Antitrust lawsuits against PSA, JSA, and others

[Lordstan]

Apparently a couple dealers have filed antitrust suits against multiple TPAs for essentially colluding to control the autograph market.

Disclaimer: I have no dog in this fight. Just providing the info.


http://www.courthousenews.com/2015/0...d-a-cartel.htm

[Teamgluck]

This looks like one to follow

[RichardSimon]

Link not working.

[Lordstan]

I check it again and it's correct. Maybe it was taken down. Let me see if I have it in my cache.
Nope I don't have it. Looks like the whole website is down. Not sure if temporary or not.

[felada]

It was working earlier. Looks like they are claiming collusion because psa and jsa will not authenticate their items.

[Sophiedog]

Let's see if this one works
http://live.autographmagazine.com/pr...alled-a-cartel

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by felada

It was working earlier. Looks like they are claiming collusion because psa and jsa will not authenticate their items.

Discovery should be a hoot! It will most likely end up solidifying the defendants reputations. How great would the following exchange be:

Todd M's counsel: "Please take a look at this autographed photo of Tom Hanks that my client has authenticated. Was this submitted to PSA/DNA for evaluation? "

Joe O: "Yes. It was found to be nowhere near close to what an authentic signature looks like."

Roger E: "I'm not sure that is even a photo of Mr. Hanks."

Steve C: "Why am I even here for this crap?"

Tom Hanks: "That is not my current signature.That is not my signature from the past, and before you ask, it will never be my signature in the future."

Todd M: "It was probably signed while you were drunk, or skiing."

Tom Hanks: "I don't drink or ski."

Joe O, Roger E, Steve C (in unison): Are we done here?

Todd M's counsel: "I saw Madonna in the reception area. Let's skip to Joe Frazier..."

[travrosty]

Here is a cache of the original link.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by Deertick

Discovery should be a hoot! It will most likely end up solidifying the defendants reputations. How great would the following exchange be:

Todd M's counsel: "Please take a look at this autographed photo of Tom Hanks that my client has authenticated. Was this submitted to PSA/DNA for evaluation? "

Joe O: "Yes. It was found to be nowhere near close to what an authentic signature looks like."

Roger E: "I'm not sure that is even a photo of Mr. Hanks."

Steve C: "Why am I even here for this crap?"

Tom Hanks: "That is not my current signature.That is not my signature from the past, and before you ask, it will never be my signature in the future."

Todd M: "It was probably signed while you were drunk, or skiing."

Tom Hanks: "I don't drink or ski."

Joe O, Roger E, Steve C (in unison): Are we done here?

Todd M's counsel: "I saw Madonna in the reception area. Let's skip to Joe Frazier..."

While That Mueller guy prays (preys) all day and steals all night, he has done some good and some bad IMHO. First, I love his business plan of returning anything for life, but he has more stories than a library to smoke screen the reality when people question the authenticity.

I've stated numerous times that that's the same big shot that argued with me about 'Providence" and "how he did many signings he did with Mickey Mantle, Mantle this, Mantle that blah blah blah. We were discussing "this" Mantle and the guy went on for 4 pages on his "last smear website", not Animal Planet that Travis started and handed over to this nut job. He lost all of his credibility in my eyes that day 5 years ago when he sold this Mantle on his website. I saved it so I could share it every time the name comes up. I hope he gets everything he wants praise to god. To think that Steve and Roger are being taken for the ride is a Joke just like this one Mr Mueller played on some nit wit. Here's the Beautiful Mantle that "Mr Sue everybody" is hanging his hat on.

[Exhibitman]

Here's a lesson in the law of unintended consequences: I was seriously looking at a Mueller item on eBay but have now decided to pass on it given what I've read here.

[packs]

I don't understand the complaint. If your item isn't authentic, then why would they authenticate it? It sounds like they're essentially suing because they can't sell their forgeries as authentic examples and they're blaming the companies instead of admitting they own forgeries.

[Lordstan]

I think the plaintiffs are alleging that the items in question are authentic and that the TPAs rejected them in an attempt to deny free trade. Furthermore, if I understand antitrust correctly, I think they are alleging that the TPAs conspired to do so.
Seems difficult to prove to me. Even if it is true, I'm not sure how you would prove it.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[packs]

Why would they do that though? What would they have to gain by not certing authentic items? The fee is collected either way and they have no claim to secondary market sales. The whole basis of their complaint makes no sense to me.

[travrosty]

http://www.courthousenews.com/2015/0...d-a-cartel.htm

the original link is up again.

[Lordstan]

Originally Posted by packs

Why would they do that though? What would they have to gain by not certing authentic items? The fee is collected either way and they have no claim to secondary market sales. The whole basis of their complaint makes no sense to me.

The plaintiffs are claiming that the TPAs are not certing them as real because it improves the TPAs standing in the autograph business world by holding down others and playing favorites. By controlling who they certify for, they would exert a certain amount of influence over the marketplace.

I think many of us here have experience bias by the TPAs in one way or another, I just don't know how they can prove it based on 10 photos.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by Lordstan

The plaintiffs are claiming that the TPAs are not certing them as real because it improves the TPAs standing in the autograph business world by holding down others and playing favorites. By controlling who they certify for, they would exert a certain amount of influence over the marketplace.

I think many of us here have experience bias by the TPAs in one way or another, I just don't know how they can prove it based on 10 photos.

The TPA's should not know who they are certing for.
Does anyone know for certain if that is the case.

[travrosty]

They are not suppose to know but if someone comes up to the tpa at a show and shows them the cert from a dealer, or tell them it has a cert from whomever, then they know and they shouldnt be able to know.

Quick opinion is always linked to an auction listing, so the tpa will know what dealer cert it has if it has one listed.

[packs]

I'm just not clear on how a company would know you're a dealer or why they would care if you sold your authentic signature after paying their fee. When I drop off items for certification I'm just some guy walking in. I don't hand them a business card.

If your item isn't authentic, why should they pass it just because you want to sell it?

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by packs

I'm just not clear on how a company would know you're a dealer or why they would care if you sold your authentic signature after paying their fee. When I drop off items for certification I'm just some guy walking in. I don't hand them a business card.

If your item isn't authentic, why should they pass it just because you want to sell it?

The dealers werent dropping off their own items. Other people who bought the item from that dealer were then dropping them off for certification, and they included the dealer cert with the item when they dropped it off.