PAWN STARS Shoeless Joe Jackson signed book...

[mr2686]

Wow. You think Herman Darvick was abused? I don't think he was questioned near enough. I'm sure if Morales or anyone else had said the Jackson was good, you all would be all over them. Give me a break.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by travrosty

The more things change, the more they stay the same. If our entire premise was totally wrong, you would think someone currently working for PSA would come on here and correct us. I don't see anyone.

+1

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by ibuysportsephemera

Why should they? Only a small group of people in the total population know about Net54. By the numbers you provided earlier, everyone can see it is a huge business that makes them a lot of money. They have no obligation to you.

Based on the way Herman Darvick (who I had never heard of before this thread) was treated by you when he tried to explain his position....I would also stay far away from this place.

My disclaimer- Autographs are only a small part of my collection, I think that they are never a sure thing unless they were signed in person and have only once gotten an autograph authenticated. I respect many of the autograph collectors here, however it is just too speculative for my taste.

Jeff

I wouldn't say Herman was abused either. Maybe we were a bit "animated"? He told us the back story and answered follow-up to it as well.

His explanation was thorough and told us what he remembered 18 1/2 years ago. he stands by his work then. He didn't get a chance to reexamine it, but stood behind his work 18 1/2 years ago. Love him or hate him, he came on like a professional to stand up for himself. I have respect for that.

You wont see PSA or JSA doing that...which is one of many reasons, professionals (not in this business) like me are sick of their smug NO HEAR, NO SEE, NO TELL attitude. F them. They have a responsibility to their customers and they shun everyone. Personally, I shun them and would never pay .01 cent to have them even certify a double cheeseburger from McDonalds.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by mr2686

Wow. You think Herman Darvick was abused? I don't think he was questioned near enough. I'm sure if Morales or anyone else had said the Jackson was good, you all would be all over them. Give me a break.

you're right...we would

MoralASS , doesn't have the balls to come here or would we want a guy who passes EVERY FORGERY he can get his hand on. He is a complete loser and a criminal IMHO. He's not a bad FDE, He is crooked. There is no excuse for a guy like that other than he's a complete Putz. with ZERO MORALS, hence the name Moraless. Oh, that's right, he's also an ASS, isn't that right Mr. MoralASS.

I would say PSA & JSA aren't quite there yet....let's give it some more time though and maybe the similarities will continue to intersect?

[smotan_02]

Originally Posted by mr2686

Wow. You think Herman Darvick was abused? I don't think he was questioned near enough. I'm sure if Morales or anyone else had said the Jackson was good, you all would be all over them. Give me a break.

Auto certs are opinions. This is the only concrete fact in this entire debate. I don't know the difference between Herman and morales, but I do know that no one will volunteer to go before a firing squad when it is your opinion versus theirs.

[travrosty]

mr. darvick came on here and defended himself. fair enough. he had it consigned from a collector who got the 'cut' from the jackson family and he was positive the pawn stars signed book was real, so he had his say fair and square which everyone should be afforded.

if the pawn stars signed jackson book is now no good based on psa's opinion, i would think mr darvick would be eager to go to rick and buy it for 13000 and then he could have a 50 thousand dollar signature.

if i certed a john l sullivan boxing autograph and it was worth 2500 dollars, and rick bought it for 500, and psa said no good which makes it a bad autograph in Rick's eyes and he considered the autograph a total loss, i would break my arm grabbing for the phone to take it off of ricks hands and bail out his loss for the same 500 because i knew it to be a real 2500 dollar sullivan autograph regardless of what psa thought. because i don't care about psa's opinion. a real autograph is a real autograph.

I am sure that is what Herman did also in this case. There's 30 to 40 grand to be made off of psa's mistake as far as mr. darvick is concerned.

[smotan_02]

Originally Posted by travrosty

mr. darvick came on here and defended himself. fair enough. he had it consigned from a collector who got the 'cut' from the jackson family and he was positive the pawn stars signed book was real, so he had his say fair and square which everyone should be afforded.

if the pawn stars signed jackson book is now no good based on psa's opinion, i would think mr darvick would be eager to go to rick and buy it for 13000 and then he could have a 50 thousand dollar signature.

if i certed a john l sullivan boxing autograph and it was worth 2500 dollars, and rick bought it for 500, and psa said no good which makes it a bad autograph in Rick's eyes and he considered the autograph a total loss, i would break my arm grabbing for the phone to take it off of ricks hands and bail out his loss for the same 500 because i knew it to be a real 2500 dollar sullivan autograph regardless of what psa thought. because i don't care about psa's opinion. a real autograph is a real autograph.

I am sure that is what Herman did also in this case. There's 30 to 40 grand to be made off of psa's mistake as far as mr. darvick is concerned.

It's only 30-40 grand profit when two people's (buyer and seller) opinion a.) line up and b.) buyer is willing to pay that much. PSA and pawn stars have a wider audience than darvick, so now buyer's opinion is swayed. You speak as though they are facts, nothing is fact-based in your post.

[alexautographs]

Originally Posted by smotan_02

It's only 30-40 grand profit when two people's (buyer and seller) opinion a.) line up and b.) buyer is willing to pay that much. PSA and pawn stars have a wider audience than darvick, so now buyer's opinion is swayed. You speak as though they are facts, nothing is fact-based in your post.

Nothing is fact-based in this entire industry (except that Mantle wasted a perfectly good liver).

EVERYTHING is an opinion - the value and grading of your cards, the authenticity of a baseball (or a signature), etc.

Yes, and now that PSA (and PornStars) have killed the piece, even if Jesus himself descended from the clouds with Joe Jackson in tow and they both pronounced the book as authentic, still nobody would buy it.

Hmmm...makes you wonder about the power of the "pawn-ticators", as they should now be called.

Fudd - tell us what you REALLY think of "Moreorless"- don't hold back.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by smotan_02

It's only 30-40 grand profit when two people's (buyer and seller) opinion a.) line up and b.) buyer is willing to pay that much. PSA and pawn stars have a wider audience than darvick, so now buyer's opinion is swayed. You speak as though they are facts, nothing is fact-based in your post.

the fact is either its real or its not.

if psa shot it down, its toast now to most people. but even if it was toast to everybody and i was the authenticator and i knew it to be real, i would buy it for the cut rate fire sale because i dont need psa to tell me if its real or not and i wouldn't cert the autograph if it didnt know it was real 100 percent. no guessing. and if i knew for sure and issued the cert i would certainly buy it cheap if no one else wanted it.

because every real autograph now has to be psa REAL? There is two kinds of real now? real and psa real?

i dont frame my autographs with the psa certificate like some people do. somtimes the psa cert card gets as much exposure on the frame than the signed item does.

[brownscollector78]

I try to stay away from autographs but I have noticed that the industry of autographs has sadly echoed the industry of collectibles in general...too many people are in it just to make a quick $ and those same people drive up the costs of enjoying the hobby- making it harder for true collectors who are in it for the love of it to continue collecting what they love.

A sad state of affairs.

[Exhibitman]

Not to defend PSA/DNA [perish the thought] but when I sent in an Eric Clapton item and it came back as no good it was accompanied by an email string between the company's authenticators going back and forth over why the item was counterfeit or good and it reflected not only a careful study of the piece by more than one person but a willingness to do exactly what I would expect experts to do in a tough case: analyze and discuss the item. I was unhappy with the result but satisfied with the process.

[Herman Darvick]

Originally Posted by Ringking

I just heard about the goof on pawn stars last night. There was a book that a guy had for sale that was signed by Shoeless Joe Jackson. It had a COA from Herman Darvick. Herman is a person that sold something signed by shoeless joe for 23 grand a few years ago. Long story short...the book was a fake and the Pawn Stars are out 13 GRAND on the item.

To make matters worse, they sent the book to PSA/DNA and it came back with a rejection letter saying that the book showed signs of being traced.How can such a self appointed expert make such a huge mistake??? And he works for PSA??? What about other items with his COA now?

It can be seen here: http://www.history.com/shows/pawn-st...say-it-aint-so


watch the whole thing as this goes on for the whole show.

PSA/DNA is wrong. In December 1990, I sold the first authentic signature of Joe Jackson at my auction for $23,100. I authenticated it. To put the price in perspective, in 1990 you could buy a complete collection of the autographs of all 40 U.S. Presidents, from Washington to G.H.W. Bush, for less than $23,100! It was illustrated actual size in my catalogue. It was bought by Leland's auctions and traded to Barry Halper the next day. Google "Joe Jackson" and "23,100" as see how many websites (including books) report this sale. The authenticity of the "Joe Jackson" has never been questioned. 3 1/2 years later, in 1994, I was shown the book bearing a "Joe Jackson" signature which I authenticated and issued a COA. I still believe it is authentic. In this Forum, Mike Nola, Official Historian of The Shoeless Joe Jackson Virtual Hall of Fame Web Site, criticizes PSA/DNA's two major reasons for not certifying its authenticity as read out loud from their letter to Rick on Pawn Stars, "drawn" and "pressure": "Has anyone there given any thought to the fact that the same characteristics that apply to tracing (i.e., pressure points, delays, etc., etc......) pretty much apply to someone such as Joe Jackson who would have been 'drawing' his name based on a pattern taught him by his wife. ... The signature on the book looks different than the one that appears on his will, but the one on his will appears different that the one that appears on his 1941 mortgage note and that one appears different that the one on his 1949 drivers license. In other words all his signatures differ somewhat, since he was just tracing a pattern taught to him by his wife Katie." One more thing: In 2006, I was asked by PSA/DNA to be one of their authenticators. I accepted their offer and signed a 3-year contract. In February 2009, I eMailed PSA/DNA that I did not want to renew my contract and wanted my signature taken off all PSA/DNA Letters of Authenticity issued after the date of my eMail. I have not been a PSA/DNA authenticator since February 2009.

[packs]

It sounds like Joe Jackson doesn't really have a signature so nothing he's ever signed should be considered an autograph. Him drawing his name is equal to him drawing a smiley face or any other doodle, no?

[travrosty]

now mr. darvick is a baseball autograph authenticator, is the babe ruth siganture on the cover of your book "collecting autographs" a real babe ruth autograph, mr. darvick?

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Herman Darvick

The authenticity of the "Joe Jackson" has never been questioned.

Of course it's been questioned. Many, many, times. There is no definitive answer, and there never will be.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Of course it's been questioned. Many, many, times. There is no definitive answer, and there never will be.

and I guess that's just the autograph business in a nutshell David. It really blows

[travrosty]

he was a psa authenticator for over 3 years and is now turning against his old company. wonder if spence, his new boss thinks its a real jackson autograph?

[RichardSimon]

Something I don't quite understand here,,,
Pawn Stars, which I have watched for a grand total of 5 minutes, when they had Orville Wright signatures brought into the store, sent the book with Joe Jackson's autograph to PSA? Isn't this the show that trumpets the arrival of Drew Max (he authenticated the Orville Wright signatures) when he arrives at their store.
I would love to know why Drew Max was not used to examine this Joe Jackson autograph. I would love to know what Drew Max would have said on the air about this Joe Jackson autograph.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Something I don't quite understand here,,,
Pawn Stars, which I have watched for a grand total of 5 minutes, when they had Orville Wright signatures brought into the store, sent the book with Joe Jackson's autograph to PSA?

So maybe there was something going on other than just a scripted plot....but equally nefarious?

[sylbry]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Something I don't quite understand here,,,
Pawn Stars, which I have watched for a grand total of 5 minutes, when they had Orville Wright signatures brought into the store, sent the book with Joe Jackson's autograph to PSA? Isn't this the show that trumpets the arrival of Drew Max (he authenticated the Orville Wright signatures) when he arrives at their store.
I would love to know why Drew Max was not used to examine this Joe Jackson autograph. I would love to know what Drew Max would have said on the air about this Joe Jackson autograph.

I will go out on a limb and say it is a scripted show and the scripted called for
them to make a mistake, perhaps to show not everything they purchase works out. Drew Max would have certainly called the signature authentic and trumpeted the fact that it is worth far more than what Rick paid. Thus Drew wasn't right for the part.

[Rob D.]

Something I don't quite understand ...

How come the professor could make all of those nifty gadgets, but he couldn't invent something that would help get the castaways off of the island?

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

Something I don't quite understand ...

How come the professor could make all of those nifty gadgets, but he couldn't invent something that would help get the castaways off of the island?

Is the above a metaphor for T206Resource.com ?

[mr2686]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

Something I don't quite understand ...

How come the professor could make all of those nifty gadgets, but he couldn't invent something that would help get the castaways off of the island?

Why would he want off the island when he had Ginger and Maryanne there?

[terjung]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

Something I don't quite understand ...

How come the professor could make all of those nifty gadgets, but he couldn't invent something that would help get the castaways off of the island?

Sounds like something I heard in a Weird Al parody ... "Isle Thing" as memory serves.

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by sylbry

Drew Max would have certainly called the signature authentic and trumpeted the fact that it is worth far more than what Rick paid. Thus Drew wasn't right for the part.

You need to take this more seriously. I happen to know for a fact that Drew was in the hospital because some joker put a spring loaded snake that jumped out of his big black magnifying glass bag like that fake can of nuts trick.

Nearly scared him to death.

My best goes out to Drew for a quick recovery.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by shoeless moe

my best goes out to drew for a quick recovery.

+1

[Herman Darvick]

Originally Posted by Deertick

In that scenario, why would the 'e' in Joe have been erased and redrawn? Why would it be smooth flowing, relative to known sigs? Why would he sign a BOOK (that was already signed by his wife on his behalf), when he was so apprehensive to sign his MORTGAGE and WILL?

That's not Jackson's wife signing his name. That's the collector writing the name of the person who signed the page because, while "Joe" is legible, "Jackson" is sloppy.

[Herman Darvick]

Originally Posted by Ringking

I just heard about the goof on pawn stars last night. There was a book that a guy had for sale that was signed by Shoeless Joe Jackson. It had a COA from Herman Darvick. Herman sold an autograph signed by shoeless joe for 23 grand 18 years ago. Long story short...the PSA/DNA said the book was a fake and the Pawn Stars are out 13 GRAND on the item.

To make matters worse, they sent the book to PSA/DNA and it came back with a rejection letter saying that the book showed signs of being traced.

But since Joe Jackson was taught how to sign his name by his wife, it would look slowly written i.e traced/

Herman Darvick worked for PSA/DNA from 2006-2009; he did not renew his contract. Letters like the one Rick got was one of the reasons Herman Darvick left PSA/DNA over 3 years ago. http://www.history.com/shows/pawn-st...say-it-aint-so


watch the whole thing as this goes on for the whole show.

Any questions? Contact me at hdarvick@yahoo.com

[Stalwart Fellow]

The current item in question is circled in green.

Assume that it is likely a fake and then have it prove its authenticity?

If genuine, it was a hell of an item to be left behind in a home that was foreclosed upon as the seller stated on the episode of Pawn Stars.

Many scenarios...
HDCERT.JPG

Jacksonsix.jpg



I personally have concerns with the open "o's" in the Pawn Stars item.

The excessive shakiness.

I feel the item may have been designed to fool and then things got carried too far.

The owner may have known the lack of value and therefore had no problem washing his or her hands of the item and certificate, leaving them both behind in the foreclosed home.

[Rob D.]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Is the above a metaphor for T206Resource.com ?

No, it was an implication that if you're going to wonder why something didn't play out a certain way on a reality show like Pawn Stars, you might as well question the storylines on sitcoms like Gilligan's Island. Because they're both scripted.

[Matthew H]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

No, it was an implication that if you're going to wonder why something didn't play out a certain way on a reality show like Pawn Stars, you might as well question the storylines on sitcoms like Gilligan's Island. Because they're both scripted.

Gilligan's Island had real actors, so there might have been some improv there... Just trying to be fair to Gilligan's Island.

[Stalwart Fellow]

oops, repeat post.

[Stalwart Fellow]

Originally Posted by Stalwart Fellow

The current item in question is circled in green.

Assume that it is likely a fake and then have it prove its authenticity?

If genuine, it was a hell of an item to be left behind in a home that was foreclosed upon as the seller stated on the episode of Pawn Stars.

Many scenarios...
Attachment 74162

Attachment 74163



I personally have concerns with the open "o's" in the Pawn Stars item.

The excessive shakiness.

I feel the item may have been designed to fool and then things got carried too far.

The owner may have known the lack of value and therefore had no problem washing his or her hands of the item and certificate, leaving them both behind in the foreclosed home.

Also note the difference in the "e" that PSA stated had been erased then re-done.

[Shoeless Moe]

The bigger question is why would Shoeless Joe sign that book. The signature can be debated and for a guy who couldn't write it's always going to look shakey. 50 people could say yes it looks good another 50 could say no it looks bad. And u could have 10 "experts" look at it and again 5 say good 5 say no good.

So there is no way anyone will ever know with 100% certainty if it's good or bad.

However. I think the real question is why would Joe sign that book? He has virtually no history of autographing "anything". Anything, other then a few legal documents and a few baseballs, that usually were team signed balls when "he was playing".

His wife did ALL his signing of autograph requests.

So why out of the blue does he sign "one" book. And I'm not sure of the contents, but if anyone is please chime in, isn't the book slightly negative toward him.

No one, including Herman will know with certainty if that sig is real, but history of JJ tells us more likely it is not.

[Stalwart Fellow]

Originally Posted by Shoeless Moe

The bigger question is why would Shoeless Joe sign that book. The signature can be debated and for a guy who couldn't write it's always going to look shakey. 50 people could say yes it looks good another 50 could say no it looks bad. And u could have 10 "experts" look at it and again 5 say good 5 say no good.

So there is no way anyone will ever know with 100% certainty if it's good or bad.

However. I think the real question is why would Joe sign that book? He has virtually no history of autographing "anything". Anything, other then a few legal documents and a few baseballs, that usually were team signed balls when "he was playing".

His wife did ALL his signing of autograph requests.

So why out of the blue does he sign "one" book. And I'm not sure of the contents, but if anyone is please chime in, isn't the book slightly negative toward him.

No one, including Herman will know with certainty if that sig is real, but history of JJ tells us more likely it is not.

Well reasoned and convincing argument as to why the item should not have been given written authentication.

Often such authentication does offer the naive a certain consolation.

Sure, the item can be sold then resold! There are many trusting fools with cash to fritter away.

[mr2686]

That's exactly what I said back on page 7. I can't believe this is still going on.

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by Shoeless Moe

The bigger question is why would Shoeless Joe sign that book. The signature can be debated and for a guy who couldn't write it's always going to look shakey. 50 people could say yes it looks good another 50 could say no it looks bad. And u could have 10 "experts" look at it and again 5 say good 5 say no good.

So there is no way anyone will ever know with 100% certainty if it's good or bad.

However. I think the real question is why would Joe sign that book? He has virtually no history of autographing "anything". Anything, other then a few legal documents and a few baseballs, that usually were team signed balls when "he was playing".

His wife did ALL his signing of autograph requests.

So why out of the blue does he sign "one" book. And I'm not sure of the contents, but if anyone is please chime in, isn't the book slightly negative toward him.

No one, including Herman will know with certainty if that sig is real, but history of JJ tells us more likely it is not.

I asked Herman these questions:

• Why would it be smooth flowing, relative to known sigs? (see Stalwart Fellows post above)
• Why would he sign a BOOK when he was so apprehensive to sign his MORTGAGE and WILL?
• Under what circumstances do you feel someone would feel the need to clarify a plainly obvious signature, especially on a book referencing that individual?
• As far as the erasure, are there other examples of such behavior?

I have not received any answer as yet. I now lean toward agreement with the PSA assessment.

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by mr2686

That's exactly what I said back on page 7. I can't believe this is still going on.

Mike, you need to set your post count to 80 in the User CP. This is only page 2.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by mr2686

That's exactly what I said back on page 7. I can't believe this is still going on.

I cannot believe this is still going on and it is not even in the autograph section where it belongs.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Something I don't quite understand here,,,
Pawn Stars, which I have watched for a grand total of 5 minutes, when they had Orville Wright signatures brought into the store, sent the book with Joe Jackson's autograph to PSA? Isn't this the show that trumpets the arrival of Drew Max (he authenticated the Orville Wright signatures) when he arrives at their store.
I would love to know why Drew Max was not used to examine this Joe Jackson autograph. I would love to know what Drew Max would have said on the air about this Joe Jackson autograph.

they only use Drew when there is no authentication that accompanies the piece, if it already has a cert from someone, I believe Drew recuses himself from opining on the piece, probably to avoid dueling authenticators. just my opinion.

[mr2686]

Originally Posted by deertick

mike, you need to set your post count to 80 in the user cp. :d this is only page 2. :d:d

:d:d:d

[vintagechris]

Originally Posted by travrosty

they only use Drew when there is no authentication that accompanies the piece, if it already has a cert from someone, I believe Drew recuses himself from opining on the piece, probably to avoid dueling authenticators. just my opinion.

I could be wrong, but they may not be using Drew Max anymore. It seems like he hasn't been on this season. On another note, I believe he is pictured on Frank Prisco's website posing with Frank.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by vintagechris

I could be wrong, but they may not be using Drew Max anymore. It seems like he hasn't been on this season. On another note, I believe he is pictured on Frank Prisco's website posing with Frank.

That is a very strange photo for a number of reasons. I believe Drew Max has been photoshopped into the photo.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

That is a very strange photo for a number of reasons. I believe Drew Max has been photoshopped into the photo.

Very large magnifying glass. Very tight t-shirt.