Attention memorabilia collectors

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Art M.</b><p>And you thought only cards could be "altered".......<br /><br /><a href="http://www.signedbaseballmagic.com/beforeafter.html" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.signedbaseballmagic.com/beforeafter.html</a><br /><br />Is nothing safe these days?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>zach</b><p>I dont consider that "altered". You're getting rid of autos you don't wont, not restoring the one you want left. Nothing is wrong with this, the only thing that would be wrong was if the guy touched up the signature you wanted to be kept.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>scgaynor</b><p>It is a big deal to autograph collectors. Removing unwanted names and personalizations can add huge value to a ball. <br /><br />Scott

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>I like personalizations, even if they aren't "Dear David." Though I'd prefer a good handwritten letter over a signed ball any day.<br /><br />As far as that web page goes, to me there's something not right about removing a Ford Frick or Bill Dickey or even a Mickey Vernon autograph from a ball. Putting aside market value debate, I thought you were supposed to be happy that Bill Dickey signed your baseball.<br /><br />The hobby should be for collecting history, not for artificially creating it.<br /><br />Luckly this type of restoration is simple to identify.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>This is a huge deal and horrible for the hobby. The reason why single signed baseballs are so valuable is because they are in fact a rarity. Nobody thought in the old days to get a baseball signed only by one person. A ball signed by Christy Mathewson alone is worth 3-4 times the amount if it had several others on it. The price difference between a single signed and a ball with multiple signatures is in fact rather big. <br /><br />DJ

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>I've always thought it was stupid that a ball signed by Ruth alone would sell for more than one signed by Ruth and Gehrig. Only in a truly insane world could you make money by erasing Gehrig's signature, or Ruth's. <br /><br />I'm not sure I object to this as a form of deception. If someone actually thinks less is more, they can pay for it. But it will be sad to see genuine treasures being erased. Kind of like card companies chopping up Babe Ruth's bat.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>That's kind of my point. If a collector wants a Lou Gehrig signature removed from a baseball, there's something wrong with the collector not baseball.<br /><br />And, as with cutting up jerseys for cards, most of these alterations will be done for purely financial (resale) reasons.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>I've even heard of stories of auction houses literally unstitching baseballs where an autograph was on the other panel and re-stitching it with a contemporaneous unsigned panel to "voila" give you a single-signed ball of some major period superstar.<br /><br />Just like anything else in life - follow the money, and you'll find exceedingly creative [and often disturbing] methods to achieve that end where the money is. Easier in cards - but in many aspects of this hobby [and most other hobbies]<br /><br />~ms

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>This is weird. I agree that the problem is with the collectors who put more value on balls with names removed. <br /><br />I'll pose another angle on this - if it gets easy enough to remove signatures there may eventually be no point in removing them, so value may not go up.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>As a person who collects autographs, it's all about the rarity aspect. I don't think a lot of the card guys get it. What makes a Jimmie Foxx single signed baseball so rare is that it wasn't like today where people would go into a store, buy a $12 baseball and get Bob Feller to sign it. Back in those days, a baseball would be filled up by as many players as possible.<br /><br />Let me put it this way. How would you feel if there was a company that could take ANY condition plagued card and make it into a PSA9 or PSA10. How would that effect the business? It's kind of the same thing. You would have 10,000 PSA10 Ty Cobb T206 Red Backgrounds in the first month.<br /><br />DJ<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>My sentiments exactly. What is the differnece between removing "undesirable" signatures from a ball and rebuilding the corners and removing the creases from a card? Both have been altered to make the item more desirable and valuable in the marketplace. While we are at it, let's remove all but the smile from the Mona Lisa since that is what everyone finds so intriguing about the painting.<br /><br />I do have a serious problem with the fact the item has changed from it's original historical context. Much akin to chopping up a jersey or other piece of memorabilia.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I'm incompetent at being incontenent.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>If it is not identified that the names have been removed from a baseball, it could be argued that this is a form of forgery-- as the essential identity of the ball has been changed to fool others (the hobby considers a team signed ball and a single singed ball two different things and values them differently). If it is identified that names the have been removed, it would be distasteful to many (including myself), but would not be forgery. If the hobby values a natural single signed Jimmy Foxx baseball higher than an artificially created single signed Foxx ball, a ball owner can't get names removed and represent it as a natural single signed ball during resale. <br /><br />As in alterations, restorations and reprinting, it's all about disclosure and honesty. Sellers don't get in trouble for saying a restored item was restored. They get in trouble for saying a restored item wasn't restored.<br /><br />This also makes good provenance for a single signed ball that much more important. If you can establish that the Ruth signed ball has been around a long time, it likely will be a better investment. A simple test for the worried potential buyer is to have the seller prove he bought the ball as a single signed ball. The seller who had the names removed himself isn't going to be able to come up with the Mike Gutierrez or Robert Edwards receipt for a single signed ball.<br /><br />Lastly, if you see a baseball with signatures of Eric Estrada and Ty Cobb on the same panel, you can be confident it hasn't had signatures professionally removed.