What do you think of this Heritage offering?

[travrosty]

What do you think of this Heritage offering?

Late 1930's Lou Gehrig single signed baseball.

http://sports.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7070&lotNo=80016


Sorry too late, what do you think of THIS one?

World series 1917 final out baseball.

http://sports.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7070&lotNo=80105


sorry, too late on that one, too, what about THIS one.


http://sports.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7070&lotNo=80011

bid is at $100,00 what do you think? Would you bid on it if you could?

is this the best 1927 signed Yankees ball there is? Is it worth $200,00+ estimate?

[RichardSimon]

I guess many here are afraid of a banning by Heritage if they offer an opinion on that ball. Travis and I have already been banned so what the heck.
I did an informal survey among five people whose opinions I respect a LOT and four of them disagree with the TPA's opinions on this ball.
Another person who read my post, a hobby veteran with MANY years of experience, just e mailed me and agreed with the majority of the people in my informal survey. That now makes five out of six people who have expressed an opinion that differs from the TPA's on this ball.

[shelly]

I find it interesting that if you like something from Heritage you are a bright and good person.The the othe side of the story is. If you dont like what you are looking at your are foolish and you should never be allowed to darken our doors.
I am willing to take that gamble and say I have many bad feelings about this ball and I would not buy it.:p
Since I have yet to purchase anything from them there is little to loose on either side. I will keep you informed if anyone cares.

[Fuddjcal]

I find it interesting that if you like something from Heritage you are a bright and good person.The the othe side of the story is. If you dont like what you are looking at your are foolish and you should never be allowed to darken our doors.
I am willing to take that gamble and say I have many bad feelings about this ball and I would not buy it.:p
Since I have yet to purchase anything from them there is little to loose on either side. I will keep you informed if anyone cares.

I'll take a gamble too and say that I would tend to agree with the previous 3 posters over any insider cert crap going on at PSA, JSA & Heritage. Go ahead and ban me. I don't even collect anymore do to this situation and wouldn't be caught dead giving Heritage ONE RED CENT PERIOD, in any event. Ban me, ban everybody, I could give a rats ass. This cert stuff is among the most ridiculous situations I have every known and don't wish to be a part of all the scamming and scheming. It boils down to people in general have little or NO integrity in this business and it's downright laughable.

[travrosty]

Maybe they could DOUBLE ban me? If they really wanted to punish me, they could reinstate my account!

I also got correspondence from a long time collector, with decades of experience, and he has big concerns over this ball also, the uniformity in the spacing, and start - stop points of the signatures, the green ink, the babe ruth signature, no one signing on the sweet spot. And then there are the signatures themselves.

It just doesn't seem to add up. the contrivance of someone putting the positions down on the baseball, made even more suspicious because it was one of the ballplayers who supposedly wrote the positions down. Doesn't he know the positions of the people signing when he is on the team? And how does the authenticators know that the positions were inscribed by Combs hand? Not enough to go by!

the person who contacted me loves these old baseballs and won't be bidding on it either.

I hear a big name in baseball autographs doesn't like it either and will make it be known soon.

[RichardSimon]

Double banning,,, ouch, does that include 20 lashes?? :):).

[thenavarro]

If they really wanted to punish me, they could reinstate my account!



Nice one, that one made me smile :)

Mike

[RichardSimon]

The auction takes place about eight blocks from where I live.
Since I am barred from bidding I wonder if they would let me attend the preview.
I would guess not, since they require ID for admission and I guess that I am on some sh-- list there.

[RichardSimon]

Nice one, that one made me smile :)

Mike

+1

[mighty bombjack]

There is no way I would pay that price for that or any ball, even if I had the money to spend. The best Yankee ball? Clearly that is an opinion, and many will disagree.

Real autos? Clearly that is an opinion as well, and many are disagreeing. Seems like JSA and PSA have deemed it real, as has one of the five people Richard polled? Is that like the one dentist that doesn't recommend Trident gum to their patients that chew gum?

My point is, all we have about those signatures are opinions, and opinions of people giving the opinions. Somebody paying over 100 K for a baseball with writing on it needs to be comfortable with what they are buying.

I'm more interested in the removed lots that Travis posted. We're they deemed bad after being posted to the auction, or what? We'll never know I guess.

[RichardSimon]

My point is, all we have about those signatures are opinions, and opinions of people giving the opinions. Somebody paying over 100 K for a baseball with writing on it needs to be comfortable with what they are buying.

I'm more interested in the removed lots that Travis posted. We're they deemed bad after being posted to the auction, or what? We'll never know I guess.

In this hobby someone spending $100K on a ball only has to have a COA from one of the TPA's to be comfortable.
And the reasons for the removal of the two baseballs are already posted on the Hauls of Shame website. The balls were made after the alleged dates of use and signing. That info on the website came from our own Brandon Grunbaum, who knows more about baseballs then anyone that I know.

[David Atkatz]

Actually, Wayne, we do know. (Thanks, Peter.)

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=16843#more-16843

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/baseballs_tagged_as_fakes_jIX5flVt2HaXwJHxUG9LsJ

[mighty bombjack]

Actually, Wayne, we do know. (Thanks, Peter.)

http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=16843#more-16843

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/baseballs_tagged_as_fakes_jIX5flVt2HaXwJHxUG9LsJ

That is fantastic! Great stuff on the part of Brandon and Peter.

[mighty bombjack]

In this hobby someone spending $100K on a ball only has to have a COA from one of the TPA's to be comfortable.

That's up to them, isn't it? I think they're crazy, but people spend bigger money than that on things I wouldn't touch all of the time. And there are clearly several people who disagree with those TPAs (though exactly who some of those people are is not at all clear).

I'm glad that, in the case of the balls that went poof, they had to be removed because of iron clad proof and not warring opinions. When all we have is the latter, the "truth" is going to equal perception and perception alone.

[RichardSimon]

That's up to them, isn't it? I think they're crazy, but people spend bigger money than that on things I wouldn't touch all of the time. And there are clearly several people who disagree with those TPAs (though exactly who some of those people are is not at all clear).

I'm glad that, in the case of the balls that went poof, they had to be removed because of iron clad proof and not warring opinions. When all we have is the latter, the "truth" is going to equal perception and perception alone.

I can assure you that the people (when I ask questions of people, I usually don't turn around and then print their names in a forum) I asked are all very highly regarded in the hobby and one of them is Shelly, who has posted his thoughts on this ball, in this thread, and who at this very moment is trembling at the thought of retribution from Heritage :).

[travrosty]

Double banning,,, ouch, does that include 20 lashes?? :):).

maybe stoning by baseball, they got a couple now they aren't doing anything with.

[dgo71]

I'm sorry if this is off topic, but I've never really participated in auctions from the larger houses and I am wondering, point blank, who can you trust? I know Coaches Corner is downright laughable (how they are allowed to even continue operating is beyond me) and I see many auctions reviews in SCD for Heritage, Kevin Savage, etc. In fact I just read an article on this '27 Yanks ball and the story was it was part of Earle Combs' personal collection and there was some provenance with it to that effect. However, if something like this Yanks ball is questioned by people whose opinions I trust immensely, it makes me wonder what type of work the auction houses are doing to prevent themselves from selling forgeries. Are there any auction houses that are unquestionably trustworthy?

[mighty bombjack]

I can assure you that the people (when I ask questions of people, I usually don't turn around and then print their names in a forum) I asked are all very highly regarded in the hobby and one of them is Shelly, who has posted his thoughts on this ball, in this thread and who at this very moment is trembling at the thought of retribution from Heritage :).

I respect that Richard, but it's very easy to say that "experts" agree that something is bad, as Nash is wont to do in his postings. Others are quick to accept that as truth because they have an agenda that needs satisfying. I could easily say that I've spoken to several experts who think this Yankee ball is good. People would ask for names then, no?

[mighty bombjack]

I'm sorry if this is off topic, but I've never really participated in auctions from the larger houses and I am wondering, point blank, who can you trust? I know Coaches Corner is downright laughable (how they are allowed to even continue operating is beyond me) and I see many auctions reviews in SCD for Heritage, Kevin Savage, etc. In fact I just read an article on this '27 Yanks ball and the story was it was part of Earle Combs' personal collection and there was some provenance with it to that effect. However, if something like this Yanks ball is questioned by people whose opinions I trust immensely, it makes me wonder what type of work the auction houses are doing to prevent themselves from selling forgeries. Are there any auction houses that are unquestionably trustworthy?

The argument often made here, which is a right and righteous one, is that these third party authenticators are letting auction houses do less and less in terms of determining authenticity on their own. TPAs are here to stay, but a respectable house should be willing and able to give its own opinion first and foremost. Leland's is one house that gets love around here for doing their own work and not relying on others. Heritage clearly wants big dollar items to push, and a TPA cert let's them do exactly that without worrying about the item itself. That is, until someone points out that an item is demonstrably fake (the proof for which is not very often available).

[David Atkatz]

Here's a name. I don't know if it's "the best autographed baseball, ever," or "the best 1927 Yankees baseball," but my humble opinion is that the ball is genuine.

[travrosty]

I'm sorry if this is off topic, but I've never really participated in auctions from the larger houses and I am wondering, point blank, who can you trust? I know Coaches Corner is downright laughable (how they are allowed to even continue operating is beyond me) and I see many auctions reviews in SCD for Heritage, Kevin Savage, etc. In fact I just read an article on this '27 Yanks ball and the story was it was part of Earle Combs' personal collection and there was some provenance with it to that effect. However, if something like this Yanks ball is questioned by people whose opinions I trust immensely, it makes me wonder what type of work the auction houses are doing to prevent themselves from selling forgeries. Are there any auction houses that are unquestionably trustworthy?



All mainstream legitimate auction houses want to offer good product. if it comes with a TPA cert, you have to look at who certed it and their qualifications, as well as get second and third opinions from others that you trust in the hobby. I believe Heritage should do all they can to date these baseballs and pull out the bad weeds BEFORE they ever get to the TPA.

It's up to each auction house to do some due diligence. for some that due diligence is relying entirely on the TPA's. sometimes that works, sometimes it doesn't. No auction house is immune, but some seem to be in the spotlight more than others and maybe they had a hand in their own demise in that regard by not being careful enough and not getting more opinions.

[RichardSimon]

I could easily say that I've spoken to several experts who think this Yankee ball is good. People would ask for names then, no?

Have you actually spoken to several experts? If you tell me you did, then I would believe you, but you are not exactly saying that now. You don't have to name the names, just tell us if you have actually talked to people about the ball and if so how many.
This looks like one of those baseballs where we have to say that the people who have been asked just disagree but two of the names of those that have offered negative opinions on the ball are at the very top of this hobby.

[David Atkatz]

What's your own opinion, Richard?

[mighty bombjack]

Have you actually spoken to several experts? If you tell me you did, then I would believe you, but you are not exactly saying that now. You don't have to name the names, just tell us if you have actually talked to people about the ball and if so how many.
This looks like one of those baseballs where we have to say that the people who have been asked just disagree but two of the names of those that I have discussed the ball with are at the very top of this hobby.

I have not spoken to anybody about this ball, only the back and forth on this board. I agree, all we will be left with on this ball is opinions and opinions of those giving opinions. And there is apparent disagreement on both of those counts.

For me, the authenticity of this particular ball isn't really of interest per se, but the discussion of auction house practices and how authenticity is determined by interested parties is why I'm here.

[shelly]

I guess many here are afraid of a banning by Heritage if they offer an opinion on that ball. Travis and I have already been banned so what the heck.
I did an informal survey among five people whose opinions I respect a LOT and four of them disagree with the TPA's opinions on this ball.
Another person who read my post, a hobby veteran with MANY years of experience, just e mailed me and agreed with the majority of the people in my informal survey. That now makes five out of six people who have expressed an opinion that differs from the TPA's on this ball.

David, I would surmise from the quote above you no exactly what his opinion is. I am just saying he would not in his opinion buy that ball. If I am wrong then Richard can answere.:confused:

[RichardSimon]

:D:D;);):):)

[David Atkatz]

David, I would surmise from the quote above you no exactly what his opinion is. I am just saying he would not in his opinion buy that ball. If I am wrong then Richard can answere.:confused:No, Shelly. I don't know what his opinion is. He mentions six people he contacted, or who contacted him, and five don't like the ball. He never states his own opinion.

Perhaps Richard will answer, speaking for himself.

[RichardSimon]

Since I usually have David on block I did not know what he was saying. But it became apparent to me from Shelly's posts.
My opinion on the ball is that it is not authentic.
Why else would I have posted what I did about it?

[David Atkatz]

Well, that wasn't so hard, was it?

Why else would you have posted what you did?
Who knows?
But we already have to guess who your experts are. Why should we have to guess your opinion, too?

[shelly]

David be nice:eek:

[David Atkatz]

David be nice:eek:
I was being nice, Shelly. All I did was ask Richard--very nicely--for his own opinion. Then I got a sort-of answer--from you, not him--and a line of "smiley-face code" from Richard.

And I'm sure you'll admit, Shelly, that when he finally did answer, he saw fit to embellish his reply when a simple "I think it's bad" would have sufficed.

[dgo71]

Thanks Wayne and Travis...wow, that's scary. You would think legally the auction house should still have some liability. Ignorance of the law being no excuse for breaking it, and all that. It's disheartening to see big houses essentially using the "we didn't know it was fake" excuse by hiding behind a TPA.

[RichardSimon]

So close and yet so far away. (I live at East 80th Street and the auction is at East 79th Street across the street from Central Park).
I am assuming after this thread I will have to come up with some fake ID to get into this auction :):).

[David Atkatz]

I will probably go to the preview--I'd like to see some of these pieces. I haven't decided about the auction, yet.

[shelly]

Richard, I am sure David would take you as he guest. Then I am sure we will know if it is authentic or not.:D
I can dream can't I.:D

[shelly]

I would be amazed if Heritage did not allow anyone into the auction preview. In fact they would be fools if they did that. Just think about the negative press that they would get.
Why would any auction house not allow anyone in unless they have doubt's of there own. What better way to prove to those who think the ball is not authentic but to let them see it in person. Would anyone of you spend that kind of money on just someone's word. I sure would like to see what I am buying in or send someone that has no interest but to make sure what I am buying is truly what they say it is.

What I Find most amazing is. Heritage has what they call two of the greatest experts in the autograph world. Yet you do not see them saying in there opinion it is authentic. Why do they go outside of there own staff to have this item authenticated? In fact when have you ever seen Gutierrez or Jordan on any of there certs.
Just so you know this is from Mike's site dated Feb 2 2013. No conflict of interest at all.


Mike Gutierrez is a vintage sports autograph and memorabilia specialist with experience dating back to the 1970s. Currently, he works for Heritage Auctions in Dallas, Texas, as a consignments director and is also an autograph authentication consultant for James Spence Authentication (JSA), the leader in sports authentication.:confused:
Hey, If I am that person buying that ball that is what I would ask.

[David Atkatz]

Richard, I am sure David would take you as he guest. Then I am sure we will know if it is authentic or not.:D
I can dream can't I.:DWTF is wrong with you, Shelly? Are you not happy unless you can get a fight going here?

[David Atkatz]

Mike is certainly one of the "greatest experts in the autograph world."
He definitely knew those letters in the National Baseball Library's August Herrmann Papers were genuine.

[chaddurbin]

i think it would be a great idea for richard and david to go together and check these sigs out in person. then they can debate about it and maybe come to a consensus. we can dream...;)

[Deertick]

I would be amazed if Heritage did not allow anyone into the auction preview. In fact they would be fools if they did that. Just think about the negative press that they would get.
Why would any auction house not allow anyone in unless they have doubt's of there own. What better way to prove to those who think the ball is not authentic but to let them see it in person. Would anyone of you spend that kind of money on just someone's word. I sure would like to see what I am buying in or send someone that has no interest but to make sure what I am buying is truly what they say it is.

What I Find most amazing is. Heritage has what they call two of the greatest experts in the autograph world. Yet you do not see them saying in there opinion it is authentic. Why do they go outside of there own staff to have this item authenticated? In fact when have you ever seen Gutierrez or Jordan on any of there certs.
Just so you know this is from Mike's site dated Feb 2 2013. No conflict of interest at all.


Mike Gutierrez is a vintage sports autograph and memorabilia specialist with experience dating back to the 1970s. Currently, he works for Heritage Auctions in Dallas, Texas, as a consignments director and is also an autograph authentication consultant for James Spence Authentication (JSA), the leader in sports authentication.:confused:
Hey, If I am that person buying that ball that is what I would ask.

Any auction I have attended has not allowed anyone to preview unless they are registered to bid. If you are "banned", you cannot register and, therefore, you cannot preview. The only exceptions I have run into are charity auctions. But then again, maybe I have a shifty visage*.

*Trademarked. Any band that would like to use it, let's talk.

[RichardSimon]

Any auction I have attended has not allowed anyone to preview unless they are registered to bid. If you are "banned", you cannot register and, therefore, you cannot preview. The only exceptions I have run into are charity auctions. But then again, maybe I have a shifty visage*.

*Trademarked. Any band that would like to use it, let's talk.

:(:confused::(:confused::mad::mad:
Looks like Travis and I are out of luck.

[travrosty]

:(:confused::(:confused::mad::mad:
Looks like Travis and I are out of luck.


I guess I am out of luck, and I was on such a roll too. :) ;)

[Plinvestments]

:(:confused::(:confused::mad::mad:
Looks like Travis and I are out of luck.

You can preview with a $100 donation to charity.

[shelly]

I know that Heritage reads this site. If you really feel that the ball is authentic then I would lift any ban on any member of this site. I think that Leon should also request that as well.:mad:

[JimStinson]

According to the description of the baseball, it was a gift directly from Earle Combs to his neighbor. On an item expected to sell for as much as this one there would or should be a paper trail a mile long.

How difficult then to request the NAME of the neighbor which certainly the consignor would be more than happy to provide,

take less than an hour do a search of the Federal Census records. Confirm Combs address......his home address is in all of the census back to when he was a baby....and then confirm the proximity of the neighbor. Pretty simple stuff. Also could be crossed checked against the city directory and the best part is all this information is available on line.

Then to be extra diligent find a living relative if the neighbor is deceased (also through census records) and confirm. Then after ALL of that is done examine the item in question.
______________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

[shelly]

Jim, why would you go through all that if you have two letters from the "the top two authenticator.'s in the world"
They just think that what ever these people say is fact. How many times will it take for any of these auction houses to realize that it is just an opinion and for that kind of money I sure would do a lot more than an opinion.
I still find it offensive that they would not allow a people that are respected in the industry to look at there items.
I think that they would appreciate someone else's opinion for that kind of money. If I where the buyer I would like to have a real exam of the ball. it might cost them a few thousand but worth it in the long run.

[travrosty]

They think they are setting dangerous precedent to let others look at it besides psa and jsa. They think that opens them up to the appearance that psa and jsa arent up to the job if the word gets out that others were brought in to inspect and investigate the items and/or autographs. They want the impression that psa and jsa are the be-all end-all to everything, case closed, no further authentication needed. period. End of story. PSA or JSA and nobody else.

They do that at their own peril. But its up to them. I dont see how it has been working out in their favor lately. Is it just me or do these old, valuable, rare balls and signatures seem to always have BOTH authenticators signing off on them. You would think that at least some of the time they would disagree and there would only be one of them that liked it, either just psa or just a jsa certificate. But it seems like they always have both.

I am wondering if the second company that looks at these items is told beforehand if the first one has passed it or not. It should be a blind study type of thing, where both companies are not told at all if the other one liked it. It is only fair to do it that way as to not give the appearance of the results being tainted by prior knowledge of the other authenticators decision.

Ivy won't come on here but Jonathan does so let's hear how these authentications work. Are they told if the other service has given it the ok or not before they look at it?

[shelly]

Travis, what bigger conflict of interest is there than having a man work for both you and the authenticator?:confused:

[David Atkatz]

Gotta agree with Shelly on that!

[travrosty]

I agree, I can't figure out why that is permissable. It's like the '84 Celtics and Lakers playing for the championship and your head referee tonight is Red Auerbach.

[Michael B]

Any auction I have attended has not allowed anyone to preview unless they are registered to bid. If you are "banned", you cannot register and, therefore, you cannot preview. The only exceptions I have run into are charity auctions. But then again, maybe I have a shifty visage*.

*Trademarked. Any band that would like to use it, let's talk.

Sorry Jim,

Your trademark request has been categorically denied. Visage, the band, was formed circal 1978 by 2 members of the Rich Kids, Midge Ure and Rusty Egan along with Steve Strange who hosted club nights with Rusty in a London club called Blitz. The Rich Kids also included original Sex Pistol guitar player Glen Matlock (Who I will be seeing with original Ramone Tommy at a coffeehouse in Virginia in April). Visage would release 3 albums from 1980 to 1984 and had a top 10 hit in England with 'Fade to Gray'. During their early incarnation they were joined by Billy Curry from Ultravox while that band was on hiatus. Ultravox had a new wave dance hit with "Sleepwalk" in 1981. When Ultravox returned from their break Curry would rejoin that band and take Midge Ure with him.

Steve Strange continued the band in various forms that included musicians John McGeoch (Magazine, Siouxsie & the Banshees), Dave Formula (Magazine), Barry Adamson (Magazine, Buzzcocks, Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds) and in demand session saxaphonist and future producer Gary Barnacle (M, Kim Wilde, Elvis Costello, Soft Cell,Tina Turner, David Bowie and Pet Shop Boys). Strange still performs using that name and in 2012 he started recording a new Visage album.

Sorry to disappoint you. No money to be made on this. How did I know this to begin with? Started listening to the Sex Pistols in 1976. College radio in Boston 1979-82 playing everything from hardcore punk (Dead Kennedy's, Ramones, Pistols) to 1970's R&B to Miles Davis. Truly free form radio. Bouncer in a new wave dance club in Boston in 1980. Concert photography 1979 to date. Very broad spectrum of musical tastes. My personal Top 500 songs is all over the place - Disco Tex and the Sexolettes, Iggy Pop, Cat Stevens, Public Image Limited, Paul Anka etc. etc. And yes, it is written down.

Cheers,

Michael

[David Atkatz]

"Shifty Visage" is not the same as "Visage."

[Deertick]

"Shifty Visage" is not the same as "Visage."

Thank you David!

Michael, just remember this: Everything counts in large amounts.

I did not mean to derail this into a circle jerk with dead milkmen clashing with BHS.:)

[mighty bombjack]

Travis, what bigger conflict of interest is there than having a man work for both you and the authenticator?:confused:

This assumes that we fully trust the authenticators, thereby believing that their judgement need be impartial. Why doesn't Heritage just have Gutierrez do the authentications in house, and skip TPAs? Conflict of interest gone?

Leland's doesn't use third party authenticators. They use in-house people. For the most part, so does Coaches' Corner.

See my point? In the end, it is all about the item itself, just as it has always been. Do you guys think that if these TPAs didn't exist, Heritage would only be selling good stuff? I sure don't.

[Michael B]

Thank you David!

Michael, just remember this: Everything counts in large amounts.

I did not mean to derail this into a circle jerk with dead milkmen clashing with BHS.:)

Very good. Quotation marks around 'shifty visage' would have been clearer to me, but you get that one. As long as you are not telling me to 'Wayne County and the Electric Chairs signature song' which is not repeatable here.

[Tom Hufford]

Whoever got this ball signed should have gotten Joe Giard to sign it, too. He's the key to the 1927 Yankees.

[shelly]

What I find most disturbing is that anyone one would pay that kind of money on the word of god knows who. Jim and PSA have a ton of people working for them. Who said the ball was good. I sure would like to know that. I would also ask Heritage if I could have at least two other opinions from people that I trust as well. If anyone of them said no that would be my exit from the auction.

[David Atkatz]

We can also apply Shelly's "god knows who," to those who believe the ball is bad. So far, only Richard and Shelly have opined openly. Wouldn't it be nice to know who those other four "top of the hobby" experts are?

[shelly]

David, you forgot yourself:confused: The point I am trying to make is who within PSA and JSA decided that the ball was authentic. Not asking anymore than that.

[David Atkatz]

You may not be asking any more than that, but I am.

I, too, would like to know who within JSA and PSA decided the ball was genuine.

I would also like to know which "top of the hobby" experts decided it wasn't.

[shelly]

David, my understanding is that Nash, whether anyone likes him or not has just posted about the ball. I am not fighting with anyone on this site. I am just saying without knowing who the hell the person was that said this ball is real I would not buy it and even if you who thinks it is real you would not buy it either. You well know that what we see is not always what we get.

[mighty bombjack]

David, my understanding is that Nash whether anyone likes him or not has just posted about the ball. I am not fighting with anyone on this site. I am just saying without knowing who the hell the person was that said this ball is real I would not buy it and even if you think it is real you would not buy it either. You well know that what we see is not always what we get.

Nash hasn't posted about this ball, has he?

[Runscott]

The signatures are all very nicely evenly spaced, each appears to have been signed very slowly and carefully with the same amount of pen pressure, and each signer was careful not to mess up anyone else's signature. What more could you ask for in a '27 Yankees ball?

[RichardSimon]

The signatures are all very nicely evenly spaced, each appears to have been signed very slowly and carefully with the same amount of pen pressure, and each signer was careful not to mess up anyone else's signature. What more could you ask for in a '27 Yankees ball?

+++

[shelly]

Scott, the sweet is open. was it for Miller Huggins? I know everyone will say he he would not sign. My question is if this person was so respected and loved why not. He had like you said everyone sign in the perfect spot and not one mistake on the ball. No smears no skips and they asked Ty Cobb for his pen. I am sure for this perfect ball that the manger who would have the chance of his life time to sign on the sweet spot because you know who would always be there turned it down.:confused:

[Runscott]

Scott, the sweet is open. was it for Miller Huggins? I know everyone will say he he would not sign. My question is if this person was so respected and loved why not. He had like you said everyone sign in the perfect spot and not one mistake on the ball. No smears no skips and they asked Ty Cobb for his pen. I am sure for this perfect ball that the manger who would have the chance of his life time to sign on the sweet spot because you know how would always be there turned it down.:confused:

Like you say, it was Ty Cobb's pen. Cobb was probably standing there waiting to get his pen back, yelling "ya'll better not be writin yor damned Yankee names in my spot, ya hear?"

[Runscott]

There are a lot of obvious problems, but 'Urban Shocker' is just horrid.

[JimStinson]

The point I am trying to make is who within PSA and JSA decided that the ball was authentic. Not asking anymore than that.

Shelly I think his name was Ray ....peace, out..:)
_________________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

[shelly]

:d:d:d:d:):):):):):)

[shelly]

David the count is now at 4-1 Scot, Richard, Jim and myself. 4
David 1 .
.
I know you will not believe this but I hope you are correct. I would hate to see someone through away that kind of money. I personally can not think that ball is anything but bad.

[David Atkatz]

"Throw" away, Shelly. Not "through" away.

See? We all make mistakes.

[JimStinson]

Seriously and in all Fairness to the parties involved with regards to the authenticity of the ball , I don't think anyone including myself can say its a "slam dunk" Call one way or the other without actually physically examining it in person.

But as I stated in a previous post I would hope that on such a high dollar ticket as this that all due diligence was used with regards to provenance. And maybe or probably it was.

With ready access to census records, City Directories etc. the person or persons who made their determination, should have been able to back track almost to the source. Thats 90% of the work....then after thats complete and only after that is complete and CONCRETE...Examination of the actual item is obviously necessary but secondary
_____________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

[David Atkatz]

With some here, Jim, it's always a slam dunk.

[shelly]

What did that mean:confused:

[David Atkatz]

Precisely what it says, Shelly. Some here don't believe they could ever get it wrong.

[Runscott]

David, what's wrong about being sure of yourself? Sometimes I am, sometimes I'm not. I have opinions about the Cy Young letter that Dan posted, but I'm not as confident as I am about this ball. I even compared this Yankees ball, signature for signature, with the signatures on the '27 ball that you now own, as well as with the one that you used to own. I did this because I'm trying to learn.

It was clear to me that your first ball, and this one, were signed by two different people, and neither of those two signed the ball that you currently own. To me, what I just stated was very obvious. But that's easy for me to say, since I'm not in the market for any of those three balls, so my opinion means absolutely nothing.

[David Atkatz]

Scott, there's nothing wrong with being sure of yourself. There is something wrong, though, in believing you always speak Ex Cathedra.

(And, FWIW, you are not one of the people I had in mind.)

[Runscott]

Thanks, I knew you weren't talking about me - I can be obnoxiously certain about cards and photos, but autographs are you guys' domain.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Last Saturday (Feb. 16th) someone on this board asked me my opinion on this baseball, and it is still my opinion that the autographs are authentic.

[shelly]

David, whether you think it or not. I do not believe there is not one person on this site that has not made more than a few mistakes. If you are talking about Richard I can guarantee he has. His knowledge of Jeter has gotten him in trouble over the years. I am only saying there are people I trust on here more than others. Some people just do not like to come on here and say "I made a mistake." I remember it took you a very long to time to admit your first 27 Yankee ball was not what you thought it was. There is no shame in being wrong.
I will say this again. I do hope I am wrong. I do not want to see someone loose money on just a few peoples opinion. People that we have no idea who they are. I agree with Jim. There can be a much greater back ground check on that ball that has yet to be done. I am sure that would give much more credence to the authenticity of said 27 Yankee ball.
Chris, do you think that anyone with a half of brain would not know who that person is? Just saying.
Last but not least why is everyone afraid to say who they are talking about. I heard, someone told me, a person on site. Just say there name.


Just a late addition to this thread. Nash has posted the questioned ball on his site.

[Runscott]

Just a late addition to this thread. Nash has posted the questioned ball on his site.

Just read HOS. This response by Heritage is thought-provoking, but Heritage is working backward from the end product. Using this logic, if I signed a real 1927 ball, then because the ball is real, the signatures would be as well.

"The Combs team ball is the correct 1927 one-year style. So the suggestion that a supposed forger would have known this fact prior to the ball’s first public appearance in 1999, then could have tracked down a pristine example of that exceedingly rare style to use for his forgery, and lastly had the skill to perfectly execute these autographs to pass the finest authenticators in the industry is truly preposterous."

[Runscott]

Compare the panel locations of each signature to the locations on David's authentic ball, or any other '27 Yankees ball, real or fake. Only the green ball has all the starters (except Collins) neatly grouped on two panels, all the pitchers (except Shawkey) on the same panel, all the catchers and coaches on another. Has anyone ever seen a ball where the signatures were organized this way?

It explains why Gehrig and Ruth avoided the sweet spot, but other than that it's just a little bit weird.

[jgmp123]

Compare the panel locations of each signature to the locations on David's authentic ball, or any other '27 Yankees ball, real or fake. Only the green ball has all the starters (except Collins) neatly grouped on two panels, all the pitchers (except Shawkey) on the same panel, all the catchers and coaches on another. Has anyone ever seen a ball where the signatures were organized this way?

It explains why Gehrig and Ruth avoided the sweet spot, but other than that it's just a little bit weird.

Which makes even more sense for a forger to simply go down the roster list....Where was Huggins on that roster list...:confused:

[David Atkatz]

Supposedly, Combs went from player-to-player getting this ball signed. It's certainly not hard to imagine that he wanted them grouped by position--outfield, infield, pitchers, catchers, mgr & coaches. It makes sense to me that a player on that team might do that. It does not make sense to me that a forger skilled enough to have produced those signatures would just "go down the roster."

And, BTW, there is a Huggins on that ball.

[Runscott]

Supposedly, Combs went from player-to-player getting this ball signed. It's certainly not hard to imagine that he wanted them grouped by position--outfield, infield, pitchers, catchers, mgr & coaches. It makes sense to me that a player on that team might do that. It does not make sense to me that a forger skilled enough to have produced those signatures would just "go down the roster."

And, BTW, there is a Huggins on that ball.

That would be highly unusual (unique?), but I could buy that argument. What I can't buy is the slow deliberate signature of each player, perfectly spaced, same pressure applied. And even if you believe that all of those characteristics, along with the odd grouping method, there's still the actual characteristics of the signatures - at least a few of them are really horrible - how do you get past the end of 'Gehrig'? I couldn't even find one example where the 'rig' looks like the one on this ball. Gehrig had such a light, beautiful signature that it's hard for me to believe anyone could view this one as his.

I have some work to do, but I'll try to post images of the signatures on your ball, next to the ones on this one. It's kind of startling.

[travrosty]

the signatures crowd each other, ruth crowds the signature above it.

would ruth really make a concerted effort to carefully crowd the autograph above it to make room for everyone else, perhaps, or would he just let a babe ruth autograph rip? historically he signed very fast. it doesnt look like a fast fluid ruth, it looks planned and stodgy.

tony lazzeri starts his signature way to the left, on the stamping, why? just so the end of his signature can coincide with the end of gehrigs? why? so the postiion designations can all line up? there was plenty of room for lazzeri to start his siganture farther to the right, but he starts it on the stamp? weird. most of the signatures seem to start in a vertical line and a lot of them seem to end in sync too.

can anyone find any other ball like that? not saying it could be impossible, but i believe in entropy. things tend to be disordered, and over a dozen guys signing a ball, their signatures are going to be more disordered. and not line up so unnaturally like this.

[David Atkatz]

Look. Combs brings the ball to each player and tells him where to sign. It ain't that hard to understand.

[shelly]

You are talking about the 27 Yankees. I would think to have that perfect storm would be so strange that you and I would agree on anything. By the way Richard is Jewish so he would have no chance to have papal infallibility.:D

[David Atkatz]

You are talking about the 27 Yankees. I would think to have that perfect storm would be so strange that you and I would agree on anything. By the way Richard is Jewish so he would have no chance to have papal infallibility.:DWhat are you talking about, Shelly? Perfect storm? WTF?

Players keep signed souvenirs of teams they played on. I've seen Gehrig's personal scrapbooks at the HoF library. He had the player photo page from the 1926 WS program, signed in beautiful, bold, black fountain pen by every teammate appearing there. George Pipgras had the famous 1927 team photograph signed by every player. I could go on. It's not so hard to believe that Combs had that ball signed for himself.

[shelly]

Please do go on. Your background on the 27 Yankees is well known and respected. I just think that this ball stinks.

[Runscott]

Is this really a good Gehrig? Maybe he just wasn't himself that day.

[David Atkatz]

You are certainly entitled to that opinion, Shelly.

[David Atkatz]

Is this really a good Gehrig?I think it is.

[Scott Garner]

I'm sorry if this is off topic, but I've never really participated in auctions from the larger houses and I am wondering, point blank, who can you trust? I know Coaches Corner is downright laughable (how they are allowed to even continue operating is beyond me) and I see many auctions reviews in SCD for Heritage, Kevin Savage, etc. In fact I just read an article on this '27 Yanks ball and the story was it was part of Earle Combs' personal collection and there was some provenance with it to that effect. However, if something like this Yanks ball is questioned by people whose opinions I trust immensely, it makes me wonder what type of work the auction houses are doing to prevent themselves from selling forgeries. Are there any auction houses that are unquestionably trustworthy?

Derek,
FWIW, you just mentioned an extremely trustworthy, long-time dealer in this hobby, Kevin Savage. That being said, Kevin's forte is not high end game used memorabilia.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Is this really a good Gehrig.

I believe it is an authentic Gehrig sig.

[Runscott]

Chris and David - thank you. You are both much more knowledgeable about Yankees signatures than I am. I've really enjoyed discussing autographs in this forum, and appreciate how respectful the conversations have been - even if I end up being wrong about this, it's been a lot of fun digging around and learning.

I just hope I don't try to bid in the next Heritage auction and find a giant stop sign.

[shelly]

Scott, as far as the Gehrig is concerned you are correct he had a really,really bad signing that day.:D
You are a very smart person. I think that someone that looks from the outside in is much brighter than we are.:)

[David Atkatz]

I think that someone that looks from the outside in is much brighter than we are.:)Yeah, Shelly. The less experience with a particular signature, the more valuable the opinion. I suppose someone who's never seen a Gehrig signature at all would have the most valuable opinion. (And Jim's, of course, is worthless.)

[Runscott]

Yeah, Shelly. The less experience with a particular signature, the more valuable the opinion. I suppose someone who's never seen a Gehrig signature at all would have the most valuable opinion.

David, you nailed it. Sometimes what you just said is completely true, but probably only if the inexperienced person has a good eye for autographs and the experienced one doesn't. But anyone can make mistakes.

[dgo71]

Derek,
FWIW, you just mentioned an extremely trustworthy, long-time dealer in this hobby, Kevin Savage. That being said, Kevin's forte is not high end game used memorabilia.

I just re-read my post and I see how that was confusing, but I was not trying to lump Savage, nor Heritage for that matter, in with Coaches Corner. I was only trying to state that I see a lot of auction adverts in SCD and when something as notable as this '27 Yanks ball was called into question, it made me wonder how reputable any one of the houses really is. Sorry for the confusion, no offense intended towards Savage or anyone else. I have never dealt with auction houses, so I'm trying to find out from the people here who have expertise in the matter, who are good ones to deal with. Thanks for the info!

[shelly]

David, I did not say the your opinion or Jim's is not useful. I was saying I appreciated what Scott brought to the table. If you have a problem with that I really do not care.
I never saw where Jim said the Gehrig was good. I know that both you and Chris like it. I do not. Now who is really going to tell us who is right and who is wrong. I think that the ball is bad. You and Chris thinks it just fine. Now who is right and who is wrong? We can go back and forth and nothing is going to be solved. I have gone over six months not fighting with you and it stops here.:D

[mark evans]

What this thread shows me is that the vintage autograph hobby is fraught with peril. When the country's best experts can't agree on an item as popular as a '27 Yankees baseball, what chance do we grundoons have?

[David Atkatz]

David, I did not say the your opinion or Jim's is not useful. I was saying I appreciated what Scott brought to the table. If you have a problem with that I really do not care.
I never saw where Jim said the Gehrig was good. I know that both you and Chris like it. I do not. Now who is really going to tell us who is right and who is wrong. I think that the ball is bad. You and Chris thinks it just fine. Now who is right and who is wrong? We can go back and forth and nothing is going to be solved. I have gone over six months not fighting with you and it stops here.:DI respect Scott's opinion, Shelly, but not because I think he's an "outsider," with very little experience. Unlike you, I don't believe Scott brings that to the table. (If I felt that that was what one had to offer, I would not hold that opinion in very high esteem at all.)

I'm not sure what Jim thinks. From his Brother Ray comment, I suppose he thinks the ball is bad. But I believe his opinion is one of the most valued, not the least.

Again, unlike you, I don't weight one's opinion by whether it coincides with my own, or not.

[RichardSimon]

The last person in my informal survey, well known in the hobby, has responded to me and has reiterated his opinion that he does not think the ball is authentic, but he wishes to remain anonymous on this issue. I have to respect his request.

[JimStinson]

Seriously and in all Fairness to the parties involved with regards to the authenticity of the ball , I don't think anyone including myself can say its a "slam dunk" Call one way or the other without actually physically examining it in person.

But as I stated in a previous post I would hope that on such a high dollar ticket as this that all due diligence was used with regards to provenance. And maybe or probably it was.

With ready access to census records, City Directories etc. the person or persons who made their determination, should have been able to back track almost to the source. Thats 90% of the work....then after thats complete and only after that is complete and CONCRETE...Examination of the actual item is obviously necessary but secondary
_____________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

I hate to have to quote myself but this seems to have generated into a murky, heated, and controversial subject not to mention one of the longest threads I've ever seen on this board. I am not defending or attacking anyone. EVERYONE is entitled to an opinion. And anyone can spend their money how they like and where they like. Its cynical but at the end of the day maybe its not a case of how good a DEAL you got but how good a deal you THINK you got.
BUT ...I have said this before what an autograph LOOKS like is the first and ultimately last step in a series of steps, leading to a determination of authenticity. The very, very good forgers can fool ANYONE based on looks alone (Counterfeiters can draw twenty dollar bank notes FREEHAND) and they have found a very lucrative nitch in the field of autograph collecting because all of the parties involved WANT an expensive museum quality item to be real.
So looking at the autograph in question is the first step, some are so off base they immediately go to the trash heap , This ball is NOT one of those (as evidenced by this debate) So then comes the fun part Research , looking at subtle intangibles like labeling, format, etc. Then using the various "authentication secrets" that inevitably every good autograph collector/dealer/authenticator is going to learn over the course of his lifetime (The ones he won't share with anyone....THOSE secrets), then morph into Philip Marlowe and do the hard core detective work and back track to the source , If the trail goes COLD, that speaks volumnes and you PASS case closed.
If it dosen't you trudge on, until eventually you are able to prove your case to any critic with evidence a mile long. Done properly you'd make any critic look like a fool. Then finally the last step is LOOKING at the item again to confirm what research has already proven to you and then and only then , you make your determination. Which by now is no longer an "opinion" its a fact.
________________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

[mighty bombjack]

Which by now is no longer an "opinion" its a fact.
________________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

Great post.

So the thing left to ask is this: While it seems you yourself sell only what you deem to be "facts," what is your opinion of Heritage selling what seems to be an "opinion"?

[RichardSimon]

Great post.

So the thing left to ask is this: While it seems you yourself sell only what you deem to be "facts," what is your opinion of Heritage selling what seems to be an "opinion"?

<Ray Charles picture> :):)

[RichardSimon]

The Nash story, on his website, about Heritage includes nine other items.
My opinion is that I agree with what he has said and disagree with the COA's issued by the TPA's.
What do you guys think about these other items in the auction that Nash has discussed?
There have been many opinions expressed on the board about Nash, pro and con.
Let us just discuss the items.
http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=17835#more-17835

[Runscott]

Agreed - Jim's post is a great one (like many in this thread). I don't see the 'heat' as all that bad...yet - nothing like some of the autograph threads have turned into.

Thanks Shelly and David, for your comments. I have been collecting autographs for about ten years, but most of that time it just amounted to studying and comparing them. Ruth and Gehrig have always bothered me, primarily because I would like to eventually own something signed by each, but the comfort level has rarely been there for the affordable ones.

The following by Jim is something I wanted to say as well, but I didn't want Chris or David to think I was referring to them (I wouldn't have been). But I think it's the reason that the authenticators get away with shoddy work, and why the auction houses patronize us. By the way, the bold part of that last sentence is what pisses me off more than anything. They don't want to take the time to do due diligence, but they dismiss the opinions of those who do.

"all of the parties involved WANT an expensive museum quality item to be real."

I don't authenticate autographs, so I have the benefit of being able to 'stop' looking when I get to the point where I've decided the item doesn't look good enough for me to want; however, if I ran an auction house I would not accept items I felt uncomfortable with, even if I thought they might be real - unless it was just 'presentability' that got me to that point.

[shelly]

This ball was authenticated in 2002 and sold for 86 thousand. No matter what, neither one of them could change there minds. What do you think would happen if they did that.
That is why I feel that Heritage should have someone else look at the ball. That way there would be no conflict of interest. When I say someone else I mean anyone that has never worked or has any interest in Heritage. As most of you have pointed out there are some very good people on this site.
I keep on saying this but look how many pieces have been found to be bad. Why for this kind of money would you not try and make sure that every I is dotted and every t is crossed.
Richard also brings up a good point. There are nine other items in question. Do any of you have opinions on them?

[Runscott]

Supposedly, Combs went from player-to-player getting this ball signed. It's certainly not hard to imagine that he wanted them grouped by position--outfield, infield, pitchers, catchers, mgr & coaches. It makes sense to me that a player on that team might do that. It does not make sense to me that a forger skilled enough to have produced those signatures would just "go down the roster."

And, BTW, there is a Huggins on that ball.

If this was Combs' personal ball, why didn't he get ALL the players to sign it? Certainly if some weren't around the first pass through the clubhouse, he could have gotten them to sign later? Several players who are on your ball didn't make this ball.

[David Atkatz]

Maybe he didn't much care for the scrubs. And, except for the sweetspot (and who's gonna sign there? Giard?) there's no more room on the ball. He got the starters, and the major pitchers--the guys he played with almost every day.

Look. The ball may or not be real. I think it is. Others don't. But the observations that the sweetspot is blank, or it's signed in green ink, or there aren't more signatures, or there aren't fewer signatures, or... provide absolutely no evidence either way.

[Runscott]

Maybe he didn't much care for the scrubs. And, except for the sweetspot (and who's gonna sign there? Giard?) there's no more room on the ball. He got the starters, and the major pitchers--the guys he played with almost every day.

Look. The ball may or not be real. I think it is. Others don't. But the observations that the sweetspot is blank, or it's signed in green ink, or there aren't more signatures, or there aren't fewer signatures, or... provide absolutely no evidence either way.

Not trying to beat a dead horse, but these types of observations are the only evidence we ever have for authenticating autographs, other than provenance, and no one's interested in checking the provenance for this item.

[slidekellyslide]

I have no expertise at all in autographs, but my gut tells me this ball is real...I do think it's hard to believe that a forger would get the exact 1927 ball for the 1927 team with what little knowledge was/is out there regarding balls...the crowded sigs and perhaps deliberate could be a sign that the guys wanted to make their best signature for Combs, and perhaps he even told them to make sure where to sign and to not make it too big since he had plans to get everyone on it.

Just my completely uneducated opinion. :)

[shelly]

Dan, I went out to people that you would not have any idea who they are. I questioned them about the ball not what was signed on the ball. Here is there reply.

The 1927 ball was a one year style because it was Ban Johnsons last year and Barnard followed him. There is a newer top logo with the patent date and the cursive logo.
This has been known for 20-30 yrs its nothing new. Any forger would have figured it out looking at the many 1927 attributed balls (including many Phila A's balls) To say its authentic based upon the style of ball is so flawed, I don't know what to say.
These are from people that I trust.

[shelly]

That being said, I have a question to David. Would you buy this ball? No Caveat emptor.

[Runscott]

Dan, I went out to people that you would not have any idea who they are. I questioned them about the ball not what was signed on the ball. Here is there reply.

The 1927 ball was a one year style because it was Ban Johnsons last year and Barnard followed him. There is a newer top logo with the patent date and the cursive logo.
This has been known for 20-30 yrs its nothing new. Any forger would have figured it out looking at the many 1927 attributed balls (including many Phila A's balls) To say its authentic based upon the style of ball is so flawed, I don't know what to say.
These are from people that I trust.

A forger would have to be an idiot to buy a 1928 ball, as it wouldn't have Johnson's name on it, and he would have to be an even dumber idiot not to buy the one with the 1925 patent stamp. Even if he ONLY had these two bits of obvious information and guessed from there, he still would have a 1 out of 3 chance of getting it right by complete accident. Not bad odds.

Dan - I completely understand going with your gut. If my gut agreed with your gut, my next step would be to prove that it is a good ball (not the opposite) - we need to adapt the Communist approach of 'guilty until proven innocent' (in my opinion), rather than the opposite, Democratic style. The Communist method caught all the guilty and some of the innocent. Not good for human beings, but great for baseballs. If we did this, the ball would have to be tossed in the trash, as there is nothing other than alleged circumstantial evidence - can you get any worse?

The Democratic style would be to assume the ball is real (which is what we are doing here), and have to prove that it is 'guilty'. But we are further limited by the Democratic approach, in that we can't even produce evidence - provenance is apparently disallowable in our 'autographed ball court', as is questioning the authenticators, and as is any sort of forensic testing.

The above is why so many forged baseballs are floating around.

[slidekellyslide]

I don't think there's anything wrong with that approach when it comes to autographs...I think that same approach should be used with game used memorabilia as well. Maybe I'm off on the ball...don't know, I sure wouldn't buy anything like that with out rock solid provenance.

[shelly]

I don't think there's anything wrong with that approach when it comes to autographs...I think that same approach should be used with game used memorabilia as well. Maybe I'm off on the ball...don't know, I sure wouldn't buy anything like that with out rock solid provenance.
That is what anyone with a brain would say.:)

[Runscott]

In fairness, you can't argue with Chris' willingness to satisfy any doubts the winning bidder might have:

"If the winning bidder would like to have the baseball sent to the FBI labs at Quantico, VA, then we would be pleased to work with them to help facilitate that process prior to the settlement of the auction and as long as the process did not damage the baseball in any manner."

[RichardSimon]

In fairness, you can't argue with Chris' willingness to satisfy any doubts the winning bidder might have:

"If the winning bidder would like to have the baseball sent to the FBI labs at Quantico, VA, then we would be pleased to work with them to help facilitate that process prior to the settlement of the auction and as long as the process did not damage the baseball in any manner."

Sure, anybody can walk into the FBI lab at Quantico and say "gentlemen, please examine this." Easy to say lets get the FBI to take a look, but is that really a possibility? My guess would be no it is not possible but that is only my guess.
It is not a criminal case, the FBI is not investigating the individuals involved with this (at least I don't think they are), so is the FBI really going to just take a baseball that walks in off the street and submit it to vigorous testing?

[shelly]

In fairness, you can't argue with Chris' willingness to satisfy any doubts the winning bidder might have:

"If the winning bidder would like to have the baseball sent to the FBI labs at Quantico, VA, then we would be pleased to work with them to help facilitate that process prior to the settlement of the auction and as long as the process did not damage the baseball in any manner."

If I where the third largest auction house in the world, with the most respected authenticators in this hemisphere. I sure would like to make sure before anyone of my customers would pay $ 1000,000 or more that what was purchased is authentic. Why not make sure now. Why would anyone send it to the FBI unless they thought it was not real. If you are so sure why in the hell would you even make that statement?:confused:
The only way that ball would be damaged is if some idiot bought it.

[Runscott]

Hey, now I'm laughing as hard at me as you are. But on the other hand, I know nothing about the workings of the FBI (and I'm happy for that), and maybe Chris doesn't either.

[David Atkatz]

Just returned from the pre-auction reception. Looked at the ball as carefully as I could.
I still think it's good.

[shelly]

Well, I guess that settles it. ;)

[Runscott]

Well, I guess that settles it. ;)

Actually, it does. If someone wants that ball, and thinks it is real, that's the end of it - they wouldn't bid on it otherwise, they certainly aren't sending it to a lab to get it tested, and the last thing they want is to find out ten years from now that it's a fake. When it's sitting up on their mantel, if anyone even looks at it and winces a little, they'll change the subject to the latest Lexus models.

In my opinion it's a bad way to buy collectibles, but you have a much larger selection to choose from, and you have less future angst to deal with.