Re: HELP; Anyone dispute an auction house over item cannot photomatch?
I deal with a lot of photo matching on the hockey end and I used to work for Leland's back in 2003 and I authenticate for many auction houses now.
My suggestion is contact the direct source, meaning call the Yankees and get in touch with the equipment manager who worked during this time frame and ask the right questions.
Most teams in professional sports that sell their game used items, especially during patched years do patch up a lot of extra sets and even post patch jerseys that were not during the time frame on when the patches were worn. Why do they do this? One to have extras just encase for backups, two and probably the main reason why they do it, patched jerseys are more coveted and most of the time sell for more then none patched jerseys.
According to the auction description you may have a case if you prove them wrong which won't happen (read below), the auction house made a mistake in giving what they believe is the exact time from of when the jersey was worn. Where Steiner does not, their LOA is very vague only stating that it is a game used jersey with 10 and arm band, which in a court of law would not mean that Jeter wore it given what the auction says it was worn. Like people have said in this post it could have been worn before being patched and the patch could have been added on after the fact. Unfortunately in a court of law you would need to show you have every photo of Jeter from every inning from that time frame and a clear enough photo to be used in photo matching. The odds of that happening is zero. What your making now is a generalization statement, which would not hold any water.
Photo matching albeit fun and exciting and when done properly can solidify authenticity and improve a pieces monetary value, it can not be used as the end all be all for an item. For the very reason above, no one has every photo of every inning of every game of every player. All it takes is the photographer to miss that one inning which the jersey in question could have been worn.
I personally believe a customer must feel comfortable with their purchase from an auction house. But when you registered with an auction house, you did agree to abide by all terms set forth by that auction house and on many occasions an auction house will stand by those terms which I believe they are doing now in your case. Now if you find out from the Yankees equipment manager that he put on the armband and numbers onto sets that were not used during the auction houses specific time frame you have a case that holds water and could be used in a court of law. The auction house would then bare the burden of proof because other sets were lettered up and how does the common collector determine which is which, this would also put a cloud on every jersey ever offered by Steiner with the arm band and numbers. All of them would need to be determined.
Last note - the equipment managers of the world control the hobby always have and always will. Just remember that.
I hope this helps a little bit with your Jeter situation.
I deal with a lot of photo matching on the hockey end and I used to work for Leland's back in 2003 and I authenticate for many auction houses now.
My suggestion is contact the direct source, meaning call the Yankees and get in touch with the equipment manager who worked during this time frame and ask the right questions.
Most teams in professional sports that sell their game used items, especially during patched years do patch up a lot of extra sets and even post patch jerseys that were not during the time frame on when the patches were worn. Why do they do this? One to have extras just encase for backups, two and probably the main reason why they do it, patched jerseys are more coveted and most of the time sell for more then none patched jerseys.
According to the auction description you may have a case if you prove them wrong which won't happen (read below), the auction house made a mistake in giving what they believe is the exact time from of when the jersey was worn. Where Steiner does not, their LOA is very vague only stating that it is a game used jersey with 10 and arm band, which in a court of law would not mean that Jeter wore it given what the auction says it was worn. Like people have said in this post it could have been worn before being patched and the patch could have been added on after the fact. Unfortunately in a court of law you would need to show you have every photo of Jeter from every inning from that time frame and a clear enough photo to be used in photo matching. The odds of that happening is zero. What your making now is a generalization statement, which would not hold any water.
Photo matching albeit fun and exciting and when done properly can solidify authenticity and improve a pieces monetary value, it can not be used as the end all be all for an item. For the very reason above, no one has every photo of every inning of every game of every player. All it takes is the photographer to miss that one inning which the jersey in question could have been worn.
I personally believe a customer must feel comfortable with their purchase from an auction house. But when you registered with an auction house, you did agree to abide by all terms set forth by that auction house and on many occasions an auction house will stand by those terms which I believe they are doing now in your case. Now if you find out from the Yankees equipment manager that he put on the armband and numbers onto sets that were not used during the auction houses specific time frame you have a case that holds water and could be used in a court of law. The auction house would then bare the burden of proof because other sets were lettered up and how does the common collector determine which is which, this would also put a cloud on every jersey ever offered by Steiner with the arm band and numbers. All of them would need to be determined.
Last note - the equipment managers of the world control the hobby always have and always will. Just remember that.
I hope this helps a little bit with your Jeter situation.
Comment