Opinions on adding missing signatures to old team signed items
 

Just wanted to survey the group on this.

What's everyone's opinion on taking, for example, an old team-signed ball that's missing one guy, and getting that missing guy's signature at a later date. Let's assume we're using the same color pen, it's not DECADES later where the player's signature has changed significantly due to old age, etc. Take any grading/authentication out of the equation too.

If I had, say, a 1987 A's ball without Canseco, and added him at a signing event...is that advised against? Incredibly damaging to the value?

I would have no problem adding additional signatures. Quite a few collectors have special milestone balls (ex. 500 home run balls) signed by those players in the club. It would be a rare event to have every 500 home run hitter under the same roof at a signing event. On the football side, signed helmets have sigs added at different times. In my day of collecting signed balls, single signed balls ruled the day. Purportedly, multi-signed balls are harder to sell. Then again, in my day, signed cards purportedly ruined the value of the card, now such cards are all the rage. Add the signature.

Agreed, you should be able to add the autograph to a team ball at a later time, presuming that it is hand-signed/witnessed and that the authentication, if any, is updated to include the new signatures.

I guess it depends (to me) on when the ball was signed originally, but I don't like the practice.

I have no issue with it.

In this case, I'd go ahead and add Canseco. I'd say it's a yes on any team ball from the last 40 years, and on a case-by-case basis on balls older than that. You'd want the new sig to look as close to the older sigs as possible.

No problem, but make sure it's the same color ink and hopefully the other sigs are dark and strong to match the new one. I hate when one or two are real dark and the rest are faded.

I will be the oddball and say I am not a fan. I was about to sign up to another auction house to bid on what would have been an amazing item. I could see the main signature I cared about looked off. Not off like a forgery but off as in it looked to be a newer version of his autograph. The person who consigned it confirmed my original opinion. So to me I no longer wanted it because it had a newer auto on an older item.

It would really depend on the item also. A 87 As team ball I would add Jose.

Not so oddball.... I completely agree.

I like to leave vintage things as they are, and it would bother me to have newly signed autos on a vintage ball. To me, they always stand out in an intrusive way.... brighter ink, bolder auto, slightly different colored ink, newer "style" of autograph, etc.

I like the uniformity of naturally aged baseballs and vintage ink, and I would not corrupt a vintage signed ball, as it would bother me every time I looked at it. Just my personal preference (since the question was asked), and not intended to influence the OP either way.

Thanks all!

Today it would be pretty difficult for somebody to get something like a team signed baseball in a single event. And as mentioned, it is impossible to collect something like a baseball signed by every member of the 500 home run club without constantly adding signatures as time passes.

I think the only circumstance I would advise against getting a signature long after the fact would be if you wanted something like a Mickey Mantle and Mike Trout signed baseball.