I think it's great that these forgeries have been exposed, and I'm sure there will be others. I love the detective work that is going into this. And I hope it scares the TPAs into tightening their procedures and getting better at what they do. It seems to me that the recent sudden influx of signed old cards might have raised some alarms with them, although I guess it would be easy to explain as the result of the rising prices bringing more of them to market. What I don't understand, though, is the chorus of those wishing to shut down the TPAs and, presumably, go back to the wild west days of yore in the 80s and 90s, when a show of any size would feature dealers with stacks of index cards and old autograph book paper with every name in sports whose autograph collectors were willing to shell out money for, many of them appearing to have similar characteristics as if drawn by the same hand. Those of us who set up at shows back then would pass those tables, shake our heads and mutter, "what are you going to do?" and just move on, resigning ourselves to the old saw that "a fool and his money are soon parted." Smarter collectors gravitated to the dealers who seemed to know what they were doing and whose offerings didn't include the aforementioned stacks of index cards. When the TPAs started coming in, the market responded quickly and positively to the idea of having experts examine autographs for authenticity before being sold, and slowly but surely it became necessary for even the most knowledgeable dealers to get their wares certified in order to be able to sell them. As their expertise became less and less important to their own business and more and more valuable to the TPAs, the best of them followed the money and became authenticators. Even among the few dealers that remain, how many of their autographs haven't been OK'd by the big four TPAs? This evolution, really a revolution, of the hobby has it's good points and bad points from a collector's perspective, and there are many good arguments to be made as to the pros and cons thereof, but it seems to me that the arguments end when the question becomes "what does the marketplace think of the advent of TPAs into the hobby?" The answer to that question is irrefutable.
So now there is this scandal uncovering mistakes made by our watchdogs, following on other scandals in the past, and surely preceding more to come. We've all chuckled over the incidences of TPAs rejecting pieces that happened to be accompanied by their own prior LOAs, or turning down autographs that had just been signed and witnessed ten minutes earlier at the same show, or differences of opinion between the so-called experts themselves. These, and other such indicators of a lack of perfection in the process we rely upon and pay for and particularly in the infallibility of those trusted with implementing it should rightly give us pause and question whether this really is the best system for assuring that we are getting what we think we are. But having lived through the evolution of the hobby to where we are today, I would ask two questions of those who advocate scrapping this system and going back to the freewheeling times of the past: First, tell me how many bad autographs you think have been slabbed or given LOAs by the big boy TPAs compared to those that are good? Give me a percentage. And secondly, describe to me a system that does a better job of weeding out forgeries and providing confidence to the average Joe collector that he's getting what he's paying for?
|