Problems with two championship rings in upcoming Heritage Auction

[Lordstan]

I will echo Scott's comments. I don't know anything about rings, but the differences are pretty obvious once you know what you're looking for.

[sports-rings]

Originally Posted by Lordstan

I will echo Scott's comments. I don't know anything about rings, but the differences are pretty obvious once you know what you're looking for.

I agree, the differences are pretty obvious. Yet as the days continue to pass the two item descriptions remain unchanged and there have been numerous bids on both items.

I am not sure if Heritage's investigation has now concluded or is still going on. Chris said he would update the listings and make an announcement at the live auction should they conclude that they need to change the description of either item.

There are a couple of "ring experts" in the hobby, including one under the PSA umbrella of authentication services.

I hope Heritage will seek other opinions on the rings if they still feel at the conclusion of their investigation that the last name, the uniform number and player-position on the rings look original and not modified.

[mcgwirecom]

Nice work, it does look more than questionable. Surprised that a big auction house like that wouldn't listen to a knowledgable collector.

In the past I would peruse the auctions for McGwire signed items. This was before there were any big TPAs. For the most part they would remove items based on my opinion. Thats why I am surprised they wouldn't listen to you!

[sports-rings]

Surprised that a big auction house like that wouldn't listen to a knowledgable collector.

I have alerted many auction houses when I have discovered that a ring in their auction had issues.

Many are proactive and pull the ring immediately. Others are defiant but look into the matter and eventually pull the items.

I don't have an ego and am not a self-proclaimed ring expert. I ask the auction houses to get a 2nd opinion if they feel that my analysis may be incorrect.

I feel Heritage can and should sell these rings, they just need to modify the descriptions.

I hope that the Heritage investigation into these two rings continue. I see as of this morning that the listings have not been modified and I have not heard from Chris Ivy.

Two stories about auction houses and their willingness to modify listings.

Hunt auctions had a Chicago Bears championship ring two years ago in their super bowl auction. It was not mentioned in their auction that it was a smaller version that the players received. I notified them that they should change the listing but they refused. They claimed the bidder should know it was not a player-size ring by their inclusion of a lower than market value estimated final selling price.

We went round and round on net54 and they didn't budge. I am friends with an NFL official who oversees the auction. When I alerted him of this issue, he made sure they changed it.

The 2nd story involves Heritage. Three years ago they had player, Frederick Thurston's Green Bay Packer superbowl II ring for sale. It clearly was not his original ring since the original rings were marked "Josten" and made in 14K. The ring they were auctioning off was 10K and marked "Jostens". The mark means it was made much later on and not original. Thurston saved some money when he had the ring remade by purchasing a 10K version and not a 14K version.

Heritage refused to budge on the description and I remember having a shouting match with them at their booth during the National. I asked them to speak to other ring experts and finally, at the start of the bidding during the Platinum auction event at the National, they announced it was not the original ring.

The winning bidder with the juice paid $50,787. Although Thurston is in the packers Hall of fame, that seems like a lot of money for a non-Pro Footall Hall of Famer's non original ring. I hope the winning bidder knew what he was purchasing was not the original ring and of lesser gold content than what the team was intended to receive.

I hope the winning bidders of these two super bowl rings in their current auction know what they are buying, otherwise, down the road they will probably be quite upset.

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by sports-rings

I have alerted many auction houses when I have discovered that a ring in their auction had issues.

Many are proactive and pull the ring immediately. Others are defiant but look into the matter and eventually pull the items.

I don't have an ego and am not a self-proclaimed ring expert. I ask the auction houses to get a 2nd opinion if they feel that my analysis may be incorrect.

I feel Heritage can and should sell these rings, they just need to modify the descriptions.

I hope that the Heritage investigation into these two rings continue. I see as of this morning that the listings have not been modified and I have not heard from Chris Ivy.

Two stories about auction houses and their willingness to modify listings.

Hunt auctions had a Chicago Bears championship ring two years ago in their super bowl auction. It was not mentioned in their auction that it was a smaller version that the players received. I notified them that they should change the listing but they refused. They claimed the bidder should know it was not a player-size ring by their inclusion of a lower than market value estimated final selling price.

We went round and round on net54 and they didn't budge. I am friends with an NFL official who oversees the auction. When I alerted him of this issue, he made sure they changed it.

The 2nd story involves Heritage. Three years ago they had player, Frederick Thurston's Green Bay Packer superbowl II ring for sale. It clearly was not his original ring since the original rings were marked "Josten" and made in 14K. The ring they were auctioning off was 10K and marked "Jostens". The mark means it was made much later on and not original. Thurston saved some money when he had the ring remade by purchasing a 10K version and not a 14K version.

Heritage refused to budge on the description and I remember having a shouting match with them at their booth during the National. I asked them to speak to other ring experts and finally, at the start of the bidding during the Platinum auction event at the National, they announced it was not the original ring.

The winning bidder with the juice paid $50,787. Although Thurston is in the packers Hall of fame, that seems like a lot of money for a non-Pro Footall Hall of Famer's non original ring. I hope the winning bidder knew what he was purchasing was not the original ring and of lesser gold content than what the team was intended to receive.

I hope the winning bidders of these two super bowl rings in their current auction know what they are buying, otherwise, down the road they will probably be quite upset.

First I want to say I have no vested interest anywhere - I do not favor or believe any auction house to be beyond reproach nor do I collect rings. When purchasing items I do collect I follow the best advice I ever learned - Caveat Emptor (Buyer beware).

Second, I want to thank you for caring enough about the collecting community to go to the lengths you have to raise clearly relevant questions regarding rings that come up for auction.

My confusion is what appears to be your level of emotional investment in the outcome of the questions you raise. You have gone beyond a reasonable amount of effort in "getting the message out" to collectors. You have used your knowledge to act in a way that protects you (by not pursuing the rings). While I understand some frustration at not "feeling heard' or possibly not believed as a result of a particular party's (auction house's) lack of action to your information - a "shouting match" seems a bit out of proportion.

[sports-rings]

My confusion is what appears to be your level of emotional investment in the outcome of the questions you raise. You have gone beyond a reasonable amount of effort in "getting the message out" to collectors. You have used your knowledge to act in a way that protects you (by not pursuing the rings). While I understand some frustration at not "feeling heard' or possibly not believed as a result of a particular party's (auction house's) lack of action to your information - a "shouting match" seems a bit out of proportion.
Reply With Quote

I am not sure why you are confused or why you are concerned with my emotional investment and time spent on this matter.

What the heck is in this for me? I don't want to be the self appointed ring expert. Heck, ring collectors know and acknowledge that Scott Welkowsky knows more about rings than anyone I have ever met. TJ Kaye is employed by PSA as their ring expert. I encourage people to speak with them and I encourage the auction houses to do the same.

I'm not sure if you can determine my level of emotional investment in the outcome. Like many ring buyers and some or most collectors at this site, I have been burned in the past by purchasing items that have turned out to be not what they were supposed to be.

So my desire to alert the community stems from helping others avoid the same problems. I have a feeling I am much less "emotionally invested" than you think, meaning I don't let this stuff get to me personally or on an emotional level. I could care less whether I am believed or not believed and I am the first one to admit that auction houses should get 2nd or 3rd opinions on these matters.

Wouldn't deciding what "reasonable amount of effort" is differ from person to person? I keep a database of as many rings as I can, so in situations like this, I can cut and paste some examples of what the rings are supposed to look like.

I won't judge you by the time you spend researching your hobby pursuits and I would appreciate it if you would not judge me by the time I spend. And besides, with the many of thousands of dollars I can spend on one transaction, frankly I should be doing this much research and I'm happy to share it with others.

I can't tell you how many times others have helped me on this board with areas of sports memorabilia I know very little about. So I'm happy to return the favor.

As far as the shouting match goes, the person I dealt with at Heritage was quite annoyed that I was questioning the Superbowl II ring and started the shouting. Being a typical New Yorker, I shouted back. Is that out of proportion, who knows?

[packs]

No offense to the poster before you but how else can you alert the hobby of misinformation other than make a post and lay out your facts?

[djson1]

Originally Posted by sports-rings

... and started the shouting. Being a typical New Yorker, I shouted back.

Haha...that was pretty funny.
BTW, if you didn't point these things out, I never would have thought it was an altered ring. It's interesting to see that the Steelers logo on the Edwards ring doesn't have that faint tiny "Steelers" wording as well (like the one on the Bradshaw ring does).

Please keep us posted on what happens. Thanks.

[hcv123]

[QUOTE=sports-rings;1301419]

I'm not sure if you can determine my level of emotional investment in the outcome. Like many ring buyers and some or most collectors at this site, I have been burned in the past by purchasing items that have turned out to be not what they were supposed to be.

So my desire to alert the community stems from helping others avoid the same problems. I have a feeling I am much less "emotionally invested" than you think, meaning I don't let this stuff get to me personally or on an emotional level. I could care less whether I am believed or not believed and I am the first one to admit that auction houses should get 2nd or 3rd opinions on these matters.

Wouldn't deciding what "reasonable amount of effort" is differ from person to person? I keep a database of as many rings as I can, so in situations like this, I can cut and paste some examples of what the rings are supposed to look like.

I won't judge you by the time you spend researching your hobby pursuits and I would appreciate it if you would not judge me by the time I spend. And besides, with the many of thousands of dollars I can spend on one transaction, frankly I should be doing this much research and I'm happy to share it with others.

[QUOTE]

All relevant points. I apologize for judging you.