Very, very, interesting...

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

What specifically are you implying Richard?

Auction houses want the high priced items to be authenticated by TPA's.
A lot of money is at stake.
They earn zero if the authenticators deem an item to be not authentic.
When a lot of money is at stake perhaps pressure is placed on authenticators to authenticate things that maybe should not be authenticated.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Auction houses want the high priced items to be authenticated by TPA's.
A lot of money is at stake.
They earn zero if the authenticators deem an item to be not authentic.
When a lot of money is at stake perhaps pressure is placed on authenticators to authenticate things that maybe should not be authenticated.

I thought that's what you were getting at...anyone ever put pressure on you to pass something?

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

I thought that's what you were getting at...anyone ever put pressure on you to pass something?

I worked for several auction houses over the years. Phillips, American Memorabilia and Guernsey's.
The only one of those three who put pressure on the authentication team (3 of us) was American Memorabilia. Screaming, shouting matches used to break out as we refused to give in to the pressure. Eventually we were asked to leave their employ and they switched authenticators. Apparently they get along a lot better with PSA.
The negative reports about American Memorabilia did not come to light until long after they changed authenticators.
But I see autograph auction items where the players name is misspelled and I wonder why the TPA's would authenticate such items and how could they not even make a note of that misspelling in the COA. I see TPA's authenticating items (very rare boxing) that have no known exemplars and wonder in astonishment how their ethics could allow them to do that.
Pressure from the auction house??

[travrosty]

Go to ebay, and look at every single one of the 'authenticated' babe ruth signatures, all of them, and look at them and compare, and you can see there is a problem here. Go to all the auction houses, look at the all the ruth sigs that have been authenticated over the past 10 years. It's amazing.

Not just the baseballs, but the flats, cuts, etc. so many differences but many are cited as being signed in the same era.

How many babe ruth's were there floating around signing stuff? I always thought there was only suppose to be one. i have spent hours and hours looking at them on ebay and auction houses, and i suspect the people who say there is no obvious differences or problems with the autographs uncovered at the haulsofshame investigation haven't looked at too many.

Richard mentioned the rare boxing signature with no exemplars.

It was 'deemed authentic' by two companies, then the certs were pulled after people complained and called them on it. But instead of pulling the item from the auction, the auction house mentioned that although due to a lack of exemplars, these companies both feel this piece is authentic. Based on what?

The auction place still wanted to sell the item. And they kept the listing up, and sold it. No exemplars, still sold it.

Based on what? We are looking into a crystal ball now? Why were the certs issued in the first place? They didn't have exemplars. They knew they didn't have any, and this auction listing should be investigated to figure out what is going on with these authenticators.

People want answers, because if they issue certs without exemplars in this instance, what other signatures have they done the same thing, only it went through undetected? The free pass has expired.

One of these companies recently certified a James Jeffries (boxing) autograph at a sunday memorabilia show and they listed the name as 'James Jeffers' on the certificate. If you look at the sig, the last name does look like it is signed jeffers, only because that's how his signature sometimes looks to the naked eye. They had no idea who this guy's name was, they went with what they saw. It's gone beyond silly now to crazy.

But they know Babe Ruth, and don't ever question them or you are a Monday morning quarterback!!! They can't get James Jeffries, Luis Firpo, John L. Sullivan, Robert Fitzsimmons, Joe Louis, Jack Sharkey, Jack Dempsey, Jack Johnson, Battling Nelson, Sonny Liston, Muhammad Ali, Max Schmeling, or Mike Tyson correct, and those screwups were no brainers, but let's trust them with one of the most expensive autographs in the hobby because these world experts must know something we don't.

Travis Roste-boxing expert

[RichardSimon]

Now the TPA's must be using crystal balls to authenticate the signature of someone who could not write (boxer Tom Sayers).

"Both PSA/DNA and James Spence believe this piece to be authentic, but are unable to issue paperwork due to an absence of exemplars."
-- from the Heritage Auction catalog. and this after the TPA's issued COA's and then withdrew them, when the auction house was called to task on a handwritten piece, allegedly written by Tom Sayers.

Oh, they believe it to be authentic. Well, considering that we are in a hobby that is free of fraud , who can blame them for their beliefs?
The Sayers item sold for over $10K, I guess the person who bought it has the same beliefs as the TPA's. In this case I think I would be an atheist.
Is this just ridiculous or am I being too much of a cynic?
I can accept the fact that mistakes can be made, we have all made them, but this instance cannot be described as a mistake.

[GrayGhost]

That Sayers mess is VERY disturbing. This has got a lot of steam in a real hurry. Again. at some point, this is going to blow up in some people's faces. For those that like Drama, or don't like Certain "authenticators", it'll be kinda satisfying.

For collectors/other dealers who relied, often to the tune of thousands of dollars, on "expert" opinions and got taken, its simply AWFUL.

Oh, BTW, a friend of mine has a handwritten copy of The Gospel. signed by St. Matthew. Should I "send it in". I mean, hey, no reason to NOT believe its real, just because nobody has seen his signature?

[mr2686]

I will be sending in my Adam and Eve signed Fig leaf.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by travrosty

...and don't ever question them or you are a Monday morning quarterback!!!

Travis,

This is a complete mischaracterization of what I wrote and you know it. It's quite clear my reference to "Monday Morning Quarterback" was in regard to people who are suddently acting like this potential Ruth situation was so obvious and "they just knew it all along." Maybe Richard did. Maybe some others did. But if it was "so obvious," why did it take 10 years to put together a study? In all your previous rants and diatribes, where did YOU provide any evidence and comparisons of Ruth signed balls? If it was "so obvious," it should have been easy, right?

Th truth will be the truth and I will watch as the situation unfolds. There is nothing wrong with questioning as I have done it many times myself. I won't comment any further in this thread other than to note that your happy schadenfreude dance is unseemly and sickening.

[travrosty]

It IS quite obvious, These questions have been raised before, but fell on deaf ears, it is just now picking up steam. I brought something up over 2 years ago that most people still don't know about but will know about soon. It not babe ruth baseballs but is related to all of this. It's hard to break through the defenders and protectors of these companies who keep telling people to be quiet, because these companies are doing a great job. That day and age has passed and people are waking up. TPA could be such a good tool to use if it was done right. I am not against TPA's in theory, but don't see any value in the way it is being done now. I wouldn't even have a problem with a serious mistake made here or there. But with the plethora of incredibly ridiculous mistakes, one after another after another, when a coa is issued for jack johnson signed on a card produced a few years after he died, and the back of the card even states that johnson died in a car accident, there is something seriously wrong here.

I have made a mistake and given a refund to a customer for 75 dollars when it turned out not to be legit, so I am not perfect either, but holy cow, let's get some perspective here on the gravity of this situation. It is dire.

Richard, you are not being too cynical. Some of this stuff is just being shown the light of day, and they desparately don't want it to be shown, because it shows how they operate internally. Is a piece authentic based on how they feel that day, or are there objective standards they follow?

Steve Z., just tell us how you feel about these companies and these disparities. Please, I want to know. Are they doing a good job? Is 50k, 100k, not enough money to warrant a serious introspection on these balls? Or should it just be swept under the rug? Shouldn't we also hear from the companies that certified these? shouldn't they give us their explanation as to why they certed these balls that are all over the map? Will we ever hear from them? I seriously doubt it because they believe in the silent treatment, hoping it will go away.

A question I have is why does it take someone from the outside to scour through hundreds of auctions over a dozen year period to figure this out, when the TPA's had images of all these balls all along right there in their database, and they couldn't put two and two together? They had it right there. There wouldn't be any need for Monday morning quarterbacking if the PAID Sunday game time quarterbacks were on the stick.

Here we have a guy doing it for FREE and taking flak for it? Can't wait for part 3.

Remember it is Ron K's opinion in contrast to the TPA's opinion who don't put the name of the authenticator who looked at the balls on their COA's. I will take Ron K's word first and foremost over authenticator X hiding behind a company banner. He has the guts to put his name to it and say he is the one who believes these balls not to be in the hand of Ruth. You have to respect that.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by travrosty

Steve Z., just tell us how you feel about these companies and these disparities. Please, I want to know. Are they doing a good job? Is 50k, 100k, not enough money to warrant a serious introspection on these balls? Or should it just be swept under the rug?

Travis:

I've clearly stated the truth should come out and there should be a reasoned examination and discourse. Just because I'm not running down the street with a pitchfork and torch, you equate that with sweeping something under the rug. Rubbish.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by travrosty

Richard mentioned the rare boxing signature with no exemplars.

It was 'deemed authentic' by two companies, then the certs were pulled after people complained and called them on it. But instead of pulling the item from the auction, the auction house mentioned that although due to a lack of exemplars, these companies both feel this piece is authentic. Based on what?

The auction place still wanted to sell the item. And they kept the listing up, and sold it. No exemplars, still sold it.

Based on what? We are looking into a crystal ball now? Why were the certs issued in the first place? They didn't have exemplars. They knew they didn't have any, and this auction listing should be investigated to figure out what is going on with these authenticators.

People want answers, because if they issue certs without exemplars in this instance, what other signatures have they done the same thing, only it went through undetected? The free pass has expired.

One of these companies recently certified a James Jeffries (boxing) autograph at a sunday memorabilia show and they listed the name as 'James Jeffers' on the certificate. If you look at the sig, the last name does look like it is signed jeffers, only because that's how his signature sometimes looks to the naked eye. They had no idea who this guy's name was, they went with what they saw. It's gone beyond silly now to crazy.

But they know Babe Ruth, and don't ever question them or you are a Monday morning quarterback!!! They can't get James Jeffries, Luis Firpo, John L. Sullivan, Robert Fitzsimmons, Joe Louis, Jack Sharkey, Jack Dempsey, Jack Johnson, Battling Nelson, Sonny Liston, Muhammad Ali, Max Schmeling, or Mike Tyson correct, and those screwups were no brainers, but let's trust them with one of the most expensive autographs in the hobby because these world experts must know something we don't.

Travis Roste-boxing expert

That Sayers thing was appalling but not surprising; big packs of whores on both sides of that table when there's money to be made. No expert is beyond question; they are human beings and prone to human errors.

I spend a lot of time and study on the autographs I want and usually try to get them on a legal document, a contract, or a check. To me those are better media for likely authenticity than some random scrap of paper. But nothing is perfect. I've been burned a few times, fortunately on cheap items that I could return.

Sometimes the forgeries are innocent and look damned good; I was very disappointed with a Marciano 1950s postally used PC that turned out to have his wife's signature and I have secretarials of La Motta and some others on vintage postmarked PCs.

Even with the truth of everything said in this thread, and given the demonstrable incompetence of the TPAs, the vast majority of the public accepts their verdicts and that makes their products fungible. I don't think that is ever going to change. It is too entrenched. After all, misgraded cards abound but PSA and SGC chug along.

Ad@m W@rsh@w

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

That Sayers thing was appalling but not surprising; big packs of whores on both sides of that table when there's money to be made. No expert is beyond question; they are human beings and prone to human errors.

Ad@m W@rsh@w

No human error in the Sayers thing,, just greed, unethical behavior and "faith based" authenticating.
autographalert.com has a picture of Sayers' passport, dated one year AFTER the supposed handwritten note was written.
In the space for Sayers' signature is a big X. He could not write his own name.

[aaroncc]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

No human error in the Sayers thing,, just greed, unethical behavior and "faith based" authenticating.
autographalert.com has a picture of Sayers' passport, dated one year AFTER the supposed handwritten note was written.
In the space for Sayers' signature is a big X. He could not write his own name.

I have been told before that his manager John Gideon wrote for him on occasions. Since his literacy was very low. I know somewhere in H.D. Miles, Tom Sayers, 1866 that he was reported as signing some articles for a match. Can't remember the specifics. Anyway the buyer of this letter took a leap of faith. The same as the seller did when he bought it a few years ago in the Sotheby's auction.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

That Sayers thing was appalling but not surprising; big packs of whores on both sides of that table when there's money to be made. No expert is beyond question; they are human beings and prone to human errors.

I spend a lot of time and study on the autographs I want and usually try to get them on a legal document, a contract, or a check. To me those are better media for likely authenticity than some random scrap of paper. But nothing is perfect. I've been burned a few times, fortunately on cheap items that I could return.

Sometimes the forgeries are innocent and look damned good; I was very disappointed with a Marciano 1950s postally used PC that turned out to have his wife's signature and I have secretarials of La Motta and some others on vintage postmarked PCs.

Even with the truth of everything said in this thread, and given the demonstrable incompetence of the TPAs, the vast majority of the public accepts their verdicts and that makes their products fungible. I don't think that is ever going to change. It is too entrenched. After all, misgraded cards abound but PSA and SGC chug along.

Ad@m W@rsh@w

That's the status quo and it is only going to change if the public demands change, and a regulatory agency forces them to change. The vast majority accepts it because they havent even seen one of these ridiculous errors but they need to be reached. The sayers autograph is not human error, as Richard has pointed out.

That listing started out as psa/dna LOA - JSA LOA,

then one of them dropped out first and it just listed the other company as issuing an LOA.

Then it was changed to no authentication, just a belief by these companies that they believe it is real. We have screenshots of all three scenarios.

It wasn't an error, even heritage acknowledged that there was no authentication due to lack of exemplars. so psa and jsa never had exemplars to begin with, but still felt that they could issue LOA's for the piece.

I honesty believe that they think they can do what they want because they don't think people are paying attention, but many, many people are constantly paying attention, every auction, every auction house.