For me, it isn't so much the ratio of times the TPA's have gotten it wrong to how many times they have gotten it right, but the number of instances that keep popping up showing them being careless and not doing their job very well or barely actually examining an item. I have personally experienced this as well as seen other stories with examples of this.
The fact is, nobody can possibly know the % they get correct or wrong, so for anyone to say they get far more right than wrong is is just a statement of opinion, we just don't know the %. What we can see and is fact, is the number of times an authenticator is negligent in doing a poor job of examining an item by giving a thumbs up to a preprint, a secretarial or a photo copy, all of which should NEVER happen if you actually examine the item properly.
IMO, there is a big difference in TPA who will not answer any uestions about their practice and are trying to authenticate as many items as possible so they can make money and the TPA who really cares about the hobby and takes their time examining an item.
I believe Richard to be one of these guys who takes his time to examine an item because he cares about the hobby and values his reputation above a dollar. He will admit he has gotten some wrong in the past but I would feel more comfortable with him believing that he took the time to examine the item properly instead of just doing the assembly line process to authenticate as many items as possible because it means more money.
Edited to say, in the end, shouldn't we doubt more the guys who show they do a poor job by not examining things properly. Since we don't really know the ratio they get right, shouldn't we judge them on the things we do know?
Last edited by vintagechris; 01-31-2012 at 06:24 AM.
|