R E Question
 

I am posting an autograph from RE auction it is certed by JSA. I just would like your opinions.

http://bid.robertedwardauctions.com/...emid=25513#pic

What's your problem with it? Did the photog live in Michigan?

It looks good, or, to use your own language,

:D:D:D:D:D.

I mentioned the whole lot of them in the other REA thread.

You know what they say about things that seem too good to be true...

Signed pictures of Ruth "too good to be true"?

Can you count to, oh, about a billion? ;)

When was the last time you saw six essentially perfect signed Babe Ruth photos that were uninscribed?

And if a forger were good enough to do these, do you think he'd be stupid enough to submit six at once?

Yes, especially if he can get them certed. Your question implies that you don't believe a forger could be good enough to do these; is that right?

You aren't the slightest bit skeptical when eleven signed photos of the biggest names show up out of nowhere? And they are all perfect, and not a single one of those players wrote "To John," or "Best wishes," or "Sincerely," or "4/17/48," or anything of the like? Have you ever seen an autograph you didn't like?

Nope. Never have. Except for that Gary Cooper piece. :)

My question does not imply that at all. I'm not responsible for what you infer.
There are certainly forgers that good. But i don't believe anyone that good would be that stupid.

Ah, gotcha. Well, I think he could be that stupid (especially if they're authenticated by somebody). If you open up all those photos in tabs and flip through 'em quickly and over and over again, you don't smell anything the slightest bit fishy?

Quite the opposite. As I posted a while back, there are variations among the "Ruth"s that I interpret as evidence of their being genuine. A practiced forger would not, I believe, show such variation--having worked hard to perfect his perfect Ruth.

You say a forger wouldn't be this stupid. But that could be what they want you to think, that no way would a forger be stupid enough to make so many and sell at once. And maybe they'd also change the Sig different to make them all not look 100% the same.

And maybe God created the universe 6000 years ago, seeded with all the evidence to look like it is actually 15 billion years old.

My advice to you, Brock, is... don't bid on any of them.

knowing david is a physics professor, the song to big bang theory started playing as i read the first sentence above.

Thought you would all like to see how much guts psa has.

Your Request for Item "full name babe ruth photo", eBay Lot No. "221214951536", opinion was rendered at "4/16/2013 9:07:19 AM" and the result was:

Response: "Unable to Render Opinion"

Here are the details of your Request:
Comments: item is for sale in robert edward auctions this is a scam
Request ID: 95674
Request By: 04/17/2013

You will be refunded the amount of $7.49, if the refund does not reflect on your credit card statement please contact us quickopinion@collectors.com.

Thank you choosing the QuickOpinion service!

Shelly,


Will they even render an opinion on it, since they have now refunded his money?
Who listed it? I see the description: "Nothing until I hear from PSA"

James... Think for a minute. Who listed it?

Shelly, they pointed out in their reply that they know the photo is currently being auctioned by SCP. Has it ever occurred to you that they won't give an opinion on an item that should not be listed on eBay?

I had it put up. They would not render an opinion because it is in an aution so they want three dollars more. I just paid that. I want to see what they say if anything. This is a piece that was not done when Jimmey was at PSA.

I assume who listed it, but would rather ask than assume (especially around here)

Shelly,

Please keep us posted.

Shelly, I couldn't help but notice that you recently sold an autographed item with a CoA from "Absolute Authentic Autographs."

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Drew-Brees-A...p2047675.l2557

Who are they?

+1

Clearly the item listed was a copy and not in hand. Is it their policy not to do a quick opinion on scans of items that they know is not in the seller's hands? If not, it should be.

It appears Absolute Authentic Autographs does in person signings. The Drew Breese hologram on the jersey shows that it was signed at a formal signing.

Here is there answere when I posted it as RE auction.
Your Request for Item "full name babe ruth photo", Robert Edward Auctions Lot No. "977", opinion was rendered at "4/16/2013 11:16:03 AM" and the result was:

Response: "Unable to Render Opinion"

Here are the details of your Request:
Comments:
Request ID: 95698
Request By: 04/17/2013

You will be refunded the amount of $10.00, if the refund does not reflect on your credit card statement please contact us quickopinion@collectors.com.

Thank you choosing the QuickOpinion service!

Yeah, so? See above.

I'm confused. Can't you guys fight more clearly?

Sorry if you can't keep up, Scott. (When in doubt, though, just post another picture of the green '27 Yankees ball. ;) )

I wouldn't want to keep reminding you of your blunder ;)

Well, I don't subscribe to your "one, true, religion."

Let's just agree to disagree.

Wowsers... Wtf??? This is a little odd I must say.

NEVERMIND.. THOUGHT IT WAS CERTED BY PSA TOO

In boxing a no decision goes to the champ. In authenticating who does it go to.Would you buy a no decision?:rolleyes:

JSA saw it in hand. PSA has not. Perhaps they would render a final decision if they had it in hand.

Who gives a sh*t? Some PSA employee tasked with looking at a computer screen won't render an opinion on a 72-dpi partial scan. (And we don't know whether he's "unable to render an opinion" due to the autograph, or the politics.)

Make up your own mind. Thinking of buying? Ask SCD for high-res scans.

I have no idea what you are talking about, but you are the one who seems to have a "one, true, religion" when it comes to neatly-signed, perfectly-spaced, slowly-written signatures on '27 Yankees balls.

I have no opinions on this grouping of Ruth photos. I just thought the discussion was getting ridiculous when you stopped debating the original topic and instead posted a link to a Brees jersey in order to deflect the discussion toward Shelley's credibility. Now you deflect further by bringing up that green Yankees ball? I can talk about that thing all day if you'd like, but I'm running out of signatures to rip up.

Oh, please do, Scott. But as far as I'm concerned, based on your experience, and the number of Ruths and Gehrigs and Lazzeris, and... you've examined "in the flesh," your opinion on these autographs is worth precisely what my opinion on T206s is.

What is this about? Are you saying this item is bad? It comes with Brees personal COA. :confused:

Why should the reality and the full truth stand in the way of a post that tries to rip Shelly? :confused::confused:
Nice post Zip.

Zip, are you saying that someone said I am selling something that is not authentic on Ebay.
Let that person say that is fact or shut his or her mouth.:mad:
Not only that, the question on the start of the thread was do you like this autograh or not. The question is still out there.It seems that PSA has no answer.Do any one of you?

I agree, handling more items should give you more expertise.

Scott, when you know what your dealing in it is easy. When you think that you you know what you are dealing in your screwed.:D

I've said this before, but there is an 'eye' involved in hobbies like this (autographs, photographs, color lithography). I know guys who have handled thousands of lithographs over a period of decades, and are still fooled by fakes that would not have fooled me after I'd handled only a small handful. Same with albumen prints. And...same with autographs :(

REA appreciates the concern expressed to us regarding the Boston photographer's find. We will be having these eleven photos reviewed again. If there is any additional information that anyone might have, we would appreciate this information being communicated to us so that we can provide it to JSA. The consignor is also available to speak to anyone that is interested.

Sincerely,

Robert Edward Auctions, LLC.

info@robertedawrdauctions.com

Authentication
 

I am the person who submitted the photos to REA. I can assure any and all that they are as authentic as you can get. I am not a specialist in signatures but I have done a lot of research on REA and JSA and they are the absolute tops when it comes to verifying and authenticating memorabilia. I have talked to my mother (whom I got the photos from) and she remembers the photographer giving her a box full of his photos from when he was an apprentice to when he was a full fledge photographer. Some where given to him as payment and some he took himself. He, however, had all the signatures himself. Whether or not the photos are from the 1900's or the 1040's, the signatures are legit.

Also
 

I also want to say that REA went to a lot of trouble and expense to get these autograph's authenticated. They too were exercising caution, but after they had the signatures authenticated by professionals, only then did they agree to take my photos on consignment.

what kind of research did you do on jsa and what did you find to consider them "tops"?

Opinion
 

My opinion is that I have had dealings with REA and JSA in the past and they are as honest and legit as they come. If they say the autographs are real....then they are real! Take it from someone who has spent thousands of $$$ on memorabilia.

My brother in law ran a memorabilia shop for years and used them for authenticating their merchandise. I held on to these photos until I thought the time was right to auction them off. Before doing that I contacted maybe 10 auction sites and visited a few more and REA was the only one who didn't want to just snatch up the photos without first authenticating them. They promised me nothing in return except a fair auction.

Don't be so naive. Jimmie may be honest, but he is human. He has made many well-documented mistakes.

I suppose we can say this: "If Jimmie say's it's real, he believes it is real."

Simple solution: Have them re-authenticated by another firm. If they say they are real then the value will be even more!

when jsa authenticated an old boxing signature from the late 19th century without any exemplars to go by, but still issued the cert stating that the signature compares to other exemplars they have seen, then is that being honest and legit? the item got pulled from auction when no exemplars could be found but psa and jsa had both issued certs!

when they authenticate a luis firpo boxing autograph that looks nothing like any the boxing hobby has ever seen in 50 years of cataloguing his signature, what is that? It was pulled from the auction in disgrace? Or how about the john l sullivan signed in fancy script when real john l sullivan handwriting is sloppy and almost illegible. he was asked about it and he said he had exemplars to match the fancy john l sullivan signature, but no he couldnt show them to anyone!!!

how did you vet spence other than a brother used him to authenticate? did you check into him at all. look at his skills and track record?

So you spent thousands of $$$ on a COA? Makes sense to me.:eek:

+1

I am a collector of memorabilia and I have spent thousands of dollars on such items. Before I buy anything, I make sure it is authenticated.

This is a perfect example of how the market place has evolved with TPG, what is really meant is if they say it's real - the marketplace accepts and treats it as real (making it liquid).

Same thing on the card side, the TPG's basically print money by their actions.

+1

You go fishing?
 

Yikes. :eek:

James Graham...I sent you an e-mail. Let me know if you get it.

by whom? just authenticated, by uncle frank or grandpa bob?

but that doesnt make it right.

This sort of comes to mind too.....(concerning LOA's in general, not this specific auction. I haven't even looked at it)

TPA authenticated autographs are no longer historical artifacts. They are commodities, and the only thing you need know about them is that they can be easily resold down the line.

Too true David. Reminds me of buying an old unopened bottle of wine for and investment. Might be vinegar and nobody's going to know for sure unless they open it...which probably isn't going to happen.

Well-stated.

It's easy to forget that 'collectors' are buying these things with no idea as to whether or not they are authentic - doubt many even care.

There not only buying the authenticator there buying the stories that go with it.:D

...........or real

LOT WITHDRAWN (along with lot #’s 857, 861, 881, 917, 929, 975, 977, 983, 984): This lot has been withdrawn at the request of our consignor due to REA’s efforts to provide additional information regarding provenance being excessive (which they may have been). We are honoring the consignor’s request and apologize for any inconvenience to the consignor and to bidders.

Once you start asking the right questions things happen. I personally would like to see a few more removed but this was one great start.
I am happy to see that a least Rob had the guts to do what is right. Rob will tell you it only takes few question to change how you look at things.

Rob didn't pull 'em. The consignor did.

Exactly. Read the post Shelly. This had nothing to do with Rob having the guts to do what's right.

I must say, this sight and the people involved here have done a lot to strip the power from these TPAs and auction houses. Knowledge is power and the more it is shared, the better for all.

I don't know what Shelly edited out of his post, but it now reads accurately to me. The consignor pulled the lot due to "REA's efforts to provide additional information regarding provenance". Thus, "Rob had the guts to do what is right" (ask questions which led to the consignor pulling them). I know that this is what Shelly intended to convey with his post, and any feuds any of you have going with him isn't going to change his intent.

I don't know if the autographs are good or not, but the story behind them stinks, and the logic that some here used to defend them stinks as well.

edited to add: (ask questions.......) text

Scott,

I tried to send you a PM, but your box is full....

Hi James, I'm really sorry about that - I had to do it because of some cards I'm selling in the BST area. People keep sending me PM's and I can't handle them, so I let my inbox fill up, to force them to send emails.

You can reach me using 'contact member', but you have to choose email.

the only pressure for consignor to pull them in my theory is that rea would have pulled them and consignor thought better of it and pulled them first so they wouldnt have a history of being pulled by the auction house. now consignor can consign elsewhere with the jsa certs and no history of being rejected by an auction house, just voluntarily pulled.

but if that is the case then rea was ready to pull them if the consignor didnt do it themselves and if the consignor wasnt ready or able to answer additional questions on provenance, so i think that the deflecting answer of "consignor pulled items, not rea" is just semantics. what do others think on this theory.

rea? what say you?

Scott, I edited my grammer and spelling like most of my post. You are correct it was the questions asked that caused these items to be pulled in everyone's best interest. No one has said they are not in fact authentic. That is up to you.

I haven't even looked at them closely - I simply argued against the logic that one forum member used to defend them.

More likely to my mind is that when Rob further discussed the provenance with the consignor, the consignor got cold feet and opted to pull the items and sell them elsewhere rather than have the write-up amended to include the additional details. Presumably, this would only be the case if the consignor felt that the additional details would hurt the sale price of the items. This seems more likely to my mind than a "I'm going to break up with you before you have a chance to break up with me" scenario.

Both the consignor (and his buddy) and REA have posted here, so there is potential to hear both sides of the story.

It did not take the seller to make up his mind what he is going to do with the photo's.


I will attempt to either sell or auction them off again after I have them re-authenticated.


That was quick.

Plus one. It would be nice to hear why.