Help on a John Henry "Pop" Lloyd autograph
 

Looking for some help here on the authenticity and value of the Pop Lloyd letter below. The letter on the left on yellow paper is the one in question. The smaller letter on the right on white paper is from Lloyd's page on the PSA site.

The yellow letter is dated June 4, 1963. That's 21 months before his death. It seems to be in a shakier hand than the PSA letter dated August 17, 1961. Notice the similarity of the handwriting, especially the letter "a", capital "D", and most others. Outside of the hand being a little shaky, the letter sure feels right to me. The great content makes the letter better but to me is almost too good to be true. Just my thoughts. Lloyd's autograph would go on his page at CooperstownExpert.com.

Also I did a quick search for any sold Lloyd letters or autographs and came up with very little. It's tough to know the approximate value. Any thoughts or opinions on whether the letter is good as well as the value would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

I'm no expert but based on my initial observation I'm inclined to say no. For background of why I say this let me tell you that before I started I selling part of my collection 4 years ago I was only missing 16 HOFers autographs ( I had 297 of 313 HOFers at that time ) of which 277 were considered authentic without a doubt by PSA and more importantly Jim Stinson too ! So I have some experience on HoFer autographs after collecting for almost 50 years . My total collection numbered over 2500 signatures going back to 1871 on all types of media .
Addressing your Lloyd . Your Lloyd example differs significantly from the bookplate cut in my collection and from the enclosed PSA sample in many ways . Another collector on this board I believe had the sample in Ron's book and your sample letter differs greatly from that published example in Ron's book as well. Even with age and infirmity some basic characteristics of his basic earlier signature would be evident . I am not aware of anyone else on this board having a Lloyd signature . I have seen about 8 Lloyd signatures in my life and 4 weren't close to being good . Your letter has great content and to me that poses a problem . The content is too good for me especially with the foretelling of Aaron and Mays and Ruth's record a full 11 years before Aaron breaks it and when he wasn't quite halfway to Ruth's record . Provenance would be interesting to know as well as who is offering it to you , because Lloyd is not a commonly seen forgery but many are out there , primarily in collections of people who believe they have a real one .
Also further looking shows me several different letter formations in your letter when compared to the authentic sample listed with it .
Again I am no expert but just a collector but I would not get this item for my collection even though I might have blinders on in my desire to add this ultra rare signature to my collection . Possibly this is a case where desire might be blinding judgement , a situation all of us collectors have experienced at one time or another.
Sales of John Henry Lloyd items are very very few and far between because of the lack of samples available let alone authentic samples making it to market. In fact the majority of sales of the few Lloyd items that I am aware of have occurred privately . Because of this there aren't a lot of examples available for reference.
I hope I am wrong in this opinion but I'm not comfortable with your sample and I would not buy it and I would say no to it .
It's a shame Jim Stinson is out of the game now because he'd be of great help . Unfortunately your only resource now is PSA with Bill Corcoran and Kevin Keating , and that will be necessary if you should ever want to resell / trade it .
Good luck !

This letter appears to have been created using the second you posted as a go by. I’m not a Pop Lloyd expert, but it doesn’t pass the smell test.

I WAS the owner of the Lloyd autograph in Ron's book. While it had good (not great) provenance I bought it simply to add to my collection. I had a standing offer to sell it whenever I wanted at a fixed price. I later learned that Ron was once actually the owner of the Lloyd autograph, so one could argue that he had a vested interest on opining on the autograph being good in his book.

Long story short, Kevin Keating looked at it and failed it at the National, so I sold it for the standing offer. I am not saying it was bad, however, if PSA would not pass it, it had little value in the future, so i sold it for the standing offer.

Jim S. and Ron later told me that they had some doubts about the PSA exemplar and other similar "letters" from Negro Leaguers that had content that were simply "too good to be true". Additionally, the two authentic versions in Ron's book from the archives are different, to me, than the ones you are showing and my former autograph. So I personally would air on the side of caution.

Regardless, good luck in your decision.

Frank

Thank you so much for the thoughtful reply. It really sounds next to impossible to know if a Pop Lloyd autograph is real. With that in mind and with your response and the others it seems best to pass on this one. That's not even considering the price.

One of the other replies here is likely from the gentleman to which you refer. He mentioned Jim Stinson's doubts about the PSA example.

I'm just about at the point in HoF collecting that it's not about acquiring guys I don't have, it's more about upgrades and enjoying what's already in the collection. In the past couple years I've thought about selling everything more than ever. It's this kind of situation that pushes me toward that...there's not a lot left to collect in my budget and if I find and can afford it, the signatures are often too scarce to feel great about in terms of authenticity.

Thank you so much for your time and thought. I greatly appreciate it.

Frank - Thank you so much for the insight. For all of the points you mentioned, the only decision is to pass on this one. Your experience really comes in handy here in the form of your advice.

JS

That seems at least as possible as the letter being real. Thanks for taking the time to respond. I've got to pass on buying it.

By the way, here's information on the original recipient of the letter:

Arthur John Daley (July 31, 1904 – January 3, 1974) was an American sports journalist. As a reporter and columnist, he wrote for The New York Times for almost fifty years. In 1956, he was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for reporting and commentary.

That might explain the content, but that doesn't really solidify much for me. Any other thoughts?

There is an image here of what a geniune Pop Lloyd looks like:

https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...Results-012417

I have spoken to Steve Grad and he showed me some Beckett exemplers that have never been shared publicly, but they all seem to resemble this example (including the the "L"s in Lloyd not being connected. The one I owned and the ones you show have them connected. So the signature do look different. That being said, his signature could have (easily) changed later in life.

I know, you want to do everything possible to convince the signature is good (trust me, I have been there). My collection has plateaued for the most part for this very reason as I will no longer spend over $1,000 on an autograph unless it is on some official document I don't feel 100% comfortable with.

Arthur Daily
 

I have absolutely no idea about the autograph. However Daley was a famous and prolific writer. I would suggest spending some time to research his writings to see if anything comes up relating to the letter, unless you are now convinced it is bad, or would still not be worth the risk or expense.

Sorry for Daley misspelling
 

Sorry.

Yes, that does make sense. If I could find the quotes from the letter in one of Daley's pieces it *might* make me change my mind and buy it.

This encapsulates collecting so well...how in the world can we know for sure about the autographs of the tougher guys?