Very, very, interesting...
 

.

Yeah that is interesting. Looking forward to the 9 remaining parts to the story.

It never ends. damn...

I agree Scott. The amount of fraud in this hobby seems boundless. Ultimately, many of the deep pocketed collectors will leave. Very bad for the hobby's future, and it does adversely affect even the legitimate Ruths, as it creates suspicion and doubt as to their authenticity. Crazy business.

Dozens of snow white Ruth balls. Where are the dozens of Ty Cobb's, Jimmie Foxx, and Honus Wagner?

Hang on a minute......where did I put that box of balls again?

I can hear the fall back, "All we did was offer an opinion here. Opinions are not guarantees, buyer beware."
Why does this hobby attract so many people who are allergic to an honest day's work? Because we collectors will put up with just about anything and come right back for more.

I never thought I'd say this but "I'm glad I don't own a Ruth signed ball." :confused: It would bug me always wondering if it was genuine or not.

Buying an autographed anything without provenance or some other corroborating information atttesting to its genuiness requires a large leap of faith, regardless who gives the LOA. Given that the value of genuine single signed Ruth balls can be well into six-figures, probably as we speak there are forgers practicing their Ruth signatures. There is little down-side to the crooks. Period balls are relatively inexpensive and easy to find, and if even the signature doesn't pass muster with an authentication company, the forger can simply say he bought it at some flea market and got duped himself. I think that as time goes on, just as with baseball cards with pedigrees, autographed baseballs with pedigrees will sell for substantial premiums over balls with no pedigrees.

EDITED TO ADD that the notion of Peter Nash putting himself out as the good guy in exposing such forgeries raises the bar of hypocrisy to a new level.

most of these balls are touted as late 40's. and they show up snow white.

where are the mid 20's era quotes "Babe Ruth" snow white balls with "babe ruth" in quotes? I don't see those in any quantity at all in this type of condition.

Nobody put any of those away in a shoe box? It's seems to be the majority is a 1940's type autograph. A number of the auctions list later 40's as the year they were signed.

here is psa certing a ruth ball, then since it is sealed in the ballcube by psa, jsa SEEMS to cert it through the glass, the picture shows it still in the psa ballcube.

IF jsa didnt open the cube to inspect a BABE RUTH ball, what kind of inspection could this ball have gotten from jsa if they are looking at it through a ballcube?

It's a grade 7 ball and jsa cant take it out of the cube? Please JSA come on here and please show us you took the ball out of the cube to authenticate it yourself without foreign material in the way of you and the autograph. All I can go by is the picture they provided, and it looks like it was certed in the ballcube to me.

I don't care who sealed it in a ballcube, if it came to me, i am busting it out of there, breaking the seal, and giving it a proper inspection before my name would go on a cert. If the customer wanted to then get it resealed by psa, more power to him, but you have to look at it up close and unencumbered with NO plexiglass in the way. It's a purported high quality Babe Ruth signed baseball for heaven's sake.

Also, one of the first things JSA says they do on these single signed balls is to check for erasures and make sure it wasn't a multi-signed ball with some signatures erased to mask that fact. They even have a fancy machine to check for these things.

How can they seemingly check for erasures or other signatures on the ball, (with the ball still in the cube) when not all of the ball is even visible to the observer? You can't trust someone elses work when the person is bringing the ball to YOU and giving money to YOU for your inspection.

I am not saying the ball was certed in the cube 100%, I wasn't there, but it sure looks like that. If it was, what kind of meticulous attention did it get versus what it deserved?

Please come and show us the ball was taken out of the cube so our fears can be assuaged and this mystery can be solved.

+1

intresting
 

It is stories just like this why I stopped collecting autographed anything many years ago. And as for the experts really what it still comes down to is unless you were there when any item was signed is just an educated guess! That could end up costing the buyer alot of money years later when the item is deemed "BAD" by another educated expert years down the road!

+1

Perhaps the Ruth estate should consider licensing forgeries. That way they could receive royalties, collectors would know what they are getting, and PSA/ JSA/FBI/DNA can get a piece of the action with these "authenticated forgeries". Hey, even honest jobs would be created for the forgers.

who knew Babe Ruth's granddaughter was an expert on Babe Ruth autographs? :confused:

......and I thought I was the only one who thought of this.


Maybe she just wants a piece of the action. ;)

Ruth's granddaughter aside, I respect the opinion of Ron Keurajian, over the alphabet soup guys, every day of the week.

+1

"who knew Babe Ruth's granddaughter was an expert on Babe Ruth autographs?"


I guess if psa or jsa aren't, someone has to be.

I would go with Ron too, the guy has the pulse on Ruth auto's.

If Peter Nash and his investigation conclusively prove that PSA and JSA have make these mistakes what does that mean for the autograph hobby?
Who is responsible for refunding the buyers if buyers demand a refund?
If people are holding $50,000 Babe Ruth baseballs and a report comes out, that conclusively proves that those baseballs are forgeries, what happens then?
I have discussed this with several very knowledgable people. Their conclusions, based on the pictures that Peter Nash has shown, are that at least three different people signed those baseballs. These opinions are based on pictures of the baseballs obviously not the actual item, but opinions, based on pictures, in this instance do have value.
I would also think that such prolific forgers, if Peter Nash is correct, who have proven that they can consistently beat PSA and JSA, have forged many other expensive and historic baseballs too. That is where the big money is.

Richard,
Does anybody really believe that there are that many nearly pristine single signed Ruth balls around today?

it is extremely likely that a number--possibly even a large number--of those high-end Ruth singles are forged. But every photo that Peter has posted is taken directly from the catalog of a high-end sports auction house--Mastro, Lelands, SCP, REA, Heritage, etc., and these auctions took place over the past 10-15 years or so.

Where have all the knowledgeable people (myself included) been? Why has no one spoken up before this? We all, to some degree or other, have been found wanting.

That doesn't speak well for the autograph hobby.

You either have to be the second coming of Houdini or have a very friendly croupier dealing you the cards to 'consistently beat' a Casino.

Well, I have my doubts. But so many have been sold I guess not everybody is doubting them the way we do here.
Good ol' P.T. Barnum could have made himself a home in this hobby. He must have been thinking of pristine Babe Ruth signed baseballs when he said "there's a sucker born every minute."

Or you have to be an auction house that wants to sell these items with as few questions as possible.
And all of them use the same authenticators except for Lelands.

PSA and JSA are most certainly not casinos. Casinos are quite a bit more knowledgeable about their own bread-and-butter (gambling), especially since they would be the ones to lose by making a mistake, rather than their customers.

I'm no autograph expert, but even I was struck by the number of Ruth balls that looked as if they were signed yesterday in major auctions. It made me wonder, but I knew Ruth signed a lot and, as I said just once sentence earlier, I'm not an expert on the subject.

I don't know the specifics of "authentication" cost versus retail value of the ball after it's checked, but it seems to me that even a Mendoza line success average would add up to a substantial profit, and nobody knows about your strikeouts in these "plate appearances".

Doug

I am interested in seeing the next part of the investigation. One of these balls went for 300k.

They believe in the ball, it's pasted several places on their website, and they used it for the first item certed with the new LOA.

------------------


'The first item to receive the new LOA is one of the most famous and admired of all sports collectibles, the finest known single-signed Babe Ruth baseball. It is graded PSA/DNA Mint+ 9.5, and is considered the most valuable, single-signed baseball in the hobby.'


------------------

So they are hitching their star to this ball.

Two thoughts on this story with full disclosure that do not own a high end Ruth ball and never have.

1. Why do we assume that just because someone is a relative that they are also handwriting experts? I had a lady e mail me about an autograph I had (one of 25 on a MINOR LEAGUE team ball vintage from the 1930's) and she insisted that the autograph of her grandfather on the ball was a forgery. He was a complete common who died in the 1990's, totally worthless autograph. She was REALLY pissed that I would have the audacity to sell a forgery of her grandfather! She was 100% wrong but standing on the soapbox of "I'm his granddaughter and I know for sure!", no amount of evidence was going to prove her wrong, she was the expert by birthright appearantly. We give relatives and descendants WAAAY too much credit in this hobby. Aside from a signed letter of provenance stating that the item comes from the relative or ther persons estate, their opinions shouldn't mean much when evaluating a signature 80 years after it was signed. Unless this Ruth relative was sitting in a room watching Ruth's secretary sign for him or some other intimate first hand knowledge, why would we care what her opinion is?

2. By the end of Ruth's life autograph collecting was pretty big so it makes sense to me that there would be WAY more people getting his autograph and keeping it nice (in the sock drawer or something) as opposed to getting a signed Ruth ball in the 1930's when he was still playing when people did not collect autographs as much and the value was merely intrinsic. By the mid-late 1940's people were already thinking of autographs as "valuable" and "collectible" so it does not surprise me at all that SOME of these would survive in High Grade. How many is a completely different story that I would not dare to even guess at. I bet the optomists will be shocked at how many are fake and I bet the pessimists will be shocked that a large number of them are actually real, but regardless of how this ends, some people will be pissed!

Just my 2 cents worth (1 cent for each thought)

Rhys

You may be correct, Rhys, about the number of balls Ruth may have signed in the 1940s, but I must disagree with your contention that these autographs were regarded as particularly valuable then. Even up to the early 1960s--when I began collecting--widows were still giving away signed checks--Ruth, Cobb, Mathewson... the list goes on. In 1966 I was given a signed and inscribed Gehrig photo by a relative of the original recipient. These autographs held only sentimental value in those days. I can only imagine the situation in the 1940s!

You probably could have bought a Ruth signed ball for a buck in the 1940's, if someone even thought enough of it to sell one.
I don't think money was any kind of influence in the baseball autograph hobby in the 1940's.

I agree, just read a story yesterday about a guy who had ruth sign some balls, and later sold them for 1 dollar or 1.50 and now he is kicking himself for doing so but back then that's what they were worth. Another guy sold babe ruth baseball cards for 10 dollars each.

People were not thinking about collectible value back then. If they were and bought the highest condition material, they could have cleaned up, but it didnt happen. People saved a ruth ball for sentimental reasons only.

even as late as 1980's boxing collectors were selling Jake kilrain signed letters for 10 dollars each, now they are 2000 each or more.


They just werent worth much money at all and people didnt think about the collecting for future value until the 1980's, with a few early birds who collected in the 1970's and saw a financial future for it. The term 'dealer' and 'collectible show' wasn't even a glint in peoples eyes.

I wasn't saying that autographs were worth money in the 1940's necessarily, but that people by the 1940's were starting to think of these signed baseballs as more than just whimsical things and started to put them away and keep them nice. A much higher percentage put some type of value on a Babe Ruth ball in 1947 than in 1927 absolutely 100% for sure. If a kid got a Babe Ruth signed ball in 1930, he would show his friends and then a few weeks later probably play with the ball or handle it A LOT. By the 1940's shortly before Ruths death people were starting to understand that signed baseballs of Ruth were a treasure and SOME people (not everyone obviously) were starting to keep stuff like this in sock drawers and treasure them. And yes a small percentage of the population (again, not everyone) put a monetary value on autographs increasingly by the 1940's, if you dont believe me I can post the fly page of any Watermans Autograph Contest Album from 1932 where they spend a full page talking to kids about collecting and saving autographs for their future monetary value! I bet only 1 in 1000 people put any type of value on autographs in the 1940's, but that is better than the 1 in 1,000,000 who put any type of value on them in the 1920's and that is why you see some high grade Ruth balls from the 1940's but never any mint or near mint ones from the 1920's in my opinion. How many fakes there are I have no idea, I am just speaking to why there will be more high grade ones from later in Ruths life than during his career.

An exception to every rule. Here's a mint Ruth from 1928:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j2...th_350copy.jpg

This is disturbing and we'll see how it plays out.

What is a little odd to me is that there is more anger directed at the "alphabet soup" companies than the forgers themselves. :confused:

I am not qualified to be the judge of who is the absolute best Ruth authenticator, but I have to presume JSA and PSA are far better than your run-of-the-mill sports memorabilia dealer. Perhaps there are a handful better than PSA and JSA. But if the allegations are true, is it safe to presume these forgeries would also get by 95% of other dealers?

its not true, his autograph in the 40's was worth about zero, and people werent socking them away for future resale monetary value. just didnt happen. a few socked them away because they wanted a sentimental momento but not because they were 'worth' anything or had the potential to be 'worth' anything. there was no resale market for ruth balls, because there was no demand, thus no expectation of demand in the future.

The anger at the companies is because they potentially take a forgery and legitimize it! Before it was a forgery that might get by someone, might not.

Now it has been 'deemed authentic', and gets by everyone because there is a sticker on the cert, which has been signed by someone.

Now instead of consumers doing their own homework and vetting a ball by carefully inspecting it, getting multiple opinions, - they buy the ball because abc said it was good. If you say that consumers weren't doing that before, and getting stuck with bad balls, they are just doing the same thing now, only they feel better about it.

Never in history have people felt so good at buying potential forgeries. It's now backed up with a hologram! It's feel good authenticating, feel good buying, but what are they truly getting.

If there were no certs on these balls, people would be cautious and check them out, and maybe not pay 300000 dollars for something they dont know anything about, and buy it from anybody anywhere instead of a lifelong dealer who might back up the ball with a lifetime guarantee.

Instead they could buy it from joe blow's beanie baby show, and Joe blow just points to the certificate, and the buyer can be ignorant, the seller can be ignorant, because they trust the comapny. How about educated buyers and sellers and let the company certify coco crisp and milton bradley?

Instead some guy now has a ruth ball that he paid 20 grand for and now we see dozens of blazers all over the place over the last 10 years. Where were these balls 20, 30 years ago? They all come out of the woodwork now?

Where are the 7 dwarfs? because snow white is here!

You stated the problem perfectly.

"but I have to presume JSA and PSA are far better than your run-of-the-mill sports memorabilia dealer."

first of all , how do you know they are good? second, the problem is that now any run of the mill sports memorabilia dealer feels he can sell a ruth ball. just point to the cert.

I am really tired of the excuse. "they probably screw up less than the others so let's go with them."

let's demand competance, and if there is no one here right now, let's wait. Don't reward the best of the worst. Demand better, then you will get it. If you support the way it is being done right now, that's all you will ever get. You will never get anything better than this if this is a great system for you.



we have taken a scholarly pursuit and fastracked it. There is a picture of a jsa cert with a photo on the cert of a psa certed ruth STILL IN THE BALLCUBE! Why? did they not want to break the PSA seal? Is that authenticating, through the glass?

Please answer how that is the right thing to do? Why are these guys good? It's circular logic, the auction houses say they are good, so the collector believes them, they buy from the auction house with the abc cert. they are happy it has an abc cert, because they can resell later at an auction house, so someone else can buy it, and the seller, buyer, auction house, and the abc company all say ABC is good? The auction house makes money, abc makes money, the reseller makes money. Of course they think abc is good, everyones making money.

The problem is the person who will lose money is the guy who gets stuck with the bad autographs LAST! He is the loser. And if the company goes under or proves it is not up to snuff, like GAI, everyone who had a gai cert gets stuck and there are thousands upon thousands of losers. No one learned anything at all from GAI. Speeding into the sun and and future is so bright we gotta wear shades. But it's alright because we all have our pristine Babe Ruth signed baseballs at our side!

:)That just made me laugh hysterically.:p:p:p

This is really crazy. I had lots of faith in the alpha bits authenticators, but now I don't know. To me, if I had the means to buy an expensive ball, I would study it carefully, vs many known examples, and make my own judgment. Yes, its GREAT to have an authenticator be it the Alphabet guys, or anyone else. Soem are better than others, but in the end, unless you were THERE WHEN BABE SIGNED IT. NOBODY KNOWS FOR SURE> We all must take a "leap of faith" and IMO, our own minds and research may be less risky, than a company that authenticates so many sigs they kinda are blue in the face.

Its just an opinion, and this whole thing is making my head spin.

Gee... How long have I been saying this?

the question that is most important to answer is that - after the 10 part series, and you feel like haulsofshame is correct, and that ruth balls have totally been botched, would that be enough to shake your confidence in these companies where you feel like we need something else?


or would that not be enough? and if it wasn't enough, then what would be enough. It's already babe ruth, the biggest name ever, what would it take to say 'enough'? Is there no scenario that you would say "enough, even I couldn't support this craziness anymore?"

I have to agree with you 100% Travis. Also, to add: "No one learned anything at all from" Donald Fryingpangianniand his rubber stamping operation either. I certainly see what you mean about the potential the alphabet soup companies have to cost people a bundle. It's beyond a mess.

Travis:

You make some good points, but part of the logic is flawed in my view.

In essence, your point is that these companies "legitimize" some fakes and create a false sense of security, the collectors don't do their homework, etc. In effect, it is the fault of these companies that these fakes are allowed to flourish.

Following your logic, if these companies didn't exist approving questionable items, collectors would be more educated, they'd all do their homework, go to the proper dealer/experts, have everything reviewed my muliple trusted sources, etc., etc. :rolleyes:

Sorry, I just don't buy it.

Big money will attract fraud. Ruth balls would be selling for big bucks whether PSA existed or not. And collectors would be just as lazy and look to some source of expertise whether PSA existed or not. Instead of trusting the opinion of PSA, they'd be trusting the opinion of some dealer or auction house, who is no less prone to the same shortcomings of a TPA.

I think your view of the hobby sans "alphabet soup" is not realistic.

Can't agree, Steve. We all know to be wary of the seller--that's why TPAs exist. "Don't worry my child, I'm an expert, and I assure you you're not being ripped-off this time."

That is what I do not understand about those who are so against JSA and PSA. If they didn't exist how would someone find out who to trust? Where would a novice autograph collector start? How would they even find someone whose opinion they could trust? Everyone makes mistakes, even major dealers, auction houses etc, but they are not brought into the spotlight because their mistakes are usually not out there for everyone to see. That is why 3rd part authentication exists, to give you an extra level of comfort when buying something. They are just certifying their opinion just like every other major dealer in this industry. It is then up to the consumer to make a decision how to weight that opinion.

I think I get what Jimmy is saying and I agree.

Hi

I never said people were stashing Ruth balls away for monetary future value. Here is what I am trying to say for the third time, and I am 100% correct and have researched this extensively.

1. People in general were saving things like Ruth signed balls more in the late 1940's because they recognized them as a keepsakes/heirloom etc more than they were in the 1920's. Absolutely 100% true. Not because "they were going to be worth something someday" but because they recognized that they were collectible items. I am NOT saying everyone did this, but more people were keeping things like this in sock drawers and trying to keep them nice because they were special items by 1947 then they were in 1927. This is an absolute fact and if you dispute this you dont know autograph collecting history.


2. Autographs WERE being collected by the 1940's by larger numbers of people who viewed them as "valuable" but not in the same way we do today. While there was no set value, there are recorded events where things like Babe Ruth signed baseballs sold for money or traded at a premium for other items and this is 100% true as well. Whether you want to admit it or not, there were small groups of people who were buying and selling and trading autographs in clubs by the 1930's and there were lots of them by the 1940's. If you want an education on the autograph clubs of this time period and how they operated I would be happy to give you one, but you are wrong to state that nobody placed monetary value on autographs in the 1940's because SOME people did, the same way they did baseball cards in this era. Maybe only 10 people in the world wanted a T206 Wagner in 1949 but the facts are there to prove that SOME people did even though baseball cards were worthless to 99.9% of America. Just because some Wagners were being sold at yard sales and thrown away in 1950 does not mean they did not already have monetary value to SOME PEOPLE!

Were people getting Ruth to signed baseballs so they could sell them? No. Were people by the 1940's getting Ruth to sign baseballs because they were highly prized collectibles that did have value and should be kept nice and in nice condition? 100% YES and this is the point I was trying to make.

You are speaking in way too many absolutes. All it takes is 1 person that thought their Ruth ball was worth money in 1947 to prove your statement wrong.

Not trying to start something here, but I am right and I have spoken to people who were members of autograph clubs in the 1940's when I bought their collections who have explained to me first hand how they worked and how they would sell some of their autographs (yes for money in the 1940's including Ruth). They did have some monetary value to some people by the 1940's and to deny this entirely is not knowing the history of autograph collecting in America.

To think that sports autographs had any value other than sentimental in the 1940s is to not know the history of autograph collecting. Through the 1960s no autograph dealer--Mary Benjamin, Charles Hamilton, to name the biggest--would touch a sports autograph.

(Don't believe me? Take a look at Hamilton's 1960 book "Collecting Autographs and Manuscripts," or Benjamin's "Autographs: A Key to Collecting.")