What do you think of this Heritage offering?

[shelly]

David the count is now at 4-1 Scot, Richard, Jim and myself. 4
David 1 .
.
I know you will not believe this but I hope you are correct. I would hate to see someone through away that kind of money. I personally can not think that ball is anything but bad.

[David Atkatz]

"Throw" away, Shelly. Not "through" away.

See? We all make mistakes.

[JimStinson]

Seriously and in all Fairness to the parties involved with regards to the authenticity of the ball , I don't think anyone including myself can say its a "slam dunk" Call one way or the other without actually physically examining it in person.

But as I stated in a previous post I would hope that on such a high dollar ticket as this that all due diligence was used with regards to provenance. And maybe or probably it was.

With ready access to census records, City Directories etc. the person or persons who made their determination, should have been able to back track almost to the source. Thats 90% of the work....then after thats complete and only after that is complete and CONCRETE...Examination of the actual item is obviously necessary but secondary
_____________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

[David Atkatz]

With some here, Jim, it's always a slam dunk.

[JimStinson]

Originally Posted by JimStinson

Seriously and in all Fairness to the parties involved with regards to the authenticity of the ball , I don't think anyone including myself can say its a "slam dunk" Call one way or the other without actually physically examining it in person.

But as I stated in a previous post I would hope that on such a high dollar ticket as this that all due diligence was used with regards to provenance. And maybe or probably it was.

With ready access to census records, City Directories etc. the person or persons who made their determination, should have been able to back track almost to the source. Thats 90% of the work....then after thats complete and only after that is complete and CONCRETE...Examination of the actual item is obviously necessary but secondary
_____________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

I hate to have to quote myself but this seems to have generated into a murky, heated, and controversial subject not to mention one of the longest threads I've ever seen on this board. I am not defending or attacking anyone. EVERYONE is entitled to an opinion. And anyone can spend their money how they like and where they like. Its cynical but at the end of the day maybe its not a case of how good a DEAL you got but how good a deal you THINK you got.
BUT ...I have said this before what an autograph LOOKS like is the first and ultimately last step in a series of steps, leading to a determination of authenticity. The very, very good forgers can fool ANYONE based on looks alone (Counterfeiters can draw twenty dollar bank notes FREEHAND) and they have found a very lucrative nitch in the field of autograph collecting because all of the parties involved WANT an expensive museum quality item to be real.
So looking at the autograph in question is the first step, some are so off base they immediately go to the trash heap , This ball is NOT one of those (as evidenced by this debate) So then comes the fun part Research , looking at subtle intangibles like labeling, format, etc. Then using the various "authentication secrets" that inevitably every good autograph collector/dealer/authenticator is going to learn over the course of his lifetime (The ones he won't share with anyone....THOSE secrets), then morph into Philip Marlowe and do the hard core detective work and back track to the source , If the trail goes COLD, that speaks volumnes and you PASS case closed.
If it dosen't you trudge on, until eventually you are able to prove your case to any critic with evidence a mile long. Done properly you'd make any critic look like a fool. Then finally the last step is LOOKING at the item again to confirm what research has already proven to you and then and only then , you make your determination. Which by now is no longer an "opinion" its a fact.
________________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by JimStinson

Which by now is no longer an "opinion" its a fact.
________________________
jim@stinsonsports.com

Great post.

So the thing left to ask is this: While it seems you yourself sell only what you deem to be "facts," what is your opinion of Heritage selling what seems to be an "opinion"?

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

Great post.

So the thing left to ask is this: While it seems you yourself sell only what you deem to be "facts," what is your opinion of Heritage selling what seems to be an "opinion"?

<Ray Charles picture>

[RichardSimon]

The Nash story, on his website, about Heritage includes nine other items.
My opinion is that I agree with what he has said and disagree with the COA's issued by the TPA's.
What do you guys think about these other items in the auction that Nash has discussed?
There have been many opinions expressed on the board about Nash, pro and con.
Let us just discuss the items.
http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=17835#more-17835

[shelly]

What did that mean

[David Atkatz]

Precisely what it says, Shelly. Some here don't believe they could ever get it wrong.

[Runscott]

David, what's wrong about being sure of yourself? Sometimes I am, sometimes I'm not. I have opinions about the Cy Young letter that Dan posted, but I'm not as confident as I am about this ball. I even compared this Yankees ball, signature for signature, with the signatures on the '27 ball that you now own, as well as with the one that you used to own. I did this because I'm trying to learn.

It was clear to me that your first ball, and this one, were signed by two different people, and neither of those two signed the ball that you currently own. To me, what I just stated was very obvious. But that's easy for me to say, since I'm not in the market for any of those three balls, so my opinion means absolutely nothing.

[David Atkatz]

Scott, there's nothing wrong with being sure of yourself. There is something wrong, though, in believing you always speak Ex Cathedra.

(And, FWIW, you are not one of the people I had in mind.)

[Runscott]

Thanks, I knew you weren't talking about me - I can be obnoxiously certain about cards and photos, but autographs are you guys' domain.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Last Saturday (Feb. 16th) someone on this board asked me my opinion on this baseball, and it is still my opinion that the autographs are authentic.