Unless Troy comes back on here and answers some of the questions he's "too busy to answer", it seems MEARS is going to stand for the same things as SCDA....
This is a re-post from 1 June..I hope it answers your questions...If not, please feel free to drop me a line or post them here...
Dave Grob
---------------------------------------------------
It is great pleasure and real sense of excitement that I announce the establishment of a new organization, Memorabilia Evaluation and Research Services (MEARS). It combines my vision for a web based magazine with the services formerly provided by SCDA. My role is this new venture will be three fold:
1. I will serve as the editor and a principle contributor to the content of the site.
2. I will serve as the policy director for evaluation operations.
3. I will once again be involved in the evaluation of baseball uniforms.
Let me begin by telling you why the organization is called what it is. It will focus on two specific areas as the title implies.
Evaluation: These are the previous authentication services. Since this involves grading as well, I feel this is a more accurate term. One of the things the grading does is allow us to maintain a population report that gives collectors visibility on the number of various items by grade. This also feeds into the second aspect of this new venture, the one I am most excited about.
Research: This aspect of the organization involves making more information available to collectors. To maintain this, it also forces those involved in the evaluation services to constantly be re-educating themselves.
The web site will contain many features collectors will enjoy, including the ability to leverage a forum such as this one. One of the differences will be no anonymous posts will be permitted on the MEARS site. The web site will feature information and services for subscribers and non-subscribers as well. I am especially happy to say that the promise to offer this at less than an annual subscription to SCD will be kept. Individuals will be permitted to post adds as part of the subscription, provided they are willing to abide by certain conditions such as one year refund policy on any item sold through the site if the item is shown to be other than what it was described and sold as.
Some initial questions you might have:
Q: Will this new organization disclose what items it is consigning to auction?
A: YES. This was one of the conditions for my participation in the project. Those lots will be listed on the web site until such a time as other auction houses follow the lead of Robert Edwards Auction.
Q: Does changing from SCDA to MEARS in any way effect Dave Bushing’s policy on standing by the letters he has written?
A: NO it does not. Dave has always stated this policy applies on any letter he written, regardless who it was written under?
Q: What sort of content are you planning to provide and when will the site go live?
A: Our plan is to have the site up by 1 August. This is a very rough sketch of the first year schedule. We will also provide other articles throughout the month:
Month 1:
Organizations policies, procedures, and grading criteria.
Spalding Baseball Tagging
Initial Bat Population Report
Baseball Player Size Index
H&B Center Brand Photos
Feature Article: Building Your Own Reference Library
Month 2:
Rawlings Baseball Tagging
Wilson Hat Coding:
Hanna Bat Information
Feature Article: How to Spot Fakes or Alterations
Month 3:
Gold Smith/MacGregor Baseball Tagging
Information on Hockey Stick Manufacturers
Baseball Book Photo Reference Information
Feature Article: Collecting Tickets and Programs
Month 4:
Wilson Baseball Tagging
Quarterly Update of Bat Population Report
Update Baseball Player Size Update
Feature Article: Collecting Wire Photographs
Month 5:
McAullife Baseball Tagging
Football Player Size Information
Football Book Photo Reference Information
Feature Article: Major League Baseballs
Month 6:
Baseball Laundry Instruction Tagging
Basketball Player Size Index
Feature Article: Ethics in Authenticating
Month 7:
Lesser Known Baseball Tagging
Quarterly Update of Bat Population Report
Update Baseball Player Size Update
Basketball Book Photo Reference Information
Feature Article: Collecting Stadium Memorabilia
Month 8:
Football Tagging Information
Feature Article: Displaying, Storing, and Protecting Your Collection
Month 9:
Football Player Size Information
Hockey Book Photo Reference Information
Feature Article: Collecting Pins
Month 10:
Player index on game used gloves
Quarterly Update of Bat Population Report
Update Baseball Player Size Update
Feature Article: Collecting Awards and Trophies
Month 11:
Boxing Gloves and Trunks Index
Feature Article: Collecting Game Used Football Helmets
Month 12:
Basketball Tagging Index
Feature Article: Collecting Golf Memorabilia
Q: Why are you guys ending the relationship with SCD?
A: We wanted to expand to a robust on-line presence and medium since the inception of SCDA. It just never was the priority for SCD as it was for SCDA. This also gives me greater control over the editorial content that had been problematic at times. I also like the idea of being more time responsive in covering events and being able to do so with color images that is often cost prohibitive with paper publications.
I will try to answer any other questions you might have over the next few days. I plan to provide updates as well in terms of detailed information site features as they mature.
Actually, besides the question regarding what the MEARS acronym stands for (which was already answered) that re-post didn't answer any questions in this thread. It was just a post of a MEARS press release.
The questions were about if Troy is going to come back and answer all of the questions hanging in the air. If he doesn't, it doesn't seem to bode well for people's trust in mears- that when things get hot, you leave. Maybe that's not the case, but that's how it appears now.
Dan P.
Maybe I missed something, but I do not see any other questions. What do you consider the "unanswered questions to be? Some of the ones that have gone unanswered have been in reference to work Lou Lampson did not under SCDA (i.e., the Ripken St. Patrick's Jersey).
Dave
I guess the point is that like it or not MEARS and SCDA are linked because of Troy and others who worte questionable letters on items without relying on photographic evidence. The way Troy deals with past problems is a good barometer of how he's going to deal with them in the future, so as a vocal member of MEARS, this ends up being your problem.
He neglected to answer this from 6-15 regarding the $9000 Clemens jersey from Vintage Authentics which doesn't match any style worn by the team (posted by jerseycollector)
What did SCDA, Bushing and you base your original findings on?
Thank you,
Matt
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and this, once troy answered the question without answering the question
Troy
I appreciate the explanation. Not sure I was clear with my question- I'll rephrase- at the time the jersey was originally inspected, what was used to determine it was an authentic game jersey?
What was used with this specific SCDA examination?
Matt
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and this based on Troy's attempted explanation
Troy
So does that mean that you, bushing and scda wrote the letter of authenticity on this clemens jersey based solely on your perceived strong provenance?
It definitely wasn't based on photo documentation? How did you base your decision?
Matt
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
what about these from me after Troy admitted some items with scda letters had to be re-evaluated and pulled from the MastroNet auction though they were signed off on and received thousands of dollars in bids (dated 6-19)
Troy-
Interesting to hear this info. I now know thanks to your posting
1- You signed off on the mets jerseys even though you had no photos to match in your database AND even though you had never examined 2004 Mets jerseys, you felt it was okay approve it without photo matching. We'd love to see the worksheets-
2- you regularly sign off on items which are listed in a catalog before you really are sure about them (before your final letter)
You wrote: "We do not consider our opinion as "final" until the letters are signed and delivered to the auction houses.
Can you tell me where this policy is officially stated? Shouldn't mastronet or every auction house you work for print in their catalogs that the SCDA/MEARS letters are not final pending research? Otherwise you're completely misrepresenting what you're doing.
You're also saying your letters of opinion that are quoted as being in auction catalogs are not actually representative of your "final opinion." Troy, come on. Even you know that's a lame excuse. You guys signed off on a bunch of items that weren't legit because you didn't do a proper job of researching it and you got caught.
What authentication company would ever sign off on items, have the auction house print the catalog and then you complete your research and retract the bad items? What authentication company would put themselves in that position on purpose of making it look like they made authentication mistakes when items had to be pulled.
You mentioned you would answer questions-
Here are the questions Matt posed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are simple questions- and since you have your worksheets you can easily go back and find the answers:
1- Jevon Kearse Florida Gators jersey : Numbers sewn directly onto jersey instead of nameplate
What research was done on Florida Gators jerseys before this letter was written?
2- Pedro Martinez: Incorrect sleeves, missing customizations
What research was done on Pedro Martinez jerseys before you signed off on this jersey?
In the item description you wrote: "This white knit New York Mets home, button-down garment was donned by the ace during the first two weeks of the current season."
How can you write something like this having not properly identified the alterations Pedro always wears- did you take the consignor's word for it?
3- Curt Schilling: Incorrect Font on reverse numeral.
What jersey font comparisons were done with this jersey before you signed the letter?
4- David Wright, Tom Glavine, Carlos Beltran, pulled for further research of font and numberal styles.
How can there be questions on font and numeral styles AFTER a letter is written?- isn't this a basic factor of authenticating? So was a letter written by SCDA without checking if the fonts and numeral styles were correct?
In the description for the Beltran you wrote- "Offered here is a Mets home jersey donned by the superstar centerfielder during the first two weeks of the 2005 campaign."
If that is indeed a fact then you should have no questions about the font and numeral styles. Why pull it from the auction if you can confidently say he wore it during the first 2 weeks of the season?
Were many of these from the same consignor?
Interested in hearing your answers
Matt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave, I know this specifically isn't your problem, but it is if you associate yourself with the people who wrote these letters for SCDA. Aren't you worried for the future of MEARS? Now that we collectors have a forum in which to congregate, questions like these will not go away!
Dan P.
I think Troy addressed the Clemens jersey with his post of June 5th (5:16 PM)...Bottom line is no imagery analyis was done and too much faith was put in the source with out verifing it.
The same problem was at the root of issue for other jerseys Matt and Howard had questions on; that being a problem with procedures in that no imagery analysis was done.
While they where done under the SCDA umbrella, they are concerns for me with respect to MEARS. Those offering opinions on items are now required to check for images (at least Getty and Corbis) and those findings listed on the worksheet.
I am not worried about my association with MEARS or the fact that forums like this exist.I have been able to see the on-goings of SCDA through this forum and have used it to identify shortfalls in their policys and procedures. This is what I have taken as problems the collectors have had:
1. Need to publicly disclose if the person writing the opinion has a financial interest in the item. This will apply to ALL within MEARS.
2. Need to do imagery analysis and make that part of your findings.
3. Provide recourse (Be willing to buy it back) for bidders and buyers if found to be wrong.
4. Preference for multiple letters on lot's with more than one item.
5. Work to put more useful information into the hands of collectors so they can make informed purchases.
None of this can undo any of the previous mistakes, but it does serve as a basis to help ensure they are not made in the future..
Like many other people on this forum, I highly respect you. I find it troubling that you have to continually pick up the pieces for others who don't appear to have the high standards you do. I find it sad that you have to have a NEW policy that says authenticators must use photographic evidence as part of their research.
What that shows me is ALL SCDA letters are in doubt.
If I were Troy I would alert EVERY buyer who paid their hard earned money for items with SCDA letters where the authenticator counted on the supposed provenance and not actual photographic evidence. Since these worksheets exist (Troy was very proud to announce that he had them) it shouldn't be hard to offer up.
Dave- the old saying goes "People define you by the people with whom you associate" You are much better than that. They're dragging you down. Mears is not even going yet and you're doing constant damage control.
My two cents
Matt
Thanks for the kind words..I am familiar with that expression..I really feel that a person is defined more by what he does and the manner in which it is done. I am committed to making a go of this...
