Author Topic: What's going on with the Heritage 4/23/13 Goetz Auction?  (Read 18169 times)

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • I see there is another comment in the E-sylum tonight from a collector who is concerned about the hubs/dies and is demanding they be withdrawn or defaced. (too late!--for the first batch, at least)
Re: What's going on with the Heritage 4/23/13 Goetz Auction?
« Reply #15 on: April 28, 2013, 09:27:30 PM »
I see there is another comment in the E-sylum tonight from a collector who is concerned about the hubs/dies and is demanding they be withdrawn or defaced. (too late!--for the first batch, at least)
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • I've never met a neck I didn't like.
  • I just read last night's E-Sylum (8-25-13) and have to ask why this Heritage rep appears so greasy?  If anyone read his original comments and compared them with what was published last night you'd have to agree that he is essentially saying the same thing that Goodman wanted him to correct.  This guy is still trying to sell this stuff as though it has no problems.  Whoever is selling this stuff through Heritage certainly isn't the same person that bought the material back in the seventies from 'Greedo'.  There is only one reason for Heritage to try and convince prospective buyers and that's more money.  Is it just me?  How'd the rest of you read this inaccurate correction?
Re: What's going on with the Heritage 4/23/13 Goetz Auction?
« Reply #16 on: August 26, 2013, 09:23:07 AM »
I just read last night's E-Sylum (8-25-13) and have to ask why this Heritage rep appears so greasy?  If anyone read his original comments and compared them with what was published last night you'd have to agree that he is essentially saying the same thing that Goodman wanted him to correct.  This guy is still trying to sell this stuff as though it has no problems.  Whoever is selling this stuff through Heritage certainly isn't the same person that bought the material back in the seventies from 'Greedo'.  There is only one reason for Heritage to try and convince prospective buyers and that's more money.  Is it just me?  How'd the rest of you read this inaccurate correction?
  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 36
    • KarlGoetz.com
  • Hello everyone;  Perhaps an update to what I've been doing since May.

    1)  I immediately contacted the Goetz Family upon reading Heritage's representative (Peplinski) comments stating that the upcoming sale of Goetz die material was recently purchased from the Goetz family.  They were unable to accurately determine when the material was sold but they presume it was in the early to mid-1970's.  They also assured me that they DID NOT recently sell any material to anyone.

    2)  With this knowledge in hand I contacted several dealers I know in Germany whom shall remain unnamed at this time.  The first I spoke to was aware of the Guido sale of the material in the early 70's to a large dealer in the Netherlands.  At the same time I was told all about the failed Gorny & Mosch 1994 sale of Goetz material...I digress, this story will be shared sometime in the future.
     The other dealer stated that this material was not in use after the War (WWII) but had changed hands, minimally, four times since its arrival at Heritage.*

    3)  I figured I better contact Heritage prior to the next sale in order to put them on notice that their claims of provenance were greatly flawed.  I contacted M.Peplinski by telephone mentioning the issue.  He denied making comments so I told him I would email him with the appropriate internet links.  Here is the email I sent to Heritage on Ausust 5, 2013:

    Hello Mr.  Peplinski,

    I am writing in response to our telephone conversation completed a few minutes ago.  This email is for written clarification of my intent for telephoning.

    As I had mentioned, I am the owner of www.karlgoetz.com, an on-line web presence, which is used to provide the history of Karl Goetz through our copyright ownership of Kienast reference books.  I also act as the express Karl Goetz family's agent in matters of Private Treaty transactions.

    I have contacted you with regard to written descriptions for the Karl Goetz die consignment which state clearly that the consigned material was recently purchased from the Goetz family.  Please see description at this link: http://www.coinbooks.org/esylum_v16n16a09.html

    The Goetz family has asked me to contact Heritage with their demand that a retraction be made with any mention of the family 'recently selling' material.  In the matter of this material, Guido Goetz sold this material in the early 1970's and thus, provenance is not 'fresh' as implied by written Heritage descriptions.  It is apparent to the family that this material was not correctly attributed prior to your first sale and they do not want to be associated with undocumented 'historical transactions' that do not follow their current Private Treaty transaction practices which document provenance of Goetz material to the fullest.

    In closing, it is unfortunate that Heritage may have been told by the private consignor that the consigned Goetz die material was recently purchased from the family.  This is not true.  We believe it is Heritage's responsibility to fully research consignor claims prior to the sale of consigned material.

    This matter can be resolved by posting retractions of implied material provenance to the appropriate publications where the misinformation has been published.

    We ask that you respond immediately with your intent for resolving this matter.

    Sincerely,

    Henry Scott Goodman
    for:
    Karl Goetz Family, Munich, Germany


    I was finally contacted back several weeks later by Heritage and told:

    "Thank you for your patience. I confirmed that we had a wire crossed. While the dies did indeed come from the Goetz family, the purchase from the family itself was made many years ago."

    Heritage then made a 'soft' retraction to the E-Sylum:

    “I was recently contacted by Henry Goodman at KarlGoetz.com about a discrepancy in my note published in your newsletter a while back. I mentioned that the Goetz dies were purchased from the Goetz family recently, which was incorrect. Actually, the dies were purchased from the Goetz family many years ago, but were recently consigned to our sale by their owner.

    As mentioned by Nosferatu in the previous post here, it appeared to me that Peplinski was saying the same thing, and implying that this was still 'fresh' material.  I immediately wrote to Heritage with the following email:

    Hello Again Mr. Peplinski,

    Thank you for writing to the E-sylum with a correction to your original Goetz die comments but I still have an issue with your new statement; "Actually, the dies were purchased from the Goetz family many years ago, but were recently consigned to our sale by their owner."

    While technically 'correct', the way you have written your comment still implies that the material was bought from the Goetz family by the same person (owner) that had recently consigned the material to Heritage.  This is not true.  Minimally this material has been owned by at least four entities since it was sold by the Goetz family.  I realize that you would like to present this material as 'fresh' but it isn't and its lack of history should be conveyed.  In order for your comment to be honest it should read; "Actually, the dies were sold by the Goetz family many years ago, but were recently consigned to our sale by their most recent/current owner."

    Perhaps you see me as overly critical.  All I am trying to do is convey to Goetz collectors that these lots have essentially no provenance from their creation dates 90-100 years ago until today.  With the exception of a general sales date sometime in the early 1970's by Guido Goetz to a dealer, we know nothing more.  Collectors need to know this rather than falsely believe that the consignor bought the material directly from the Goetz family in 1970 and is now selling the material via Heritage.

    I will be writing to the E-Sylum with a copy of this email's content to ensure that their readers are aware that this material has no provenance and likely never will unless previous owners come forth with much needed information.  I need not explain to you what other doors may be opened when material has no history.

    Sincerely,
    Henry Scott Goodman


    I never received a response from either Peplinski or Warren Tucker (VP) and, as promised, I sent the email to be published in the 9/1/13 E-Sylum.

    I believe, with time, I will be able to piece together a general provenance for this material but the period from Karl's death in 1950 until this material sale to a dealer in 1970 will remain problematic without further comparative analysis on the material.  At this time we do not know what Guido Goetz did or didn't do to this material.  I believe it is a mix of Karl's original material with a Hodge-podge of Guido's material thrown in for confusion.  Much work remains.  Heritage will, at least, agree to let me use the die images for future analysis as long as I attribute the images to them.

    Stay tuned, this isn't over yet.
Re: What's going on with the Heritage 4/23/13 Goetz Auction?
« Reply #17 on: September 01, 2013, 12:15:37 PM »
Hello everyone;  Perhaps an update to what I've been doing since May.

1)  I immediately contacted the Goetz Family upon reading Heritage's representative (Peplinski) comments stating that the upcoming sale of Goetz die material was recently purchased from the Goetz family.  They were unable to accurately determine when the material was sold but they presume it was in the early to mid-1970's.  They also assured me that they DID NOT recently sell any material to anyone.

2)  With this knowledge in hand I contacted several dealers I know in Germany whom shall remain unnamed at this time.  The first I spoke to was aware of the Guido sale of the material in the early 70's to a large dealer in the Netherlands.  At the same time I was told all about the failed Gorny & Mosch 1994 sale of Goetz material...I digress, this story will be shared sometime in the future.
 The other dealer stated that this material was not in use after the War (WWII) but had changed hands, minimally, four times since its arrival at Heritage.*

3)  I figured I better contact Heritage prior to the next sale in order to put them on notice that their claims of provenance were greatly flawed.  I contacted M.Peplinski by telephone mentioning the issue.  He denied making comments so I told him I would email him with the appropriate internet links.  Here is the email I sent to Heritage on Ausust 5, 2013:

Hello Mr.  Peplinski,

I am writing in response to our telephone conversation completed a few minutes ago.  This email is for written clarification of my intent for telephoning.

As I had mentioned, I am the owner of www.karlgoetz.com, an on-line web presence, which is used to provide the history of Karl Goetz through our copyright ownership of Kienast reference books.  I also act as the express Karl Goetz family's agent in matters of Private Treaty transactions.

I have contacted you with regard to written descriptions for the Karl Goetz die consignment which state clearly that the consigned material was recently purchased from the Goetz family.  Please see description at this link: http://www.coinbooks.org/esylum_v16n16a09.html

The Goetz family has asked me to contact Heritage with their demand that a retraction be made with any mention of the family 'recently selling' material.  In the matter of this material, Guido Goetz sold this material in the early 1970's and thus, provenance is not 'fresh' as implied by written Heritage descriptions.  It is apparent to the family that this material was not correctly attributed prior to your first sale and they do not want to be associated with undocumented 'historical transactions' that do not follow their current Private Treaty transaction practices which document provenance of Goetz material to the fullest.

In closing, it is unfortunate that Heritage may have been told by the private consignor that the consigned Goetz die material was recently purchased from the family.  This is not true.  We believe it is Heritage's responsibility to fully research consignor claims prior to the sale of consigned material.

This matter can be resolved by posting retractions of implied material provenance to the appropriate publications where the misinformation has been published.

We ask that you respond immediately with your intent for resolving this matter.

Sincerely,

Henry Scott Goodman
for:
Karl Goetz Family, Munich, Germany


I was finally contacted back several weeks later by Heritage and told:

"Thank you for your patience. I confirmed that we had a wire crossed. While the dies did indeed come from the Goetz family, the purchase from the family itself was made many years ago."

Heritage then made a 'soft' retraction to the E-Sylum:

“I was recently contacted by Henry Goodman at KarlGoetz.com about a discrepancy in my note published in your newsletter a while back. I mentioned that the Goetz dies were purchased from the Goetz family recently, which was incorrect. Actually, the dies were purchased from the Goetz family many years ago, but were recently consigned to our sale by their owner.

As mentioned by Nosferatu in the previous post here, it appeared to me that Peplinski was saying the same thing, and implying that this was still 'fresh' material.  I immediately wrote to Heritage with the following email:

Hello Again Mr. Peplinski,

Thank you for writing to the E-sylum with a correction to your original Goetz die comments but I still have an issue with your new statement; "Actually, the dies were purchased from the Goetz family many years ago, but were recently consigned to our sale by their owner."

While technically 'correct', the way you have written your comment still implies that the material was bought from the Goetz family by the same person (owner) that had recently consigned the material to Heritage.  This is not true.  Minimally this material has been owned by at least four entities since it was sold by the Goetz family.  I realize that you would like to present this material as 'fresh' but it isn't and its lack of history should be conveyed.  In order for your comment to be honest it should read; "Actually, the dies were sold by the Goetz family many years ago, but were recently consigned to our sale by their most recent/current owner."

Perhaps you see me as overly critical.  All I am trying to do is convey to Goetz collectors that these lots have essentially no provenance from their creation dates 90-100 years ago until today.  With the exception of a general sales date sometime in the early 1970's by Guido Goetz to a dealer, we know nothing more.  Collectors need to know this rather than falsely believe that the consignor bought the material directly from the Goetz family in 1970 and is now selling the material via Heritage.

I will be writing to the E-Sylum with a copy of this email's content to ensure that their readers are aware that this material has no provenance and likely never will unless previous owners come forth with much needed information.  I need not explain to you what other doors may be opened when material has no history.

Sincerely,
Henry Scott Goodman


I never received a response from either Peplinski or Warren Tucker (VP) and, as promised, I sent the email to be published in the 9/1/13 E-Sylum.

I believe, with time, I will be able to piece together a general provenance for this material but the period from Karl's death in 1950 until this material sale to a dealer in 1970 will remain problematic without further comparative analysis on the material.  At this time we do not know what Guido Goetz did or didn't do to this material.  I believe it is a mix of Karl's original material with a Hodge-podge of Guido's material thrown in for confusion.  Much work remains.  Heritage will, at least, agree to let me use the die images for future analysis as long as I attribute the images to them.

Stay tuned, this isn't over yet.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2013, 12:35:11 PM by Henry Scott Goodman »
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • I've never met a neck I didn't like.
  • This second auction (flooding of market) didn't appear as successful as the first.  Could it be because of the number of redundant lots, the fact that there has been some serious pre-auction cherry-picking, or the fact that new caches of medals restruck from many of these hubs and dies (probably in 70's-80's) have appeared on market from a couple of select Germany businesses, specifically those that consigned this material with Heritage in the first place?  I've seen a number of the cherry-picked pieces for sale in Germany by the consignor, and selling at outrageous prices. 

Re: What's going on with the Heritage 4/23/13 Goetz Auction?
« Reply #18 on: December 01, 2013, 01:04:22 PM »
This second auction (flooding of market) didn't appear as successful as the first.  Could it be because of the number of redundant lots, the fact that there has been some serious pre-auction cherry-picking, or the fact that new caches of medals restruck from many of these hubs and dies (probably in 70's-80's) have appeared on market from a couple of select Germany businesses, specifically those that consigned this material with Heritage in the first place?  I've seen a number of the cherry-picked pieces for sale in Germany by the consignor, and selling at outrageous prices.