[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred

Jay beat me to the point -

"And whos' to say that when someone buys one of these lots that they can't sell off the good sigs and slip in bogus ones, then dump the lots with a bunch of bad sigs."

What happens if the lot owner slips in a fake "tough" autograph and then sends it to PSA and wants to have it individually authenticated based on the blanket LOA?

David's point regarding the cost of an LOA is valid. It would cost thousands of $$$ to authenticate a huge lot. But isn't the purpose of an LOA supposed to be a true authentication of the item which it supports? There should not be any errors when an LOA is being used (my opinion). But we all know better than that.

I think a blanket LOA on two thousand autographs was very irresponsible. Think about it. If the authenticator actually took 2 minutes to examine each autograph that would be 4,000 minutes or about 67 hours!!! Lets just say the authenticator spent one minute on each autograph - that's 33+ hours. Cmonnow - do they actually expect someone to believe that they actually took the time to look at all of them. Doesn't the issuance of the LOA indicate that the item(s) in question have been reviewed by the authenticator? Not only that, is there an autograph authenticator that has an eidetic memory that gives them the ability to know what each and every autograph is supposed to look like? Do they know which hand each person wrote with? That's a pretty large stretch to accept. One of these days it's going to open these suppliers of LOAs to some serious litigation.

COMMON SENSE - Where is it these days?