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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klrdds
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 !
|