What the future holds in the autograph industry

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by shelly

Hello, that is what I have been trying to say. The are getting better than the authenticators. Once that happens your sunk.

I think it's worse than that, and it's the crux of why we have so many fights on this forum - it's true that forgers are passing a very high % of bad Ruths and Gehrigs (etc.) right by the two legitimate TPA's, but what's worse is that when we bring these up for discussion on this forum, where we have experts who are better than those that the TPA's use, some of our guys give the bad autographs the green light And because of the massive egos, disagreement=fight.

Take that '700 HR' Ruth ticket - many say it's good, many say it's not. But the same guy who started off by saying he's 100% positive it's bad, is the only expert (maybe there are two - also a non-board member?) here who thinks the green-ink '27 Yankees ball is good. It's really mind-boggling how much disagreement there is right here.

[shelly]

[QUOTE=Runscott;1126284]I think it's worse than that, and it's the crux of why we have so many fights on this forum - it's true that forgers are passing a very high % of bad Ruths and Gehrigs (etc.) right by the two legitimate TPA's, but what's worse is that when we bring these up for discussion on this forum, where we have experts who are better than those that the TPA's use, some of our guys give the bad autographs the green light And because of the massive egos, disagreement=fight.

Take that '700 HR' Ruth ticket - many say it's good, many say it's not. But the same guy who started off by saying he's 100% positive it's bad, is the only expert (maybe there are two - also a non-board member?) here who thinks the green-ink '27 Yankees ball is good. It's really mind-boggling how much disagreement there is right here.[/QUO

Right or wrong that was his opinion.
I like who the new authenticators. The consigner. The consigner motto"I am not in the business but I know its authentic trust me"

[slidekellyslide]

[QUOTE=shelly;1126289]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I think it's worse than that, and it's the crux of why we have so many fights on this forum - it's true that forgers are passing a very high % of bad Ruths and Gehrigs (etc.) right by the two legitimate TPA's, but what's worse is that when we bring these up for discussion on this forum, where we have experts who are better than those that the TPA's use, some of our guys give the bad autographs the green light And because of the massive egos, disagreement=fight.

Take that '700 HR' Ruth ticket - many say it's good, many say it's not. But the same guy who started off by saying he's 100% positive it's bad, is the only expert (maybe there are two - also a non-board member?) here who thinks the green-ink '27 Yankees ball is good. It's really mind-boggling how much disagreement there is right here.[/QUO

Right or wrong that was his opinion.
I like the new authenticators. The consigner. I am not in the business but it is real the end.

When someone says it's "100% bad" is that still an opinion?

[HOF Auto Rookies]

I think some type of forensic testing would be great to see, obviously non-invasive. But, with that the prices to get certification would sky-rocket.

[shelly]

If the item is worth it there are places that can do things at a resonable price. The good thing is as this testing is perfected the cheaper it will become. I only say this because look at DNA testing. 5 years ago it would cost a fortune and take for ever. Now for 99 you can get your results in a few days.
Even if this where to happen do you think for one second the auction houses would pay for it. Not a chance in hell.

[Frozen in Time]

Originally Posted by HOF Auto Rookies

I think some type of forensic testing would be great to see, obviously non-invasive. But, with that the prices to get certification would sky-rocket.

That's probably true, but in the case of Ruth, Gehrig, etc. I believe it would be worth it if the forensic testing approached 100% accuracy. Moreover if any technology-based authentication became a standard for the Hobby and major auction houses, all the existing forgeries would eventually be identified as such.

[shelly]

Originally Posted by Frozen in Time

That's probably true, but in the case of Ruth, Gehrig, etc. I believe it would be worth it if the forensic testing approached 100% accuracy. Moreover if any technology-based authentication became a standard for the Hobby and major auction houses, all the existing forgeries would eventually be identified as such.

I just got off the phone with a major forensic lab. They said at this time the cost would not be worth it. It would have to be something the U.S. government would have to be interested in. So until someone comes up with a new mouse trap we are at square one.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by shelly

I just got off the phone with a major forensic lab. They said at this time the cost would not be worth it. It would have to be something the U.S. government would have to be interested in. So until someone comes up with a new mouse trap we are at square one.

Interesting, there has to be equipment that a TPA could use that wouldn't nearly cost the costs I am thinking.

[packs]

Doesn't everyone pretty much only buy from reputable sources when we're talking about a high dollar signature? If we're talking about going back to a system where collectors are only buying from reputable dealers, I feel like that is already where we are when it comes to high dollar items.

Yes it is true that there are times these reputable dealers (auctions houses) get things wrong. But isn't that going to be true regardless of whose opinion is attached to an item? Won't there always be mistakes? I'm just not clear as to what you're after. It seems like people are upset that there's no accountability when it comes to TPA's getting it wrong. But what else can someone do but offer their best opinion and refund you if they're wrong?

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by packs

Doesn't everyone pretty much only buy from reputable sources when we're talking about a high dollar signature? If we're talking about going back to a system where collectors are only buying from reputable dealers, I feel like that is already where we are when it comes to high dollar items.

Yes it is true that there are times these reputable dealers (auctions houses) get things wrong. But isn't that going to be true regardless of whose opinion is attached to an item? Won't there always be mistakes? I'm just not clear as to what you're after. It seems like people are upset that there's no accountability when it coems to TPA's getting it wrong. But what else can someone do but offer their best opinion and refund you if they're wrong?

I would think no. It seems as if a lot of peole who purchase the high dollar items get them for the conversation aspect of the piece, not for a specific collecting purpose (ego). So with that, they may not have the general knowledge to pursue a reputable dealer, and will go thru an auction house for the purchase with a TPA cert, IMO.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by HOF Auto Rookies

I would think no. It seems as if a lot of peole who purchase the high dollar items get them for the conversation aspect of the piece, not for a specific collecting purpose (ego). So with that, they may not have the general knowledge to pursue a reputable dealer, and will go thru an auction house for the purchase with a TPA cert, IMO.

Interested what the difference is btwn a reputable "dealer" and a reputable "auction house" is. They are both out to make money on you.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

Doesn't everyone pretty much only buy from reputable sources when we're talking about a high dollar signature? If we're talking about going back to a system where collectors are only buying from reputable dealers, I feel like that is already where we are when it comes to high dollar items.

Yes it is true that there are times these reputable dealers (auctions houses) get things wrong. But isn't that going to be true regardless of whose opinion is attached to an item? Won't there always be mistakes? I'm just not clear as to what you're after. It seems like people are upset that there's no accountability when it comes to TPA's getting it wrong. But what else can someone do but offer their best opinion and refund you if they're wrong?

If you are responding to my post, you really need to take what you're responding to in context with the rest of what I discussed - specifically, the fact that TPA's weren't around in the 'old days', and that forgeries have improved. As far as 'buying from reputable sources', there's a bit more to that comment I made - forgers are counting on many to buy without asking questions, since they put blind faith in the LOA's.

'Best opinions' and refunds are great, but keep in mind that there are scam artists making a fortune off such a business policy. They sell ten great forgeries and if they have to give a refund on a few, they still fleeced the buyers who didn't ask for a refund.

I just would like to see the TPA's take more time on the high-dollar items, perhaps even hiring people with better skills - which might mean PSA and SGC agreeing to bump up their prices for highly-forged autographs such as Ruth. In addition, if 'we' (not me) are counting on them to 'promise' us a signature is real, I'd like to feel confident that they are aware of all the 'tells' that we discuss (or don't discuss) in this forum. Hell, they are charging as if they are experts.

[7nohitter]

The future does not hold much without Jim Stinson. Congratulations to the few, meandering rubes who couldn't get heir heads out of their behinds and ran off one of the greatest contributors to this hobby.

And.R.ew Mi.ll.e&r

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by Runscott

If you are responding to my post, you really need to take what you're responding to in context with the rest of what I discussed - specifically, the fact that TPA's weren't around in the 'old days', and that forgeries have improved. As far as 'buying from reputable sources', there's a bit more to that comment I made - forgers are counting on many to buy without asking questions, since they put blind faith in the LOA's.

'Best opinions' and refunds are great, but keep in mind that there are scam artists making a fortune off such a business policy. They sell ten great forgeries and if they have to give a refund on a few, they still fleeced the buyers who didn't ask for a refund.

I just would like to see the TPA's take more time on the high-dollar items, perhaps even hiring people with better skills - which might mean PSA and SGC agreeing to bump up their prices for highly-forged autographs such as Ruth. In addition, if 'we' (not me) are counting on them to 'promise' us a signature is real, I'd like to feel confident that they are aware of all the 'tells' that we discuss (or don't discuss) in this forum. Hell, they are charging as if they are experts.

I agree completely.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by Runscott

If you are responding to my post, you really need to take what you're responding to in context with the rest of what I discussed - specifically, the fact that TPA's weren't around in the 'old days', and that forgeries have improved. As far as 'buying from reputable sources', there's a bit more to that comment I made - forgers are counting on many to buy without asking questions, since they put blind faith in the LOA's.

'Best opinions' and refunds are great, but keep in mind that there are scam artists making a fortune off such a business policy. They sell ten great forgeries and if they have to give a refund on a few, they still fleeced the buyers who didn't ask for a refund.

I just would like to see the TPA's take more time on the high-dollar items, perhaps even hiring people with better skills - which might mean PSA and SGC agreeing to bump up their prices for highly-forged autographs such as Ruth. In addition, if 'we' (not me) are counting on them to 'promise' us a signature is real, I'd like to feel confident that they are aware of all the 'tells' that we discuss (or don't discuss) in this forum. Hell, they are charging as if they are experts.

I really like what you said and agree. With those high profile autos, even having an outside source to verify would significantly improve the hobby. I wouldn't mind paying more to even have Jim, Richard, Chris, Travis or David look at high profile autographs to ensure the authenticity of said item.

I honestly do not get why they don't consult to some of the leading individuals whom specialize in a specific individual player to get the most definitive answer rather than saying 'it looks like it may be authentic'

[Frozen in Time]

Originally Posted by shelly

I just got off the phone with a major forensic lab. They said at this time the cost would not be worth it. It would have to be something the U.S. government would have to be interested in. So until someone comes up with a new mouse trap we are at square one.

Shelly, what exactly did you ask the forensic lab? I'm not a chemist but I believe there are already several non-invasive tests that could provide a quantitative profile of the elemental composition of surfaces such as paper, leather etc. as well as media such as ink. If any of those percentages in a given profile changed with age (say > 50 years), then some standards could be established.

Not really sure what the final forensic method would be nor what it would cost but what I am suggesting is that I am confident such technology could be developed. With regards to the eventual cost, I am assuming that it would only take one company with such technology to provide a standard for testing the authenticity of the type of autographs we have been discussing. I believe the demand would be high as well as the cost but perhaps not prohibitive.

Again, the main point of my speculation is that a forensically-based approach is the only foolproof way, in many cases, to rule out forgeries.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by Frozen in Time

Shelly, what exactly did you ask the forensic lab? I'm not a chemist but I believe there are already several non-invasive tests that could provide a quantitative profile of the elemental composition of surfaces such as paper, leather etc. as well as media such as ink. If any of those percentages in a given profile changed with age (say > 50 years), then some standards could be established.

Not really sure what the final forensic method would be nor what it would cost but what I am suggesting is that I am confident such technology could be developed. With regards to the eventual cost, I am assuming that it would only take one company with such technology to provide a standard for testing the authenticity of the type of autographs we have been discussing. I believe the demand would be high as well as the cost but perhaps not prohibitive.

Again, the main point of my speculation is that a forensically-based approach is the only foolproof way, in many cases, to rule out forgeries.

I would have to agree with you, there has to be certain methods to get a answer at 'low' costs.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

I'm sorry I forgot to post my full name, thanks for the reminder Leon

Brent Niederman

[shelly]

Originally Posted by Frozen in Time

Shelly, what exactly did you ask the forensic lab? I'm not a chemist but I believe there are already several non-invasive tests that could provide a quantitative profile of the elemental composition of surfaces such as paper, leather etc. as well as media such as ink. If any of those percentages in a given profile changed with age (say > 50 years), then some standards could be established.

Not really sure what the final forensic method would be nor what it would cost but what I am suggesting is that I am confident such technology could be developed. With regards to the eventual cost, I am assuming that it would only take one company with such technology to provide a standard for testing the authenticity of the type of autographs we have been discussing. I believe the demand would be high as well as the cost but perhaps not prohibitive.

Again, the main point of my speculation is that a forensically-based approach is the only foolproof way, in many cases, to rule out forgeries.

I asked if the could tell us when the ball might have been signed. They said they could tell by the ink and pen nothing else. I then asked about carbon dateing they said the would not be good because it could be 200 years off. I was trying to find out they could tell me if a ball was signed in the last forty years and they said no., Here is there number(909) 793-3820 I wll call the FBI lab on Monday.

[7nohitter]

The future does not hold much without Jim Stinson. Congratulations to the few, meandering rubes who couldn't get heir heads out of their behinds and ran off one of the greatest contributors to this hobby.

And.R.ew Mi.ll.e&r

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by Frozen in Time

That's probably true, but in the case of Ruth, Gehrig, etc. I believe it would be worth it if the forensic testing approached 100% accuracy. Moreover if any technology-based authentication became a standard for the Hobby and major auction houses, all the existing forgeries would eventually be identified as such.

I would not mind at all if I sent in a Ruth (if I had one), to take a small piece of the ink and material to do testing. I wonder if anyone on this board that knows of any certain devices that could potentially be used. I know there are some scans to see if anything was drawn over something else.