Psa

[theshleps]

I have been unofficially advised that PSA is rejecting most signed vintage cards these days. I heard it was due to the higher volume of these on the market they are concluding many are fake. Unfortunately those of us that have held onto cards for many years and want to sell now and feel the need to slab them are getting many authentic cards rejected.
I have seen that happen to me with a number of cards in the past year that I knew were good and I confirmed it with Jim Stinson and others. Also on some rarer HOFers. Has anyone else had this experience?

[Republicaninmass]

I've had vintage, but players who lived well, and were great TTM well into the 2000s, fail. Also, one who is currently alive failed recently.

Any other LOAs are met with "will it pass PSA" from prospective buyers. Notice they never ask "is it real" mainly because it doesn't matter, long as psa says it is.


I'm sweating bullets with the 100 I have in for grading

[alifaxwa2]

I have been unofficially advised that PSA is rejecting most signed vintage cards these days. I heard it was due to the higher volume of these on the market they are concluding many are fake. Unfortunately those of us that have held onto cards for many years and want to sell now and feel the need to slab them are getting many authentic cards rejected.
I have seen that happen to me with a number of cards in the past year that I knew were good and I confirmed it with Jim Stinson and others. Also on some rarer HOFers. Has anyone else had this experience?
If simply a trend then fine, if its a conscience decision, this is ridiculous stab in the back by PSA/DNA to there customers. Their role is to know the difference, if they can't then they shouldn't be in business. If "due to the higher volume of these on the market" they are concluding many are fake, then they are not a neutral, un-biased opinion any more.

[alifaxwa2]

Any other LOAs are met with "will it pass PSA" from prospective buyers. Notice they never ask "is it real" mainly because it doesn't matter, long as psa says it is.

Because PSA passing it (like it or not) secures the value. "Any other LOA" doesn't do that.

[daves_resale_shop]

I have been unofficially advised that PSA is rejecting most signed vintage cards these days. I heard it was due to the higher volume of these on the market they are concluding many are fake. Unfortunately those of us that have held onto cards for many years and want to sell now and feel the need to slab them are getting many authentic cards rejected.
I have seen that happen to me with a number of cards in the past year that I knew were good and I confirmed it with Jim Stinson and others. Also on some rarer HOFers. Has anyone else had this experience?

Had a similar experience... submitted a card for a friend (had been in his father's collection for well over 30 years) and it came back authct?

Several people in the hobby whom I trust and respect deemed it authentic

[packs]

Maybe they aren't authentic.

[bobbyw8469]

Maybe they aren't authentic.

I think that's the issue...in some instances, these are KNOWN real autographs that are being rejected. Like someone else stated, if PSA can't tell the difference, maybe they need to stop the autograph division. And yes, I believe forgeries are rampant.

[packs]

What does known to be real mean? I don't understand the criticism here. PSA rejected autographs they feel aren't authentic. That's their opinion. If you're saying that they shouldn't authenticate autographs unless they're able to make a determination without fail, wouldn't you prefer they err on the side of caution and reject an autograph they aren't comfortable with?

[Republicaninmass]

Hence why the say "questionable"

There was a slew of cards ending the other night, a few which I thought were questionable, so I didn't bid. I try to err on the side if caution as well. If my first inkling is a NO, I have to stop myself from asking "could it possibly be rushed, an off day, etc"

As far as modern guys who sign TTM there is no reason to fail them solely because it's an expensive, vintage card

[MrSeven]

I think the strangest PSA result I've ever seen was a Ted Williams autographed Gene Budig baseball from the late 90s.

The general consensus I've been told is that Williams stopped signing balls in 1993 after his stroke. I suspect any Budig baseball will draw additional suspicion right off of the bat by a TPA.

This ball had the saddest Ted Williams autograph I've ever seen. It was extremely sloppy & deformed and looked like it came from Williams shortly before his death. I have no doubt it was real.

Had a full LOA. I'm guessing they assume nobody would forge such a sad looking autograph. I just don't know how you'd authenticate an item like that.

[bobbyw8469]

What does known to be real mean? I don't understand the criticism here. PSA rejected autographs they feel aren't authentic. That's their opinion. If you're saying that they shouldn't authenticate autographs unless they're able to make a determination without fail, wouldn't you prefer they err on the side of caution and reject an autograph they aren't comfortable with?

Known to be real means I stood in front of Mantle while he signed it. We BSed about big breasted blondes whilst he signed my card.

[packs]

Why did you pay PSA then?

[theshleps]

I have always run my autos by Jim Stinson and Ron Gordon both original PSA folks for their opinion. I have seen them say something is good and PSA rejects it and I have seen the opposite too. I trust Jim more as he can tell me exactly why and a whole history of that player and signing habits, ghost signers, etc. I couldn't care less about a LOA except when I am selling my dupes and the AH requires getting one. I had a Bobby Doerr rejected by PSA- it was a fairly recent TTM one. Who is going to forge a Bobby Doerr?
The problem is when PSA rejects a vintage signature of mine I have no idea who looked at it and why they didn't like it. Would they have still rejected it if it was sent in by REA or HA? Also some of the AH's tell me to resubmit it to them again and it is often accepted. So I have to pay twice and hope someone else looks at it? Crazy and us old timers are frustrated. Sure there are lots of fakes but some items we have held for decades and have great provenance and still a rejection. Just frustrating

[tha-rock]

I agree with the comments posted and Michael has discussed this subject with me. Very disturbing if true. It makes no sense to me to reject an autograph merely because its vintage, or on a vintage item. When I submit a signed item to a TPA, I'm buying a professional opinion as to the autograph's authenticity. They were not there to see it signed, so all they are providing is an opinion, since they can't be 100% sure about it. In my mind, the question is how sure does an authenticator need to be before he is willing to say "I'll authenticate it." 51%?, 75%?, 90%?, 99%? I sort of understand the basis for charging more to authenticate an 18th century player than someone like Darold Knowles, because of the effort involved. Does their standard for declaring authenticity vary as well? For example, would they want to be 95% sure before they are willing to put their seal of authenticity on the likes of Al Spalding, Candy Cummings, Monte Ward, Kid Nichols, whereas for Darold Knowles or Milt Pappas, they are willing to certify it if they are 60% sure about it. Should the standard for authenticity vary based on the age of the item or age of the autograph?
It also makes no sense to me that some TPAs want to charge more for authenticating the same autograph if it is on a vintage item than if it is on a recent item. What justifies that? Certifying a Hank Greenberg signature on a 1939 Playball should be no more difficult than certifying it on 1980’s reprint.

[packs]

Is there really a large portion of the collecting world who think PSA is rejecting items because they're vintage? I don't really see how that model could sustain itself considering the amount of players who have passed. Where does that information come from?

[Republicaninmass]

My fail rate went from 5% to 40% in the past year. It is NOT because there are that many more forgeries. Again 2 1952 high numbers from one death in 2010 and one living failed. Both are 100% good. One was ttm, and the other I have 3 examples for comparison. Also, More 52s failed of players who died in the 2000s.


Seems odd

[theshleps]

Part of it is rumors possibly put out by employees at TPA's and part is experience. Like getting my 1940 playball Doerr rejected by PSA is kind of ridiculous. I think some also depends on who submits it. Some of the companies who do tens of thousands of dollars a year with a TPA I bet has a better chance of getting something slabbed than someone who never submits anything . People like Bill Corcoran and Kevin and Rich at PSA are above reproach. But for instance a Dean plaque that Jim Stinson sold to a friend was rejected by PSA recently. is it because the value is so high now? is it because my friend is a little fish. WE don't get to know who rejected it. Jim was offered a position at PSA. If he had gotten it he would have passed it. There needs to be a written policy on the procedures they follow on higher ticket items

[Duluth Eskimo]

People like Bill Corcoran and Kevin and Rich at PSA are above reproach.

No one is beyond reproach. That is part of the problem right there. They are giving you an opinion, if you don't want it don't do business with them.

What Ted says is 100% true. We discussed this in a previous thread. Kevin and others I guess are rejecting many many items that are authentic and would have passsed prior to them taking the job. It's either authentic or not, not some BS. Just like when Kevin was selling, "most aren't authentic, except the ones I'm selling". Now I will admit that I respect Kevin, Rich, and others mentioned, but that doesn't excuse rejecting authentic autographs because you feel there are too many in the marketplace. Especially for a Bobby Doerr as mentioned.

I get items authenticated for resale and nothing more. It helps the resale value. Not my personal collection. I have had many non baseball autos rejected as have many people I have spoken to. These other people are very knowledgeable as well. It sounds like they are kicking many baseball related autos as well. Not everything can be an exactly right on the money perfectly flowing vintage autograph that a 10 year old can authenticate.

Lastly, I would like to remind everyone (especially the moderators) that these people in this thread and others need to post their real name or go away. Stand by your comments

[Republicaninmass]

I believe the "new regime" is NOT reviewing the psa/dna cards, as most would have easily passed a veteran's eye. They are busy looking at the higher end psa/dna items.

[Duluth Eskimo]

I believe the "new regime" is NOT reviewing the psa/dna cards, as most would have easily passed a veteran's eye. They are busy looking at the higher end psa/dna items.

I disagree and Kevin is the main authenticator and goes on the road for shows and events. They do not encapsulate on the road though.

When a company just starts rejecting items at 5 times the norm, something is wrong. Unknowledgable people will probably just say, "that's because they're no good". Anyone who submits knows there is a problem.

[Johnny630]

I really like SGC authentic. IMO their authenticators are top notch and very knowledgeable.

[Leaf]

I believe very strongly that the reason for the mass fails is that it is safer for them to fail good items than pass bad ones.

I know the guys at PSA VERY well (and was a top 5 customer for many years)..

There is a reason however I am exclusive with Beckett Authentication now...

They can pull the trigger when stuff is good (regardless of value), they aren’t scared to fail items that are bad (regardless of who submits them) and they aren’t scared to pass on rendering an opinion (and refunding fees) when they aren’t sure...

Easy decision for Leaf


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[theshleps]

Just had a bunch of my cards submitted by an auction house to PSA fail. These include Harry Eisenstat who I corresponded with for many years and he signed this in one of our correspondences, Bobby Doerr (who would forge him??), Joe Cronin, 2 Warren Giles- all of which are good. People have seen my posted collection and these are easy guys that are easy to tell if they are legit. Again PSA seems to be saying they are going to reject many if not most vintage signed cards. A friend of mine had a Wagner exhibit with a full PSA (I had traded it to him and had gotten the full PSA for him). He lost the PSA letter and resubmitted the item to them- neglecting to tell them he had lost the letter. This happened recently and they said it was a fake (even though accepting it 2-3 years ago). PSA had previously rejected a Cobb, Lajoie and McKechnie and then after complaining on the forum and resubmitting, they were passed.
Being 66 years old- I wont be collecting forever. I wouldn't want my children to try to sell these after I pass away and have them (the unslabbed majority) all rejected even though folks like Jim Stinson and others have seen them and verbally told me they were good. I don't want to throw away $ on submitting them now if PSA will reject most. Everyone has some fakes but most of us who have been collecting since the 1960's and gotten their autographs IP, TTM and from reputable dealers like Jim, and Rich, and Bill, etc and some better auction houses and none from Coaches etc. We possible know authenticity as well as or better then some people working for TPA's. any advice?

[bobbyw8469]

Maybe use a different authenticator?

[HRBAKER]

And so now we live with the monster we helped create..............and complain about it.

Just submit them 5 or 6 times each until you get what you want.

If that is the real reason they are rejecting these certain players ("too many on the market") then they should refuse to accept them for review and not cash your check.

[Klrdds]

I think most autograph collectors erroneously believed that with Grad and some of the old authenticators at PSA gone and the Big 3 brought in that things would change , but as I have posted several times before concerning this there may be new faces at PSA but the song remains the same (forgive me Led Zepplin fans like myself ). Before Jim retired he and I talked many times for a long time over several weeks about how there would not really be any change at PSA with the Big 3 there now as PSA's saviors and in fact how It (PSA) would become harder in many ways to deal with especially concerning the rare autographs and anything on unofficial non-legal items . They are out now to cover their asses in as many ways possible after Grad's many publicized screw ups even if it means rejecting items in more numbers than before . Remember too that the Big 3 don't see every item or for that matter most items sent to PSA , so PSA's grading is still done by essentially the same untrained staff as before . Jim was right in so many ways about the future and the Big 3 and PSA, and we as collectors are left to suffer at their very whim no matter the authenticity of our items .
It will only get worse with time as long as AHs , dealers, and collectors give PSA , and JSA the power that they DO NOT deserve .

[tazdmb]

I have seen JSA pass some real slop lately, i hate to agree with the other poster, but perhaps you should try JSA instead. This is not an endorsement of JSA, but may get you the best chance of selling them for fair value.

Kevin Keating told me 2 years ago at the national after PSA failing a George Wright that he thought was good-"Go try JSA".

[Klrdds]

Maybe use a different authenticator?

Even though Beckett and SGC may be good , the truth unfortunately is that PSA and to some extent JSA are still kings of the autograph authentication market .

[RichardSimon]

And so now we live with the monster we helped create..............and complain about it.

Just submit them 5 or 6 times each until you get what you want.

If that is the real reason they are rejecting these certain players ("too many on the market") then they should refuse to accept them for review and not cash your check.

Point 1 - How sad but true.
Point 2 - Funny,,but who wants to spend more than the autograph is worth :D
Point 3 - That would be what an ethical business would do.

[Duluth Eskimo]

I'm sure some of you guys thought I just had sour grapes. Unfortunately, as I said previously, this is commonplace now. Why would I submit one thing to PSA now when I run the risk of having quality authentic items not pass. Now if I got a refund, I may not complain, but we all know that is not the case.

[Hankphenom]

I have seen JSA pass some real slop lately, i hate to agree with the other poster, but perhaps you should try JSA instead. This is not an endorsement of JSA, but may get you the best chance of selling them for fair value.

Kevin Keating told me 2 years ago at the national after PSA failing a George Wright that he thought was good-"Go try JSA".

Did you? Whatever happened to your Wright? And is this any different than card guys grade shopping? They're all just opinions, after all, right?

[tazdmb]

Did you? Whatever happened to your Wright? And is this any different than card guys grade shopping? They're all just opinions, after all, right?

No, I did bring it back to PSA this year with new authticators and....it failed. However, PSA did not charge me again for failing and was explained why he thought it was no good. I still think it may be good but have since replaced it with a no doubter. IMHO, the difference between this and grading is there is much more wiggle room for grading. With this it is either good or no good. Obviously, certain opinions are worth more than others.

[Hankphenom]

No, I did bring it back to PSA this year with new authticators and....it failed. However, PSA did not charge me again for failing and was explained why he thought it was no good. I still think it may be good but have since replaced it with a no doubter. IMHO, the difference between this and grading is there is much more wiggle room for grading. With this it is either good or no good. Obviously, certain opinions are worth more than others.

You wouldn't try it with JSA on ethical grounds, even when you are convinced it's good? I had no idea their reputation had gotten that bad that shopping something to them would feel like an ethical lapse.

[tazdmb]

You wouldn't try it with JSA on ethical grounds, even when you are convinced it's good? I had no idea their reputation had gotten that bad that shopping something to them would feel like an ethical lapse.

I actually had a great breakfast with Steve Grad Friday and talked to him about many things, including the Wright. Long story short, the Wright passed Beckett authentication. Based on the history of the signature coupled with I always thought it was good, I was not surprised.

[Hankphenom]

I actually had a great breakfast with Steve Grad Friday and talked to him about many things, including the Wright. Long story short, the Wright passed Beckett authentication. Based on the history of the signature coupled with I always thought it was good, I was not surprised.

Happy ending! But I'm still confused as to why you didn't take Kevin's advice and run it by JSA since I guess they have a rep as easier to pass things. Kevin liked it, right?

[tazdmb]

Happy ending! But I'm still confused as to why you didn't take Kevin's advice and run it by JSA since I guess they have a rep as easier to pass things. Kevin liked it, right?

Again, this is just my 2 cents.

While JSA has great Customer Service, I am still not a fan. I was concerned that JSA would be like PSA at the time. They would take it "behind the curtain", two kids would fail it after looking at it for 2 seconds and I am out another $200. I was also concerned that JSA's reputation is going down and that the Cert won't be worth anything in 10 years.

Again just my 2 cents

[2dueces]

I look at this forum everyday. I think you guys are a great bunch.
I thank my lucky stars that I never have and never will collect autographs.

[Lordstan]

The reality is that if you are going to collect virtually anything, there is going to be risk, unless you limit yourself severely.

Only buy autos you see signed in person.
Only buy cards you saw come directly from the pack
Only buy packs from the manufacturer.
Only collect stamps you buy from the Post Office.
Only buy cars/motorcycles you buy from the manufacturer
Only buy photos you saw the photographer take and develop
Only buy artwork you saw the artist create
and on and on and on.

The best defense for a collector is a combination of knowledge and scepticism.

The more you know the information about the collectible
The more you know where to get the information on the subject
The more people you know and trust who have knowledge on the subject
The more sceptical you are when evaluating a specific item's authenticity.

Knowledge so you know what you should be looking for in any one item. Scepticism to keep you from convincing yourself something is real because you want it to be real. You should enter into any evaluation assuming the item is fake and needing proof that it is real and not the other way around. If you can't find enough evidence that weighs in on the real side, pass.

No serious collector will ever say they got every item 100% correct. Perfection is unattainable unless you limit yourself as listed above, but if you can accept that a few mistakes are worth the enjoyment you get from all the correct decisions then there is no reason you can't enjoy collecting anything you like.