"I made my points in yesterday's blog and stick to them."

excellent. then explain this one again:

"what they didn’t realize is that Lou never authenticated it and caught all the things wrong with it and many more things that the message board member didn’t even catch."

robert explicitly stated that he found a multitude of issues but felt it was unnecessary to detail all of them given the profundity of the first two issues. if he never told you all of the things he found, then how is that you know lou found things he didn't?

"I never meant to note that you didn't do a good job on what you discovered. My point was that many people were making it sound like Heritage acted irresponsibly by going ahead to promote the Namath helmet before it was ever authenticated."

chris, while i always enjoy watching a good back-peddle, the fact is you explicitly stated that lampson found issues that robert didn't. explain how you know this.

rudy.

"...but what they didn’t realize is that Lou never authenticated it and caught all the things wrong with it and many more things that the message board member didn’t even comment on in his original thread."

that's your amended and improved version chris? that sets the record straight? good grief - no offense, but you are a piece of work my friend. how about this for setting the record straight chris -

"i intentionally and falsely implied in my blog that i was privy to information that allowed me to confidently state that lampson discovered the same inconsistencies as the guu member and that lampson also discovered many more inconsistencies that the guu member didn't even catch. i intentionally and falsely implied this, even though i had no such knowledge, in an effort to lend more credence to my argument. one could even say that i'm guilty of the same thing heritage is guilty of - jumping the gun in an effort to better position that which i was selling - my argument and point of view. but unlike heritage i didn't act promptly and responsibly by correcting the problem once my errors were brought to my attention - instead i chose to continue to float my sale."

also chris, at the risk of sounding ungrateful, what up with your "apology"? out of one side of your mouth you apologize for your presumptuous comments yet, in the same breath, you quickly amend your apology by adding that lampson "may or may not have" found many things about the helmet that i didn't "even catch". speaking of presumptions, i presume that you won't take it personally if i just go ahead and pass on your "apology".

and about your blog today - more specifically, about your following comment in your blog today... "For the original man who photomatched the Namath helmet, I never meant to note that you didn't do a good job on what you discovered."

no, what you meant to note was that you were privy to all of my findings and were therefore able to recognize that lampson identified each and every one of them and many more to boot. that's what you meant to note chris. and it's perfectly clear why you meant to note this, isn't it?

speaking of lampson chris - when you made all of those phone calls in order to get to the bottom of this namath thing, did you happen to ask anyone why lampson, heritage's go-to equipment guy, couldn't form a preliminary opinion on the helmet based on the photos alone? why heritage had to wait for him to arrive in dallas before he weighed in on the topic? you wrote in your blog -

"Keep in mind, Lou Lampson, its game-used equipment authenticator wasn’t scheduled to come in to their Dallas offices until this week, when he will look at all lots for the May Signature sale."

given heritage's apparent relationship with lampson i find it incomprehensible that heritage wouldn't have contacted him weeks ago about the helmet. any thoughts on this?

Robert, give me a call and I would be happy to share my thoughts. I am working on a story today and have been very busy, so typing a long response this week can't happen.

Thanks,
chris

i would rather that we communicate publicly, at the guu forum or your blog - further, my question to you doesn't require a lengthy response. again,

when you made all of those phone calls in order to get to the bottom of this namath thing, did you happen to ask anyone why lampson, heritage's go-to equipment guy, couldn't form a preliminary opinion on the helmet based on the photos alone? why heritage had to wait for him to arrive in dallas before he weighed in on the topic?

no rush - when you can.

Honestly, I didn't ask them that... My personal assumptions are that they felt so strongly about the provenance that they ran with the promotion and were waiting for Lou to come to Dallas early this week for the full analysis

From what I understand, they had a letter from Namath and the inscription looked at by JSA and PSA/DNA before they ran the promotion. Both passed the inscriptions and sigs. I know that doesnt mean an item is real as far as game-use goes (obviously), but my point is the fact that the sigs passed was just one more notch into its decision to jump the gun with the early promotion. (This is all my opinion)
If you want a better answer, that would be a question for HA.