A question of credibility (Bushing's Degree)

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenny Cole

PSAJD, I've watched this thread and have tried to stay out of it because I collect cards, not bats or other memorabilia. For that reason, I really don't care whether Mr. Bushing is the greatest thing since sliced bread, a complete ******* or something in between. What I do care about is honesty, integrity, and how those concepts generally affect our entire collecting hobby.

I don't know what kind of law you practice. However, if you want to parce the legal stuff, I can do that too. I do it all day. Let me know and we'll play that game. However, I don't really think it needs to go that far because the issue presented here is far more simple.

When someone purports to be an expert in a given field of endeavor, their credibility is always an issue. When they seek to bolster their credibility by claiming to possess credentials that they don't, their credibilty takes a hit. When they knowingly allow others with whom they are affiliated to make those claims on their behalf, their credibility takes a hit. When they fail to correct statements regarding their (false) credentials made on websites which have existed for a lenghty period of time, to which they have access, their credibility takes a hit. It doesn't matter whether the misrepresented item directly relates to the purported area of expertise. The fact of the matter is that, at least according to popular wisdom, if you lie about one thing, you are likely to lie about others.

If you are a trial attorney, I'm sure you recognize the concept. In that regard, I'm sure you are also probably familiar with the old maxim "Falsis in unum, falsis in omnibus" ["false in one, false in all"]. That seems to be a pertinent concept here. If I ever had Bushing on the stand, falsification of his credentials would be a major theme. Given what has been reported about his Master's situation, I feel fairly certain that I would be able to completely tear his ass off on that issue.

From a hobby perspective, that's really kind of sad. How do you square the truth of opinions coming from the "preeminent" bat expert with being a liar? I have some difficulty with that concept. Please feel free to explain it to me because I just don't understand.

Kenny Cole

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

Vikes -- why don't you take it up with Mastro and Bushing if you are so concerned. See what they say? If you are going to accuse someone of lying, misrepresenting themselves, whatever, do it to their face. Of course I understand your point -- I just don't draw the same conclusion you do from some discrepancy about an unspecified Master's degree. I do agree with you that legitimate questions have been raised about the streak bat, and about conflicts of interest, but this issue just doesn't move me.

Kenny -- of course I understand what you are saying. You and I also know that the courtroom does not always reflect reality -- we lawyers can make mountains out of molehills, as long as the molehills are not so remote that they are excluded on relevance or unfair prejudice grounds. Trials can turn on stuff that had little or no contemporaneous importance, that is part of the art of lawyering. And of course, in a trial with Bushing's credibility on the line, I would go after the issue as well. But leaving that stuff aside, my personal feeling is that this is a truly collateral matter that does not lead to the conclusion that Bushing is a liar or has no credibility.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Let's make this clear, prior to this whole situation arising, I had never heard of Dave Bushing. I no longer own any game used bats or any other type of game used equipment, so I have nothing to gain or lose by being pro-Bushing or con-Bushing. I just call them as I see them. All I can do right now is laugh at the posts by Aaron and Joe because they have not seen the evidence for the DiMaggio bat and have no intention of viewing it or even giving Bushing and SCDA a fair chance to prove their point.

When I went into this meeting, I was pretty convinced that things weren't right with this bat. After having heard Planichs side and SCDA's side, I've been able make an informed opinion on the facts known to this case, unlike Joe, Aaron and others who have made up their minds without seeing both sides and seem hell bent on vilifying Bushing.

As I said before, a lot this their problems i.e. conflict of interest, lack of disclosure, etc is a problem with the auction house. All this energy should be aimed at MAstro and other auction houses that won't/don't disclose this information.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenny Cole

I have a real high level of discomfort with the basic concept that someone who I am relying on to tell me the truth about something I submit to them has either: a) falsified their resume; or b) knowingly allowed someone else to do so.

Maybe I am overly paranoid and it's just me. However, whether it be a trial or the real world, I simply don't think that I would give someone who I know has misrepresented their background the same degree of credence as I would give someone who has not. That is especially true if that person ends up buying my item and selling it for a ton much more money than they purchased it for, as appears to be the case in the Henrich/Dimaggio bat situation.

I agree that lawyers can sometimes make mountains out of molehills during a trial. But isn't it interesting how trials so often boil down to an assessment of the credibility of the witness? Have you ever won a trial where the jury thought your principal fact (don't want to go into experts ) witnesses lied? I haven't. If you have, you've done a better lawyering job than me.

It seems to me we both agree that Bushing's credibility regarding his background would be a huge issue in any trial which either of us participated in. Consequently, I fail to understand how you can, at the same time, say that it isn't a pertinent issue otherwise. If he can't even tell the truth about his background, why should people rely on him to accurately describe the items that he is both authenticating and selling? I wouldn't.

Kenny Cole

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

Kenny I guess what I am saying is that outside the courtroom, I don't really buy the notion that someone who lies (in this case I think the better word is exaggerates but that is an unimportant quibble) on a small matter is also probably lying about everything else, or can't be trusted generally. I don't think there is a person on this earth who hasn't at one time or another said something that wasn't 100 percent accurate -- it's human nature to exaggerate and to embellish. To me, there is no per se rule. Whether a given lie/exaggeration taints an individual's overall credibility depends on the nature of the lie/exaggeration and the circumstances. Here, I just don't get bad vibes about someone slightly overstating his educational background particularly where that background is (to me anyhow) immaterial to what he does. Similarly, the fact that President Clinton lied about Lewinsky did not in my view taint his credibility as a leader -- in context, one can understand, if not condone, the reasons he lied. If an economist being offered as an expert witness lied about having a Ph.D., or said that he went to Harvard when in fact he went to (you fill in the blank, I don't want to inadvertently disparage anyone's alma mater), then that is one thing. Dave Bushing saying he has a Master's degree when he apparently completed his coursework but didn't complete his dissertation, to me anyhow, does not undermine his overall credibility. Other stuff might. I am not defending him, I don't know him, I don't own anything of his. But not this.

[Archive]

Posted By: Yes Virginia

I'm going over to Miestro Land, learn all the BS there is, and then go after my Masters.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenny Cole

Misrepresenting (a nice middle ground term between "lying" and "exaggerating") one's CV was the only thing that had occurred. Probably wouldn't, but I might. I'd have to think about it some more.

But I don't have that problem. That isn't the only issue that reflects on Mr. Bushing's credibility. There's also that pesky authenticating/selling what you own without disclosure issue that has been raised a time or two. Perhaps its just me, and perhaps I am just jaded, but I view the two issues as interconnected.

Where I practice, the non-disclosure of a material fact related to a transaction is viewed as a species of fraud. In my opinion, failing to disclose ownership of an item which you have also authenticated is material to a transaction. In that situation, I don't think it can even be seriously argued that no financial interest exists on the part of the owner/authenticator.

As best as I can tell, there really isn't too much question that the bat at issue was owned by the same person who authenticated it. Nor does there seem to be too much question that there was nondisclosure of those two facts. If you view things differently, so be it. BTW, are you an insurance defense lawyer? Perhaps that would explain our differing perspectives.

When you start with non-disclosure of an ownership interest in the item you are authenticating AND selling, and you then add on misrepresentation of the purported credentials of the authenticator, that causes me a large degree of heartburn. The fact that the authenticator is pimped as being the "best" at what he does simply makes it worse. I think I'll stick with cards. That way, at least most of the time I'll (hopefully) be able to figure out when I'm being lied to. At this juncture, I suppose that's all I can ask.

Kenny Cole

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Kenny, the non-disclosure isn't so much the authenticator not disclosing the fact but the auction house not disclosing this fact. Even with SCDA's new LOOs, the auction houses are not obligated to mention the fact that the authenticator has an interest in the item.

I will repeat this one last time:

WHY AREN'T THE AUCTION HOUSES BEING CALLED INTO QUESTION?

Much of this is due to their descriptions and lack of disclosure in said descriptions.

Jay



I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

Come on, Jay, say it with me now... "The Leader is good, The Leader is great, surrender your money as of this date..."

Still not moved, eh? Okay, how about... "Na na na na na na Leader-Leader-Leader..."

BTW, I haven't vilified Bushing (your Leader) about anything. I still don't know the truth behind the "streak" bat, but I do know for a fact that Bushing commonly practiced undisclosed conflict of interest (and apparently will continue to do so), which I do have a problem with.

You, OTOH, believe Bushing that the "streak" bat is legit based on a one-sided, unchallenged biased presentation given by the same people who bought you lunch and let you tour their facility, and having met the guy and deemed upstanding and the best at what he does (after he gave you a magnifying glass) have no beef with his practicing undisclosed conflict of interest (and actually prefer that he's an authenticator who is also a dealer of his own material).

So we disagree. What's the confusion? Heck, maybe if I got a tour of Mastro and free lunch, I'd agree with Bushing, too. (Well, if he threw in the magnifying glass.)

As far as this "Master's degree" stuff, I think it's comical. The guy lied on his resume and claimed to have an advanced degree that he really didn't. How cheesy for someone whose income and position in the hobby is dependent on his credibility. I mean do we even know he went to graduate school? Didn't you think it odd, that his bio didn't even say where he went to graduate school?

Anyway, unlike you, I have thousands of dollars in memorabilia that's financial value is contingent on Bushing's LOA's, so on the one hand, I'd love for this whole thing to just blow over and everybody to forget about it, or better yet, Bushing to try to take a public stance against undisclosed conflict of interest or give up dealing (or authenticating), or Bushing himself clarifying the situation with his degree.

But he's silent, which to me says he has no reasonable defense (or he has people giving him really bad advice). He's going to continue dealing and continue withholding from bidders if he has a conflict of interest on items offered at auction, and he just got caught in a pretty egregious lie on his resume (claiming to be fluent in Microsoft excel when you only know the basics is a common exaggeration, claiming to hold an advance college degree when you don't is how people lose jobs).

So to you, it's vilifying, to me it's not congratulating someone for hiding the fact he owned material he was authenticating or for lying on their resume about having an advanced degree that he really didn't. (Although I'm still waiting for my tour invite...)

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenny Cole

I guess I must not be very articulate as a writer. That is somewhat depressing, since there is many day where I spend a substantial portion of time trying to be articulate (Sigh). Let me try again.

If Bushing authenticated items he owned without disclosing that fact, that's bad. If he misrepresented his background, that's bad. If he knowingly allowed someone to misrepresent his background, that's bad. If he both owned/authenticated items without disclosing that, and also misrepresented his credentials, or if he allowed them to be misrepresented, that's at least double bad. If Mastro or any other auction house knowingly facilitated a falsehood on his behalf, that is equally bad.

I didn't shoot at Mastro because I was focusing on the individual. However, you are absolutely right. If Mastro, or any other auction house for that matter, propogated what turns out to be a lie, then I believe that they are equally culpable. Having said that, do you think that I still get my OJ Delahanty card from Mastro?

Kenny

[Archive]

Posted By: vikes066

[response deleted]

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

One more time for all you conflict of intrest conspiracy buffs:

Standard operating proceedure throughout the ENTIRE collectibles world is that authenticators sell what they authenticate. Do you think all those experts on the Antiques Roadshow do that out of the goodness of their heart? Hell no. And I am sure they have made a number aquisitions for resale becuase of it. So whining and crying about Bushing or anyone else is a moot point. It's how the collectibles world operates. That's great if you want to try and change it, but if you are, don't single out a one person. You won't effect industry wide change that way.

As too errors, show me a single person that has never made an error in thier life.

The only error that Bushing benefited from was the DiMaggio bat, and that's only becuase the original buyer had second thoughts about the piece. So basically he benefited from the someone having buyers remorse than benefiting from his error. As forthe Ichiro bat, Seaver glove, etc? How did he benefit from these errors? Corrections and refunds were made.


Jay Behrens (just so vikes know my full name since everyone else does)

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

Jay wrote: "Standard operating proceedure throughout the ENTIRE collectibles world is that authenticators sell what they authenticate."

I wasn't aware PSA or SGC sold cards they authenticate?

When did this happen?

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

Jay also wrote: "Jay Behrens (just so vikes know my full name since everyone else does)"

Actually in this instance I think using username that does not include an individual's name is probably in their best interest.

Clearly it has been the case that if you are critical of Mastro and/or SCDA you could face legal action for speaking your mind.

Additionally, Doug Allen is not above using an e-mail address on the N54 log-to search Mastro's customer database and identify you and your contact information.

So, I think cation is understandable on the part of Vikes (or anyone else in this instance).

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Aaron, you prove your ignorance with that statement. PSA has/does sell cards that it authenticate. As far I know, SGC does not, but it's always easy to point out an exception, there are always a few.
As to using your real name, it has a been along standing policy of this board to use your real name, or your posts will be deleted. I don't see this changing any time in the near future. If you don't ahve the guts to stand behind you accusations, then don't make them. Plain and simple.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

Jay: Where does PSA sell its own cards?

And thanks for confirming SGC does not sell cards they authenticate. I guess your statement that the ENTIRE collectibles world sells their own material was incorrect.

BTW, does CGC sell their own comic books?

Does AFA sell their own action fugures?

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

If you are ripping into Mastro and they shut you down from bidding on there auctions in the future then why are you bidding in Mastro auctions in the first place.

I would really like to know how many of the respondents that question the auction house policies actually bid in them and continue to do so?

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

I don't think it's a question of guts, I think it's common sense. Richard Planich used his own name and a frivolous lawsuit was brought against him in a court-decided attempt to silence him.

Besides, Vikes is using a username and a log-in. That's NOT violation of the board's policy. (Otherwise Pas would have his posts deleted as well.)Only posting as "Anonymous" is a violation.

And these aren't accusations, BTW. They are proven facts.

SCDA practiced undisclosed conflict of interest.

SCDA continues to practice undisclosed conflict of interest.

Dave Bushing does not have a Master's degree as he claimed.

SCDA will continue to use SCDA LOA's when selling their own material, in violation of their own "revamped" policy. (One that you yourself were shilling for SCDA. BTW, doesn't it bother you that they lied and used you to spread a lie?)

Etc.

Man, don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Aaron, I'm not gonna play symantics games with you. If you can't comprehend that authenticators selling their own items is an industry standard, then you are beyond hope. I don't claim it to be right or wrong. As vikes like to say, Just sating the facts.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

"If you are ripping into Mastro and they shut you down from bidding on there auctions in the future then why are you bidding in Mastro auctions in the first place."

I wasn't aware Mastro was shutting down user accounts in response to legitimate criticism of their policies. Is this another tactic to silence criticism now that lawsuits have proven fruitless?

"I would really like to know how many of the respondents that question the auction house policies actually bid in them and continue to do so?"

I absolutely do. (I just won an item on MastroNet last week.) I love MastroNet and the service and product they offer. I also feel that they have a serious problem with their handling of SCDA and undisclosed conflict of interest on game-used memorabilia (as well as not disclosing when card restoration has taken place). The two are not mutually exclusive.

Mastro, like other businesses, will occasionally come under criticism for various policies. That's simply a fact of the ENTIRE business world.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Aaron, once again you are wrong and jsut don't get it. The AUCTION HOUSE is the one that determines whether this is disclosed or not. MAstro offered to make available contact to all bidders of the DiMaggio bat that they knew at the time of the auction that Bushing had an interest in the bat. (Go ahead and insert your conspiracy theory here).

How SCDA continuing to do this. The Farve jersey in question clearly states that someone has an interest in it? Please point out where they are not disclosing anything? And I will say this once again in hopes that it might just sink in, if it's from an auction house, it is up to the AUCTION HOUSE to disclose this information.

Since you seem to be able to predict the future, who will win ROY for 2011 season?

The only thing you are right on is that Bushing never had the MAsters degree listed on his MAstro bio.

A .250 average. Almost good enough to get ya in the big leagues.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

"The AUCTION HOUSE is the one that determines whether this is disclosed or not."

I don't agree with that. SCDA could choose to stop consigning to auction houses (like Mastro) that refuse to list a conflict of interest in the item description. Alternately, they could refuse to offer their authentication services. I think if they were to present these option to an auction house, the house would rather agree with SCDA than lose their business.

"How SCDA continuing to do this. The Farve jersey in question clearly states that someone has an interest in it? Please point out where they are not disclosing anything? And I will say this once again in hopes that it might just sink in, if it's from an auction house, it is up to the AUCTION HOUSE to disclose this information."

In this instance Vintage Authentics scanned the LOA which revealed that Troy lied about SCDA's stated policy of not using SCDA LOA's when selling their own material. However, in last month's Mastro Collector Classic and Hunt Auctions, no such images were made available, so if SCDA consigned any material to either of those auctions, then the practice continues.

Thus the statement: "SCDA continues to practice undisclosed conflict of interest" is still, unfortunately, correct.

Jay, I am truly astounded to the levels you are willing to argue to prove that you were not manipulated. I believe as far as you are concerned this is no longer about SCDA and Mastro, but whether you were made to look foolish and you're unwillingness to accept that.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Aaron, you can believe whatever you like about me. I could care less what you opinion since by evidence of your posts, you do not have an open mind and have preconceived notions that you will not change no matter how wrong you may be. At least I've formed an opinion based on facts from every side. You cannot say the same.

Here is my challenge to you, since you seem so passionate about your stance, start an authenication service and run it the way you think all of them should be run. This should be a slam dunk and you will get rich. If I was a gambling man though, I'd be willing to bet on 2 things, you won't take me up on this offer (insert lame answer and reasons here) and if by some strange alignment of the stars you actually do, you will go belly up within a year becuase you probably won't find an auction house to agree to your terms. It's nice to sit at home in your win-win baracalounger, but obviously you don't understand the realities of the situation.

Do I like the situation. No. But until the auction houses change the way they operate, there isn't a whole the authenticators can do. I can't do much about it since they don't use authenticators or bid in the big house auctions, and that's pretty much how you influence a company. And as long as you keep bidding in MAstro auctions, you are condoning their every behiour that you detest.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

Yes, Jay, I accept your challenge! I am going to quit my job and inform my wife that I am going to start my own business in the high-risk world of authenticating sports memorabilia! Sure money might be tight and I'm not experienced and I would be starting the business based on a challenge from some guy on the Internet I don't know, but if I don't then Jay will say I don't have any guts!

Jay, if this is what you're reduced to, I don't think we have much to talk about anymore.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Aaron, such a predictable answer. You seem to have all the answers to properly running this type of business, so why would it be so hard to do it? According to you it's a very successful business model, so you shouldn't hesitate backing it up by starting an authenticating business based ony our model.

We really don't ahve anything more toalk about on this topic because there is absolutely nothing anyone can say or do that will ever change your mind even though 3 of went to the meeting convinced that Planich was right and after we had all the FACTS, changed our minds on the situation. But cecause we changed our minds based on the FACTS, we were duped because to visit a very crowded and cramped office with lots of neat stuff all over the place. Did it ever occur to you that the FACTS changed our mind?

Believe what you like, it's obvuious that nothing further can be gained responding to you because you won't even back up the very business model that you think will be so successful.

Wish I owned one of those win-win barcaloungers

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

Same to you, Jay. That bean-bag must be very comfortable.

[Archive]

Posted By: PASJD

I must have missed the original reference. What is a "win-win barcalounger"? Great phrase, but I don't quite catch the meaning. Thanks.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

it's a reference to Aarona nd Joe's position on the trip to Chicago. If we came back agreeing with what they beleived, they would be saying, "See, we right about all this DiMaggio bat nonsense" and if we came back, as we did, with our minds changed, they can could sit back and say that we were duped by the big city, bright lights and the tour of the Mastro offices and still maintian that they are correct about everything. This lead to my comment about them responding from the comfort of their win-win barcaloungers. No matter what happened, they were goign to be right.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

Aaron, AFA is a really bad example. AFA originated in Michigan and then moved their business to Atlanta...convienently located near Cloud City Collectibles which just happens to be the biggest seller of AFA graded Star Wars figures. So you figure so what, until you find out that Tom Derby who own(ed) Cloud City also owns a share of AFA. Of course in the interest of not appearing to have a conflict of interest Tom's sister is now the CEO of Cloud City. Not only that, but many of the people who worked at Cloud City now work at AFA.....sure no conflicts there.

As a side note Alan Rosen attempted to set up an action figure grading company in New Jersey with Plastic Dreams and Josh Velinsky while at the same time advertising in every issue of Toy Shop that he wanted to buy up your star wars figures.

Dan

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

Oh, Jay, is that what you meant with the "win-win" thing? Okay, let me clarify because you obviously misunderstood.

I don't care if you came back and agree with them 100% or if you disagreed with them. Your trip was a sham--a cheesy PR stunt that was essentially worthless since it was one-sided and unchallenged, so it really didn't matter what you came back with.

I would have had the same opinion had Adam tried to organize a one-sided, biased and unchallenged "demonstration" of Planich's take on the bat.

Both would have been a waste of time, if they aren't subject to any sort of knowledgeable, objective examination and scrutiny (which is why I kept saying that I would refrain from an opinion on the bat until both sides had a chance to argue their case in court).

Anyway, I hope that clears up any confusion.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

Interesting, Dan. Quite shady, indeed.

What about PSA? Jay said they do, but I wasn't aware they were selling their own cards.

How about CGC? I don't collect action figures or comic books, so I'm not familiar with their operations.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I'll let someone with more knowledgable about it give details, but I believe PSA and Superior are conencted at the hip. As for CGC, they are part of the same company that owns SGC, so I doubt they sell thier stuff either.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

I really don't know anything about PSA or CGC, but as a former toy collector (I say former because I now own my own vintage toy store and if I still collected toys I would never want to part with any of them) I know a lot about AFA and Cloud City. I should also say that I know of NO wrongdoing in the case of AFA and Tom Derby. Derby is recognized as a leading expert on authenticating Star Wars collectibles (especially prototypes). It's the appearance of a conflict of interest that should have been avoided and was not. There was a big to do over this a couple of years ago, but it seemingly just went away and nobody really seems to care. I think as long as the buyers in the game used industry continue to accept the leap of faith quotient this issue will probably die as well.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron

Very cool, Dan. Gotta love a vintage toy store. I still have all my old Super Powers figures safely stored away. Sadly though, the Star Wars figures are all gone...

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie