PSA/DNA Mastro Controversy

[Eric]

This was posted on the collecting website "Zipper's collecting obsession"

Friday, June 16, 2006
The PSA/DNA Plot Thickens


http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5253/273/320/Image2.jpg (http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5253/273/1600/Image2.jpg)As I have been documenting the ongoing Bill Daniels vs. PSA/DNA and MaestroNet (http://zipper68.blogspot.com/2006/04/psadna-authenticator-was-also.html) suit...

Bill Daniels reports that he sent five signed photos to Global Authentication, Inc. (http://www.globalauthentication.net/) These are the same five photos that were depicted in the MaestroNet catalog respresenting a sample from the lot he won. Bear in mind, that all of these photos were consigned by PSA/DNA employee Zack Rullo and were alleged to have been signed in-person. They were all authenticated by PSA/DNA. The signed photos were Michael Jordan, Manny Ramirez, Pete Sampras, Shaquille O'Neal and Wayne Gretzky.

Global Authentication, Inc. deemed all of the photos to be fakes.

More news is on the way... and the plot will thicken...

http://zipper68.blogspot.com/

[earlywynnfan]

This whole issue baffles me. Sure, I've always been very un-impressed with PSA and the authenticators, and I know that Mastro isn't perfect, but this lot sounds like outright crap! I'm really surprised they auctioned it off.

Ken

[suave1477]

hey Eric this situtation was posted here on the forum a few months back. Is this updated information as far as the trial proceedings?

[Eric]

I think the fact that these items failed at authentication is the new information.
Eric

[trsent]

I have known Zach Rullo since he was a little boy (now he is a big boy with a big beard) and I know he used to be one of the kids at The Chicago Stadium who would sit there after every game and get autographs (Bulls, Blackhawks and major concerts) plus sometimes obtain game used equipment.

Zach was also known to hang out for endless hours at hotels awaiting rock stars for autographs. I know I have a picture somewhere at home of Zach with Michael Stipe getting out of a taxi cab signing stuff for him.

I do not believe Zach intentionally authenticated not genuine items as he has been accused, but this is just from my relationship with him over the past fifteen years or so.

In the meantime, Global didn't like five autographs of a lot of five they were sent? Only five autographs were hand picked by the customer (who doesn't like Mastro for some reason) of a lot, why did he not have Global authenticate every photo in the lot in question?

Did Global decide to pick on PSA/DNA since they are the competition? This is the same company that left Historic Auctions and their customers hanging without a reply for how they have not authenticated items that they were advertised as authenticated? Is this not the same company that has not replied to Eric of this forum with questions about what happened that they are not authenticating for Historic as advertised?

I am concerned this whole issue is just that, someone causing trouble for others as that is how it looks to me on the surface.

[trsent]

By the way, who wrote the article in The New York Daily News?

What crap that the link doesn't give the author of the article that they reprinted. I think that link possibly should be removed from this site, as how can we give links to an alleged news article on another web site, but the author of the article is not listed with the alleged news article.

Food for thought?

[Eric]

I can tell you that the article was attached to that link yesterday. Here is another, crazy long link to it.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:z5vl5znHYpUJ:www.nydailynews.com/sports/story/411128p-347803c.html+mastro+psa/dna+daily+news&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&ie=UTF-8

[trsent]

Ok, so Michael O'Keeffe wrote the article. I wonder why he is always picking on Mastro Auctions. Hasn't he every player poker with Bill Mastro? He is really a nice guy.

[ChrisCavalier]

Did Global decide to pick on PSA/DNA since they are the competition? This is the same company that left Historic Auctions and their customers hanging without a reply for how they have not authenticated items that they were advertised as authenticated? Is this not the same company that has not replied to Eric of this forum with questions about what happened that they are not authenticating for Historic as advertised?
Hello Joel,

In case you haven't seen them (which I would find hard to believe), here they are the responses on the forum regarding Global's situation with Historic Auctions:

http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=2954&page=4 (posts 34-43)

http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=3177

What exactly are you trying to accomplish with your post? It seems to me that you are trying to unjustly paint a bad picture of one company in an attempt to justify another company whose credibility has been questioned. Further, not only have you unjustly accused a company of leaving "Historic Auctions and their customers hanging without a reply", you have also claimed the same company was involved in some form of conspiracy that is clearly unsubstantiated.

Maybe you can clear things up for me because as of right now your comments above seem to me to be both misguided and inappropriate. I look forward to hearing your reply.

Sincerely,
Chris

[trsent]

My comments are based on the fact that a New York Post article shows that Global authenticated signatures as not genuine while PSA/DNA authenticated them as genuine.

I was just asking if maybe there is an issue there where the autographs were looked at with crooked glasses because they had a chance to put PSA/DNA on the spot.

I also am sorry that you find my comments about the Global - Historic are in the wrong. I know a major member of this community does not feel his questions were answered from the posts you linked as he emailed them ex post facto and did not receive a reply about the confusion.

I know you have a strong alliance with Global, and I am not trying to pick on them. I am confused that The New York Post elected to pick on Mastro and PSA/DNA with only using Global as an authenticator. My comments were unfair, yes, because for all I know the autographs in question may not be genuine. My comments were based on speculation, which was wrong, but at the same time I jumped to the Historic Auctions issues which again, a major member of this community has not had his questions answered from Global, which was misplaced in my post above.

I do find it odd that the five random samples were all found not genuine and only one authentication company was mentioned. If it was any other company I would have made similar comments.

[ChrisCavalier]

My comments are based on the fact that a New York Post article shows that Global authenticated signatures as not genuine while PSA/DNA authenticated them as genuine.

I was just asking if maybe there is an issue there where the autographs were looked at with crooked glasses because they had a chance to put PSA/DNA on the spot.

I have to say that I think this is a serious allegation and one that should not be made without any basis for such speculation.


I also am sorry that you find my comments about the Global - Historic are in the wrong. I know a major member of this community does not feel his questions were answered from the posts you linked as he emailed them ex post facto and did not receive a reply about the confusion.

Who did this "major" member email these unanswered questions to? If they still have questions, please feel free to tell them to post the questions on the forum since that is why the forum exists. If they don't want to post them they can email the question(s) to me or Eric and we will post the questions for them. Net, if there are questions still unanswered they should be asked.


I know you have a strong alliance with Global, and I am not trying to pick on them. I am confused that The New York Post elected to pick on Mastro and PSA/DNA with only using Global as an authenticator. My comments were unfair, yes, because for all I know the autographs in question may not be genuine. My comments were based on speculation, which was wrong, but at the same time I jumped to the Historic Auctions issues which again, a major member of this community has not had his questions answered from Global, which was misplaced in my post above.

Joel, my comments have nothing to do with any "alliance" as you suggest. The forum, and the rest of the site, exist so our members can make more informed decisions about their collecting needs. I can speak with unequivocal certainty that our commitment lies to the collecting community. I would make the same comments to you whether it was Global or any other entity I think you may have unfairly accused of wrongdoing.


I do find it odd that the five random samples were all found not genuine and only one authentication company was mentioned. If it was any other company I would have made similar comments.

I think it might be a good idea for you to ask the person writing the article this question rather than accusing anyone of looking through "crooked glasses". I think that is simply not the responsible thing to do.

Just my thoughts.

Sincerely,
Chris

[both-teams-played-hard]

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5253/273/320/Image2.jpg

Our experts have tediously studied the image of the so-called Jordan "autograph". We are experts. Friggin' geniuses, for that matter. Jordan didn't sign this. This is opinion number 2. Our expert staff has not seen any other autographs from the lot. But, the entire advisory staff wanted me to relay this message to forum members: "Adjacent to refuse...IS refuse".

You've been a great audience, thanks for coming.

[trsent]

I am sorry you feel that I cannot speculate on a scenario of a company that has ignored emails from someone on this forum who I will not name but I believe his emails should receive replies since he is a very powerful member of this industry. You know my phone number if you wish to discuss this individual situation personally.

As for my speculation, it may be wrong, but I just find it odd that five items (with PSA/DNA stickers) were all found not genuine, and they allegedly were random from the lot?

I will not be contacting the author of the article, I am confused how the pick on certain members of the community so often and I will let them continue their journey. As for what I read on the forum, it really seemed odd to me how the whole situation has been investigated and authenticated.

You know that you and I believe in this industry, so we are on the same page just different sides to this situation. I am not blessing what may have happened, I was shocked to see Zach's name put up in lights after all I have known of him over the years, and I just hope he was in the right in the end.

[b.heagy]

If I was Mastro and had a customer that spent $100 Grand with me in a previous auction, I would take the lot back and give them a full refund with a sincere apology after buying them dinner. Hash it out with the consignor and keep the customer happy. Move on to the next thing. Now you have an ugly story that will not be good for the hobby. Just my 2 cents.

Bill

[Nathan]

Joel,

It may just be me personally, but if I buy a sizable lot of autographs then the first five I'd look to have a second opinion on are the most prominent....one is considered the greatest basketball player, one considered the greatest hockey player ever, one considered one of the all-time greats in tennis, and two that would have a pretty good resale value right about now. What better way to help out your own wallet than by having the two main companies authenticate them?

[sammy]

Just some more food for thought.

I had some signed items that Global had authenticated as genuine. Their stickers were also affixed to these items.

I sent these items to PSA/DNA and they failed every one.

Personally I don't like to use either company anymore because I really don't feel they are objective, or knowledgeable enough.

"Piece of advice GAI - PSA.

If you must put your stickers/advertisements on photos, PUT THEM ON THE BACK!!!

It is so tacky and looks bad on the front.

[trsent]

Joel,

It may just be me personally, but if I buy a sizable lot of autographs then the first five I'd look to have a second opinion on are the most prominent....one is considered the greatest basketball player, one considered the greatest hockey player ever, one considered one of the all-time greats in tennis, and two that would have a pretty good resale value right about now. What better way to help out your own wallet than by having the two main companies authenticate them?

I understand, but as the previous post mentions, maybe there is issues when one authenticates after the other. I am not stating the autographs in question are genuine or not, just there is a mental bias when one authenticates after the other I believe.

I also agree with the previous posts, a $100,000.00 a year customer should have never found issues when they asked for returns. If the 8x10s were not mint, that is a good sign they were autographed in person, but it still doesn't authenticate them - PSA or Global.