This is a question for the folks at MEARS. I have been looking through the Mastronet auction. Some good stuff.
Are there any lots in this auction which were consigned and authenticated by members of MEARS?
Thanks for the list of 44 lots in the current Vintage Authentics auction in which MEARS has a financial interest. This is a step in the right direction for the hobby.
Maybe its me.Mastronet has a 1990 Marino game used jersey authenticated by Mears.The only problem I see is that in 1990 the Dolphins had the Silver Season patch, and Joe Robbie memorium armband.Some nice photos on Getty.I'm I missing something?Help
Sorry about the delay, but with the National, I am just getting the final consignment list..Even with this delay, we have still provided the bidder two weeks notice on this. My goal is to have this information available at about the same time as the lots are listed on line for viewing.
These are lots that a MEARS employee has a financial interest in, regardless of the % of that item they own.
1189, 1195, 1204, 1208, 1209, 1211, 1213, 1214, 1217,1223, 1337,1348,1350, 1370, 1752, 1753, 1755, 1759 for a total of 18 Lots.
As mentiond before, if you have questions about a particular item or worksheet, please contact eith Mastronet or Troy as I don't have copies of the worksheets or the letters..Always happy your questions, but in cases like this, I won't have the information at my fingertips..
For the record, here are the items authenticated AND consigned by MEARS in the current Mastronet auction. Some high grades here on rare items.
Matt
1189 1917-21 H&B "Black Betsy" Professional Model Bat - Style Attributed to Joe Jackson Graded A-9 by MEARS.
1195 Chuck Klein 1943-44 H&B Game Used Bat Graded A-7 by MEARS
1204 Ernie Banks 1969-71 H&B Game Used Bat Graded A-9 by MEARS
1208 Extremely Rare Don Drysdale 1965-1968 H&B Game Used Bat Graded A-10 by MEARS
1209 Billy Williams 1965-1968 H&B Signed Game Used Bat Graded A-10 by MEARS
1211 Johnny Bench 1973-1975 H&B Game Used Bat Graded A-4 by MEARS
1213 Lou Brock 1977-1979 H&B Signed Game Used Bat Graded A-6.5 by MEARS
1214 Rod Carew 1973-1975 H&B Game Used Bat Graded A-6 by MEARS
1217 Joe Morgan 1973-1975 H&B Game Used Bat Graded A-8 by MEARS.
1223 Barry Bonds 1999 Sam Game Used Bat Graded A-7 by MEARS
1337 Augie Galan 1944 Brooklyn Dodgers Game Worn Satin Jersey Graded A-9 by MEARS
1348 1968 Leo Durocher Chicago Cubs Game Worn Manager's Road Jersey Graded A-7 by MEARS
1350 1969 Don Young Chicago Cubs Game Worn Jersey and Signed "Curse" Glove Graded A-8 by MEARS
1370 Ryne Sandberg 1989 Chicago Cubs Signed Game Worn Uniform
1752 Sam Rice 1920's Bat-Rite Game Used Bat Graded A-7 by MEARS
1753 Mickey Cochrane 1934-1944 H&B Game Used Bat Graded A-6.5 by MEARS
1755 Eddie Mathews 1959 World Series Game Used Bat Graded A-8 by MEARS
1759 Dick Allen 1976 H&B Bicentennial Game Used Bat Graded A-6 by MEARS
There are some high end items with high grades (8-10) for the 8/18 lots consigned. All the more reason we would want to make sure bidders knew well in advance about this relationship. If you have a question about the basis of the grade for these lots, or any other...please contact MASTRONET or Troy about what is recorded on the worksheet.
I took nothing from your post in offense...As MEARS moves down the road, doing things like disclosing lots on a voluntary basis, I need for people to see:
1. We are working towards issues that are important to the collector.
2. We are responsive to questions or issues.
If I don't point out that they can ask for the what the basis of the grade was and how they can "find out for themselves and make an informed bid/purchase decision", then the screen will be flooded with "see their hidding something" or "all their stuff is graded high."
In this case, with this auction, of the approximately 150 lots we looked at (many are multiple item lots so the actual number of items is well above 150) we had 18..of those, less than half were high grades (8-10)..
The purpose of all this is to simply provide clarification and context to what we are doing as an organization and as indiviuals within that structure..
I heard at the National that a website is about to post all the H&B shipping records. Will that information be on the MEARS site? I was under the impression that H&B wouldn't allow it - according to a recent comment from Troy on this forum. Looks like they changed their minds?
Very good question and thanks for asking...I think you might be refering to a site that John Taube and Vince Malta are involved with...I believe that they are going to make formatted records available in the form of spreadsheets for Hall of Famers along the same lines as was done in "Bats: Professional Hillerich & Bradsby and Adirondack, 1950-1994.
This is a bit different than "posting all the H&B shipping records" as you might have been told. The MEARS site will feature information on a number of bat manufacturers, to include Hanna, Spalding, Kren, and a number of the current manufacturers as well.
Yes, that's the site I was referring to. According to what I was told, the spreadsheets you make reference to are taken directly from the H&B shipping records. Although not in the same format as the actual physical H&B shipping records, I do believe the information will be complete. I also heard that Vince Malta discovered additional bat records at H&B that go as far back as 1911 - which will also be included on this site and in Vince's forthcoming book.
Can't wait to see the bat information on MEARS' site. I've seen some letters from MEARS that reference Rawlings, SAM, and other bats as matching factory records - I didn't even realize those records were available to anyone in the hobby. It will be exciting to see all this information online - especially the H&B records!
Hi Dave... Does MEARS have financial interest in any lots in the Vintage Authentics' auction? I'm specifically interested in knowing about lot 162, the Joe DiMaggio coaches bat. I believe that one of MEARS employees won this bat from Hunts' H&B auction on November 6, 2004 (lot 203). If it is the same bat, it looks like someone has cleaned it dramatically. Has the MEARS employee done this? Why? Has it affected DiMaggio's signature? Additionally, Spence's PSA/DNA letter, which was highlighted at Hunts, is not included with Vintage Authentics. Why not?
Please contact Vintage Authentics as to the condition of the bat and or the autograph as I have not seen the item. As to if the item was cleaned as you suggest, I do not know. Our employee did not consign the item. If it was cleaned by them or another person, that is outside of what I am looking at as far as policy. The only issue I would have with this is if this cleaning took place during our evaluation.
It may not be the answer you are looking for, but my position has been that our employees are free to buy and sell. If they choose to consign it an auction house we are retained to support, that would be disclosed. To head off any questions about me turning a blind eye to what our folks do in relation to buying and selling, I would take issue with any item that was cleaned in order to mask something.
Thanks for responding, Dave. I have asked Vintage Authentics and they will not respond. You say that your employee did not consign the item, but you also state that MEARS has a financial interest in this lot (162). Please explain.
Be that as it may, here are photos of the item from Hunt and from Vintage Authentics. It's the same bat, but looks completely different. Was it cleaned to mask something?
Something else just occured to me. You would only be concerned if it was cleaned during MEARS' evaluation. But in this case, the owner, who just happens to be the evaluator, appears to have cleaned the bat. Does it matter at what point the bat was cleaned (before MEARS was established or after) or shouldn't we question the motives behind the actual act?
I could not agree more, hence, as I said in my previous post, I would be concerend if the cleaning took place prior to our work if the intent was to mask something...By that I mean if the cleaning was done to remove anothers player number on a bat or with respect to a uniform, to mask a name or number change.
Dave, one last question for you to ask the evaluator/consigner, please. In the Letter of Opinion, under Forensic Evaluation, the bat length is stateed to be 34.75 inches. In the Comments field, however, the bat is said to be 35 inches in length. Forgive my ignorance with bat measurements, but are 34.75 inchers considered 35 inchers or has an oversight occured? Just curious. Thanks for your assistance in answering these.
Great question once again..This is not a plug for a book as much as it is to show what the basis of the this issue is and why it is stated as such.
In the guide that Dave Bushing and Dan Knoll wrote in 2001, page 59 has this information on bat lengths:
" As for lengths, bats were hand sanded from the barrel end to get weights correct, so a 34 3/4" bat will be refered to in the shipping records as a 35" ."
Hope this helps on this issue and I still owe you an answer on the bat cleaning and letter on the autograph..
One other question which I'm not sure you can answer, but can you list the items which MEARS sold directly to Mastro and then provided authentication?
I know Mastro has been spending millions lately aggressively buying collections as well as smaller items, so it seems likely that they've been buying items from MEARS as well.
Since MEARS would be both the initial seller as well as the authenticator for the buyer, this presents an obvious conflict of interest as well and could influence authentication results and grades.
Please excuse the sarcastic title to this post, but I am trying to retain both a sense of humor and a sense of professionalism with respect to this question once again. There have been times when I have had to go back and re-read threads to ensure I am clear about a question/issue and that I have responded.
I am pretty sure I have since I started this thread with my post on 23 July about the issue of MEARS disclosing lots that have been sold to auction houses (thead above). I am also pretty sure that Aaron saw this post since he responded to it. I am reasonably sure that I made my feelings know as I replied to Aaron’s disapproval on 24 July in the same thread.
He and I have a had a long standing difference of opinion on this matter. I believe that individuals can occupy any number of roles within the hobby, as I have stated numerous times, to include a post titled “The Many Faces of the Hobby” on 24 July (thread below). Aaron does not and that’s fine.
The one thing that must be made clear, is that MEARS does not buy and sell nor does MEARS as an organization consign items to auction houses. If that was the case, then myself as an employee and our investors would be entitled to the profits from those sales. We are not.
Neither my position or any of the information provided here is new. I don’t expect that Aaron’s opinion on this matter has changed either…thus I am left responding “beating a dead horse.”
It is not that I don’t want to respond. I feel I have done a good job in being responsive, maybe not with the answer that was desired, but at least to let you know what I think and why.
Thanks, Dave. I think you did a great job in responding to the loophole.
I just thought it should be repeated in this thread that while MEARS is disclosing their conflict of interest for items they've consigned to Mastro, MEARS is not disclosing its conflict of interest in items it has sold to Mastro.
Far from beating a dead horse, I'll probably end up asking you the same question every auction MEARS is involved with when you fail to note it on your own (as in this thread).
As long as that's made clear, I think this is an extremely productive thread and shows good solid progress.
At least we both have an epectations about what to epect in the future. As far as me "failing to note this on my own," I thought it was my post that brought this issue to light and the explaination to why the policy was what it is was own doing since I was the first person to bring it up...
In any event, while I do consider many of the things that MEARS is doing constitutes progress, asking the same question only to get the same answer does not. That's ok as it will just be something else we will have to agree to disagree with...
No prob, Dave. I wouldn't want to be reminded of it either.
Anyway, if you post something patting yourself on the back about transparency and what you consider to be a small percentage of MEARS owned items in a given auction, I think the same readership should be reminded that the claim and figures do not reflect the number of items which MEARS sold to an auction house outright and then authenticated on behalf of that same auction house.
There's always new collectors and readers to consider who might not know what you are leaving out.
I wanted to alert the board that Dave Grob and I have been discussing my questions off-line and he's been a tremendous help. The bat was purchased from the Hunt H&B auction by a MEARS employee and he states that it has not been altered in any way since receiving it. It may be a question of different lighting/photography at the auction houses and or a digital touch up of the photos by Vintage Authentics. Perhaps VA has cleaned the bat after it was dropped off for consignment? Additionally, MEARS will locate the Spence letter of authenticity or provide a new one at their cost if the original can not be found.
All in all I am very satisfied with Dave and the profound difference in customer service being provided. I'm still skeptical about the bat, however. VA is not returning my calls, so perhaps they're the ones who have done what I suspect. I don't mind the new/polished look to the bat, I'm just worried that there will be a difference in the wood's appearance around the signature where it wasn't cleaned.
Hi Dave. I finally got Vintage Authentics on the phone to inquire about the bat. Troy's email is correct, Bushing did not clean the bat, he had it sent out to get it cleaned prior to submitting it to VA. They know this for a fact and said it was absolutely cleaned at Bushing's edict.
Dave, I'm not upset with you at all, you have been great. This is just another example, however, of Bushing's dishonesty. He plays with symantics (100% not cleaned by him) is true, but he could have said it was cleaned by someone else. I, along with a growing portion of the hobby, don't trust him. This will eventually tarnish what you are trying to accomplish with MEARS. I will never trust any letter, or company for that matter, that Bushing is involved with.
--- davegrob1@aol.com wrote:
> Jerry,
>
> I hope this helps you out...
>
> dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Troy Kinunen <kinunent@hotmail.com>
> To: DaveGrob1@aol.com
> Sent: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 20:21:23 -0500
> Subject: RE: Fwd: DiMaggio Bat
>
>
> I just spoke with Dave Bushing. He assures me and is
> 100% certain the bat has never been cleaned by him.
> It was won in the Hunt auction, shipped to him, and
> then consigned to Vintage Authentics in the exact
> same condition as it was sold at Hunts
> Regarding the diffence of photos in VA vs. Hunts
> auction, having experience from producing SCDA/MEARS
> letters, vintage authentics may have used better
> lighting or enhanced the image with photo shop.
> Regarding the PSA/DNA letter, Dave says it may have
> been misplaced. He would check his office. If the
> original letter cannot be found, Dave will get a new
> letter from Jimmy Spence, at his cost if any.
>
Not only has it been proved that Bushing has written letters on bogus items, now we learn that his stories are also bogus. If the latest issue does not leave the hobby shaking their heads, nothing will. It appears Bushing purchases the bat, sends it our for cleaning, and then indicates "he" did not clean it (what a great play on words-he sends it out, however, did not PHYSICALLY clean it himself, and can hide behind this as not being directly involved with the cleaning).
We have seen Bushing's SCD Authentic go out of business, Lampson get the hook from Bushing with the new MEARS venture, MEARS once mouth piece Troy told to keep quiet, and now this. What is so unreal is the fact that Dave Grob continues to be the only positive voice for this group, while the hobby laughs. Where there is smoke, you can bet the fire if near. Dave, when will you smell the smoke-I hope it's before the fire gets you. When will you and the rest of the hobby wake up?
Jerry- I just spoke to you about the DiMaggio auto coaches bat. i had mistakingly assumed it had been cleaned because you had said it looked different than when it appeared in the Hunt Auction. I have the bat in my possession right now and it looks exactly the same as it did before. there is still some toning on the bat that extends from the left portion of the slugger label to about 4 inches to the right of the label. maybe our photography doesn't show it as well but it definitely has NOT been cleaned. when you said it looked different i had assumed that it had been cleaned and i responded without talking to dave and troy first. my fault, sorry for the confusion. it is in the same condition as it was when it sold in hunt auction. my apologigies on behalf of vintage authentics for any inconveniance to you and my apologies to MEARS for speaking without having all of the details first. i have the bat pulled if you need a close up of the area that has the toning. additional photos can be made available to anyone that inquires although it will be with a digital camera.
Jerry wrote, "Bushing did not clean the bat, he had it sent out to get it cleaned prior to submitting it to VA. They know this for a fact and said it was absolutely cleaned at Bushing's edict."
Steve, how can you mistakenly say this? Seem like the only way to say something like this is if you had the information. If you didn't know the answer wouldn't you have just said "I don't know"
i made a mistake and i apologize. i made an assumption based on jerry saying that the bat looked completely different than it did in the hunt auction. the correct thing would have been for me to make a few calls to see if it had or hadn't been cleaned but i assumed it must have been if it looked completely different. we have 732 items in this auction and i try to be as up to speed as possible on every one. when i actually went to grab the bat i noticed that it had the same toning that existed before. again my apologies to troy, dave and the rest of the MEARS staff for bringing on any needless controversy. i have a digital close up for anyone who would like to see the dark toning on the label. i an be reached at steve@vintageauthentics.com
Well, it's become a case of "he said... he said". Be that as it may. Perhaps the bat was cleaned, maybe it wasn't. I don't know for sure, and really don't care if it was. All I was after was a shot of the label and autograph in the same photo to compare wood coloration. If there wasn't a noticable difference (bat cleaned or not), I would have bid.
I should have trusted my initial instincts and stayed away from the begining because of Bushing. I've been burned by him twice in ten years, it's not going to happen a third time. As a matter of fact, my collection has dwindled to nearly nothing because of the state of this hobby/business. I'm very happy with the few items I have remaining and simply wanted to add this last piece and call it a day.
In closing, I want to thank Dave Grob for his sincere help in trying to accomplish what appears to be a task that will never be done... cleaning up the authentication segment of this hobby/business. I'm fearful that his good name will, in time, be brought down via association. Grob understands the concept of honesty from the onset instead of trying to tell a person what they want to hear in order to sell an item.
THERE MUST BE A WAY TO DETERMINE IF THE BAT WAS CLEANED
August 4 2005, 1:11 PM
I WOULD THINK THAT THERE IS A WAY TO DETERMINE IF THE BAT HAS GONE THROUGH A RECENT CLEANING OR HAS HAD SOME KIND OF CHEMICAL(S) APPLIED TO IT. I'M NOT A CHEMIST OR BAT EXPERT BY ANY MEANS, BUT ISN'T THERE A TEST(S) THAT COULD BE UTILIZED TO DETERMINE THIS? I DON'T KNOW WHAT THINK HERE
JERRY, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE OTHER STORIES AS WELL
Re: THERE MUST BE A WAY TO DETERMINE IF THE BAT WAS CLEANED
August 4 2005, 1:36 PM
I really don't want to get into everything. Just a few generalities. I bought a glove off of Dave many years ago. The condition was not as stated (the glove was in terrible shape) and a refund was not granted. I won a bat from a Slater auction with Dave's letter of authenticity. When SCDA began, I brought it to him for an updated letter. All of a sudden the bat became a team ordered bat with an A4 instead of being a solid gamer. He joked that Jimmy Spence would have to eveluate his signature on the original letter to ensure that he actually wrote it.
Look, Bushing has aided this hobby with his service. We are all human... make mistakes, greed sets in, etc. We are all guilty of this at one time or another. When I was dealer, though, honesty was first and foremost. In the end, that brought me better returns than anything else. If Dave Grob is able to accomplish what he's setting out to do, it will be a tremendous advancement for all of you. I say "you", because I am done with it all. I have been for a while and only had a bat such as this on my want list. I still feel, however, that he is taking on an impossible task as long as the association is there.
I won the DiMaggio signed coach’s bat from the Vintage Authentics Auction and received it today. I have to say that I’m satisfied in each and every respect. First, I must thank Steve at VA for an extremely smooth transaction. It was my first purchase with them and I would definitely bid with them again. On to the bat that I questioned in the past. I’m very happy with it. I don’t believe it was cleaned, but if it was, it was done very lovingly with great attention to detail. I see no evidence that any shenanigans occurred, though. The prior posts, where everyone seemed to be putting their foot in their mouths, seem to be a bunch of guys hastily trying to play damage control when there was no reason to do so. Perhaps they were trying to give answers that I/we wanted to hear without knowing the true facts. In the future, when this occurs, take your time when responding, it’ll be more accurate and less destructive on yourselves. Finally, I want to thank Dave Grob for his sincere help with this matter as well as congratulate him for the new MEARS website. I still think you have an extremely steep uphill climb ahead, but you are headed in the right direction. All great journeys begin with a few small steps. As far as I’m concerned, I’m satisfied and the matter’s closed. Dave, you’ll only hear from me again about this if Jimmy Spence happens to find a problem with the DiMaggio signature. Otherwise, all the best to all of you…
