters photo. For the record we are not experts on every item that walks through the door. Alot of the provenance and history of items come directly from the consignor. At times and on items that are not big hit items we rely on the statements of the consignor to formulate our descriptions for individual items. The bean eaters photo was explained to me that it was "a print taken off the original negative". We listed it as such, and withing days of the auction realized(based on the interest) that something was wrong. It was worded in a way in our description that lead people to believe that it was an original photo. We looked at it under high power magnification and determined that this was a very modern re-production of the original photo. We decided to pull the item from the sale and cancel all bids as we do not want our customers buying an item that we do not believe in. Pardon us Scott for making a mistake and correcting it before anyone was affected financially. I guess that gives us a bad reputation. Also Scott you are becoming very paranoid as everything to you is a forgery. I am shocked to learn that you feel that because a 19th century photo was re-produced for a decorative piece, there must be bad intentions behind it.

Lastly I have an appointment and have for days with SGC to re-holder the card. Scott at SGC has agreed to do it and it will be done long before the sale. We haven't been able to send it out yet because the press has been here at our hall looking to view the card and shoot their stories. He is going to verify that the card is the same one he authenticated in the first place and re-holder it for safety.

I feel that you all would love for me to stop posting on this site, and I would rather not post on here until after the sale, but I refuse to listen to a giant smear campaign of my reputation and the auction halls reputation without responding accordingly.

Troy

Troy, if interested parties may be coming in to see the photo, it might be in everyone's best interest to not re-holder it yet, so that they can get the best possible view of the raw item. Seeing documentation is great and all, but getting a clear in-person view may be required by some potential buyers as well. The holder can somewhat obstruct that.. I think leaving it raw for now, could help re-assure someone of their potential purchase, and could help lead to higher bids. Re-holdering can always be arranged at a later date, before final delivery of the item, if the buyer chooses..

No conspiracy theory, or anything. Just an honest opinion..

Saco River Auction · #3 01-11-2013, 02:05 PM

That's great advice and I thank you, however there are people on here that do not allow for a common sense approach and feel that every move we make is a way of decieving potential buyers of this card. To leave it out of the holder or in its current re-glued state is going to force a select number of people to continue to speculate that we are doing something ridiculous like a bait and switch or forgery. I would feel better if I could put that particular fire out long before the auction occurs.

Troy

Runscott · #4 01-11-2013, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saco River Auction

That's great advice and I thank you, however there are people on here that do not allow for a common sense approach and feel that every move we make is a way of decieving potential buyers of this card. To leave it out of the holder or in its current re-glued state is going to force a select number of people to continue to speculate that we are doing something ridiculous like a bait and switch or forgery. I would feel better if I could put that particular fire out long before the auction occurs.

Troy

Troy, this is a ridiculous assertion. One thing we ALL have stated is that we are CERTAIN that you are NOT trying to deceive anyone.

There is absolutely no doubt here that you are honest. I can also assure you that no one thinks that your re-gluing the SGC holder would be akin to a 'bait and switch' - it would simply be indicative of ignorance regarding our hobby and slabbing.

Edited to add: Regarding the Bean Eaters cabinet, I felt that it was simply a case of your putting up something for auction that you did not know was a forgery. Yes, your practices are questioned, but not your honesty. There is a huge difference.

Saco River Auction · #5 01-11-2013, 02:39 PM

Scott your are completely delusional and I have no way (or need) to respond to you further. You love to stir up hornets nests and love the controversy. I am not going to get into a battle with you because your have no relevance in this matter. You are not going to be a bidder on this and would love to see this whole thing turn into a bad deal for the auction house and the consignor. In one breath you call me both honest and dishonest. Which is it scott? I have spoken with you numerous times on the phone and you seem like a decent guy, however I am not sure which one of your personalities I was speaking to at the time. This is counter productive as most of the negative comments have been in this forum.

To all prospective bidders who have an interest in this card, talk to me personally. I have supplied my personal cell phone number for you all and I encourage you to take advantage of it. I do not want unsure bidders. I want bidders who know that this is amazing opportunity to buy a piece of history. I feel that through dealing directly with me and ignoring these ridiculous comments, I can get your questions answered and your confidence level where it needs to be to purchase an item such as this.

Troy

Runscott · #6 01-11-2013, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saco River Auction

Scott your are completely delusional and I have no way (or need) to respond to you further. You love to stir up hornets nests and love the controversy. I am not going to get into a battle with you because your have no relevance in this matter. You are not going to be a bidder on this and would love to see this whole thing turn into a bad deal for the auction house and the consignor. In one breath you call me both honest and dishonest. Which is it scott? I have spoken with you numerous times on the phone and you seem like a decent guy, however I am not sure which one of your personalities I was speaking to at the time. This is counter productive as most of the negative comments have been in this forum.

Troy

"...and would love to see this whole thing turn into a bad deal for the auction house and the consignor." Where do you come up with this stuff?

You need to hope that your present consignors (and prospective future ones) aren't reading your comments here. The best thing that could happen for you is that you sprain your index finger.

oldjudge · #7 01-11-2013, 02:53 PM

Troy--if someone purchases the CdV and goes through the additional testing and the result is that it is not period, does that person have the right to get a full refund?

Thanks---Jay

Bugsy · #8 01-11-2013, 03:13 PM

I appreciate an auction house willing to come on here and thoroughly discuss an item they will be listing. I wish more would be willing to do so, although the way this thread has gone recently, I can't blame them for not wanting to.

benjulmag · #9 01-11-2013, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Troy--if someone purchases the CdV and goes through the additional testing and the result is that it is not period, does that person have the right to get a full refund?

Thanks---Jay

The question I would ask is if the auction house would, at the instruction of the winning bidder, send the CdV to Mr. Messier for the additional testing before payment is tendered? I think it would be a smart business decision to make, as it might induce people to bid who otherwise would be reluctant due to concerns about the authenticity of the item and the risk that the refund might not be readily forthcoming.

Runscott · #10 01-11-2013, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saco River Auction

As I said yesterday I am going to try to stay out of the discussions on this forum from now on. Unfortunately I do not like being called out by Scott and Others. You can say what you want about this card and take your shots at the process or whatever. But do not take shots at the credibility of me or this auction hall.

You are creating a straw man. We asked valid questions and presented facts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saco River Auction

We have a unblemished reputation and I will not remain silent when I see Scott trying to smear our reputation over the bean eaters photo. For the record we are not experts on every item that walks through the door. Alot of the provenance and history of items come directly from the consignor. At times and on items that are not big hit items we rely on the statements of the consignor to formulate our descriptions for individual items. The bean eaters photo was explained to me that it was "a print taken off the original negative". We listed it as such, and withing days of the auction realized(based on the interest) that something was wrong. It was worded in a way in our description that lead people to believe that it was an original photo. We looked at it under high power magnification and determined that this was a very modern re-production of the original photo.

Any smearing of your reputation is being done by you, not me. If you are going to sell multi-thousand dollar cabinet photos, you better not rely on your consignors to write your descriptions. And you might want to determine the authenticity of items a bit sooner than the day before the auction.

When I called and told you that it was a forgery, I also responded to you that it was not taken from an original negative, and I explained to you how I knew this: an original negative would have to exist, which was highly unlikely, plus I matched your scan up with a scan on the internet and found a piece of residue on the 'real' photo, meaning that yours was copied from that image (not from a negative). This all occurred on December 31 - the day before the auction.

High-power magnification was not needed - I have bad eyes and was able to do it simply by looking at my computer screen. This should have been done before the item ever was put up for auction by you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saco River Auction

We decided to pull the item from the sale and cancel all bids as we do not want our customers buying an item that we do not believe in. Pardon us Scott for making a mistake and correcting it before anyone was affected financially. I guess that gives us a bad reputation. Also Scott you are becoming very paranoid as everything to you is a forgery. I am shocked to learn that you feel that because a 19th century photo was re-produced for a decorative piece, there must be bad intentions behind it.

You are pardoned for making this mistake. No, not all are forgeries, but the Bean Eaters cabinet is. Now you are back-peddling and calling it a "decorative piece" and telling us that you knew this all along? What kind of auction house would auction off real 19th century mounted photos, alongside a fake that they knew was a fake? Answer: No one. And either did you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saco River Auction

Lastly I have an appointment and have for days with SGC to re-holder the card. Scott at SGC has agreed to do it and it will be done long before the sale. We haven't been able to send it out yet because the press has been here at our hall looking to view the card and shoot their stories. He is going to verify that the card is the same one he authenticated in the first place and re-holder it for safety.

I feel that you all would love for me to stop posting on this site, and I would rather not post on here until after the sale, but I refuse to listen to a giant smear campaign of my reputation and the auction halls reputation without responding accordingly.

Troy

There is no "giant smear campaign" of your reputation, and playing the victim is a waste of everyone's time.

I will say this - my opinion of you has definitely changed. You were happy discussing these pieces with me until I started asking questions. This is a hobby where questions get asked, especially when we are talking about very expensive and rare pieces. If that bothers you, then you should stick to that other stuff you normally auction.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
T206 SGC Graded Brooklyn Team Set 23 out of 27 Cards SOLD SOLD!!!	brookdodger55	Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T	3	03-31-2012 06:15 PM
Looking for Brooklyn Dodger Collectors	dougscats	Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T	0	12-27-2010 05:19 PM
Looking for Brooklyn Dodgers collectors	dougscats	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	0	11-24-2010 12:16 PM
FS: RARE Ca. 1860's CDV Civil War Generals and Officers featuring Abner Doubleday SGC Auth	Archive	19th Century Cards & ALL Baseball Postcards- B/S/T	0	09-06-2008 07:07 PM
Early Baseball CDV	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	11	07-25-2004 11:24 PM