LORD OF THE RINGS???
I thought it was interesting when I read recently that Montreal’s Classic Auctions sold off Peter Pocklington’s five original Stanley Cup rings for a sum exceeding $320,000. I thought it was even more interesting that these (supposed) rings had already been sold in a Lelands auction in August of 2001.
A few days after the auction’s conclusion, well known collector Shawn Chaulk announced that he had purchased all five rings on behalf of an anonymous local investor in Northern Alberta. I contacted Chaulk, a friend from way back, and he let me know that he was aware of the commotion and would be speaking to Pocklington to get his side of the story. Well – that conversation took place and the sale has now been voided.
Pocklington, the multi-millionaire former owner of the Edmonton Oilers, claims that the rings sold in 2001 were in fact his deceased father’s. He had made duplicates of his rings and had given them to his dad. Pocklington claimed in the ‘Letters of Authenticity’ that accompanied the rings that they were his – meaning he owned them. “They were mine because my dad gave them back to me before he died,” he said. Besides the fact that this is incredibly misleading and possibly fraudulent, it is not the end of the story.
Four of the five rings sold in 2001 had the word “Owner” engraved along with “Pocklington” on the side. Most of the rings that sold a couple of weeks ago did not have “Owner” on them. Does it make sense that the owner’s father’s rings would say “Owner” on them, while the owner’s rings themselves would not? Pocklington told Chaulk he never compared the rings; he just left them sitting in a safety deposit box.
Did the man that bought Wayne Gretzky from Nelson Skalbania and single-handedly put Edmonton hockey on the map, somehow pull one over on the collecting public? Suffice it to say that Pocklington either misrepresented the rings he sold in 2001, or sold rings that were not his earlier this month. How would you liked to have been one of the winning bidders in the 2001 auction that awoke on June 11 to read the ring that they thought they owned had just been sold to someone else?
Pocklington also claimed he did not mind selling these cherished keepsakes, since the money was going into his grandchildren’s trust, and he “also had replicas made so I will be able to look at them and share them with the grandkids.” Are there replicas in existence as well? Exactly how many copies of each ring are there?
Looking back at the Lelands auction page, you can see they sold one of his replica rings in December/2001. What exactly differentiates a “replica” from one of the original sets he had made up for himself and his father?
Marc Juteau, President of Classic Auctions, was also the original purchaser of the 2001 set of rings. While he would not comment for this story, he did say in an email that you should not “believe everything you read.”
An industry source close to the transaction concurs that Pocklington knew how proud it made his father to wear rings with “Owner” engraved on them, but Pocklington himself didn’t care either way. The story also goes that Pocklington very “matter of factly” handed over the original rings in 2001 and may not have known the importance of stating they were his fathers. All sources do agree though that Pocklington could have been more forthcoming with information on the original rings and that Juteau likely made a mistake in not providing this information to the public.
There is confidence surrounding the recent rings though, as their jewel value is apparently considerably higher than the rings sold in 2001. Pocklington has also expressed a willingness to get new ‘Letters of Authenticity’ written for the original winning bidders, this time stating the rings actually belonged to Basil Pocklington.
After hearing Pocklington’s story and discussing it with the buyer and several industry leaders, Chaulk decided it was best to distance himself from the entire situation. “There is way too much controversy now”, said Chaulk. “It would seem that everyone in the hobby thinks there is something fishy with this whole thing. There are some inconsistencies for sure and everyone has some reasonable doubt about the authenticity of the rings. My partner had his heart set on getting these rings for their hockey history and really wanted to keep them in Alberta. Owning them would just not be the same anymore with all the controversy that has gone on.”
Chaulk was not looking forward to having the conversation with Juteau, one that was going to cost the auction house around 25% of the overall selling price. Chaulk still considers Juteau a “hobby leader and friend” and holds him in high regard.
We may never find out the absolute facts surrounding this incident. Which rings sold belonged to Peter and which ones belonged to his father, or did Pocklington even know the difference? Was information knowingly withheld by Pocklington in order to attract higher bids, or was it all an innocent omission? Where did all these additional rings come from?
What we do know is that a public figure that should have known better was not forthcoming with obviously important information. The original rings could have been sold as having belonged to Basil Pocklington, but it is too late now.
There was a joke that made the rounds in Edmonton during the 1980’s and into the 90’s.
How do you know when Peter Pocklington is lying? His lips are moving.
(Hersh knows nothing about blogging. All writings are for entertainment purposes only. No one should take offense to anything that is written, and no one should mistake any individual point for one of absolute fact. Hersh’s views are not necessarily the views of Frozen Pond Inc. (but probably are).