Q & A With Michael O'Keeffe

[kingjammy24]

so aside from proactive changes in the hobby, you'd also like to see prosecution for misdeeds.

at face value, the information uncovered has the effect of educating the collecting community. i think the most common consequence of this education has collectors making smarter purchasing choices rather than encouraging legal prosecution. in the past 2 yrs, i've noticed a difference in buying trends on ebay and i believe it's due to this forum. as recently as 3+ yrs ago, you'd see all sorts of garbage items receiving multiple bids. you don't see that nearly as much anymore. additionally, i think much of the information uncovered has greatly reduced the trust that many collectors had in authenticators and auction houses. i think the general collecting community is seeing that, for all of their chest-pounding and hyperbolic bios, they aren't the experts they make themselves out to be.

between collectors voting with their wallets and persuing legal action, i have to think the former is much easier. it's also likely to be more effective.it's a lot easier for a person to say they're not going to buy anything with lampson's name attached to it then it is to get law enforcement interested. if you recall, getting them interested in the marinos wasn't easy. eventually it happened because of the monetary scale of things. as well, legal action isn't always guaranteed to work. alternatively, killing the financial livelihood of anyone is more likely to put them out of commission than most lawsuits, fines, or even minor sentences.

"To be honest, I thought this thread would have gotten a little more activity. ..The Network54 thread about Mastro being investigated by the FBI in the vintage baseball card forum has 281 posts. We're barely talking about it here."

i think at this point, it's pretty much all been said and most people know. i think most people knew and agreed with everything o'keeffe said.

"Wonder what would happen if the FTC told Lampson he had to prove he was qualified and be accountable for what he writes."

i'd be impressed if the ftc even managed to contact him. seriously though, lou's fully aware that he's operating in an unregulated, unmonitored, "anything goes" industry and he takes full advantage of it. beyond a simple business permit, there are no formal qualifications, credentials, licenses, professional memberships, etc required in any of this. you don't even need a high school education. the only thing you need to do is convince people you're an expert, which lou has apparently done. the thing is, most people will believe anything if you keep telling it to them over and over.

"I did my own homework and pretended basically that Lampson didn't even look at those things."

i'm sure most others have the same mindset in that situation. the thing is, ignoring lampson is what enables this to keep going on.

"..it's tough to ignore the auction houses who are selling rare pieces you want. Perhaps I should have taken a stand and boycotted, but this is a hobby that I would like to enjoy, and if I started cutting off everyone who paid Lou Lampson then I would be out of the hobby."

understandably, it's a tough situation which forces a person to prioritize. i don't think there's an objective right or wrong here. what i am saying is that you can't have your cake and eat it too. if you prioritize your collection over the health of the hobby, then that's fine but you can't then also wish something would be done about lampson. conversely, if you prioritize the hobby over your collection, then you have to accept that you're going to miss out on some pieces. it's all up to the individual. i'd probably say that most are going to prioritize their collections and personal interests. if you really feel passionate about the hobby as a whole though, then i can't see why anyone would patronize lampson or his employers. it's like saying you're passionate about the environment, and then buying Exxon stock because it's personally profitable.

i don't think you'd be cut out of the hobby though eric. i've never bought a lampson piece and have a nice little collection. to date, i've also never bought from GFC, Historic, Mastro, or AMI and couldn't care less if they banned me. getting out of auctions forces you to devise creative ways of finding pieces. anyway, AMI banning you and rob is so ludicrous it's comical. why was chris banned though.. simply for associating with you two miscreants? ultimately, AMI needs collectors more than collectors need AMI. afterall, the royalties from "is love still in style" must've run out by now.

rudy.

[kingjammy24]

short addendum to my last post.

when doug allen was caught in that facemask swapping debacle, dave grob took an admirable stance and prioritized his ethics over profit. recently he posted on the mears site about his efforts and desire to enact an industry wide association/industry wide standards. some of his comments seem relevant to this discussion.

"Many still remain content to complain, but have show little interest in doing much else. If I really thought industry personnel outside of MEARS were serious about the issue of establishing industry wide standards, I would gladly travel to Cleveland or any where else they chose to meet on my dime and facilitate these discussions. I think a positive "baby step" would be something as simple as a standardized industry vocabulary...game used, team issued, etc...
Until that time, I will focus my efforts on what MEARS has done and is doing voluntarily since this remains an unregulated industry.

- Mandatory and public disclosure by all MEARS employees on the sale of their items either through an auction house or for sale via the MEARS Web Site.
- Use of worksheets so collectors can see why a grade was given.
- Archiving Letters of Opinion for future reference to include items deemed Unable to Authenticate.
- Ensuring the collecting public has both private and public means to contact us should issues or question arise.

Until such a time as the industry, outside of MEARS, decides upon collective standards and internal regulation, is forced to do so by legislative action, the only recourse or change agent will be the collecting public. I have made personal and professional decisions that have both inhibited my ability to work in this segment of the industry and add items to my own collection because there are just simply organizations and individuals I will not do business with."

i'm going to venture that the lack of interest from industry sources is intentional. that is, they likely feel that it's in their best interests not to have any standards, regulation, or a governing body. typically, such things are at odds with profit. why impede the gravy train? where's the money in ethics or standards? most times, such things are established by governments for the best interests of constituents, not by private business whose sole interest in often in profit. beyond simply doing the right thing, there's no real incentive for an auction house or authenticator to go for what grob is suggesting. despite all of their yapping about integrity and ethics, many of their actions have shown they have little to no genuine interest in such things.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it."

there's too much easy money to be made in this industry for ethics to get in the way.

rudy.