What the future holds in the autograph industry

[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 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.

[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.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

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

Seems like the ones with less knowledge feel more comfortable with an auction house because of the image, marketing, return policies and publicity etc etc etc. With the dealers, they may not think they are an expert in the autograph authentications (unlike us that know from being on the board that we have very reputable dealers in all areas of autograph certification).

[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

[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

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by 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

Andrew, I'm as big of a fan as Jim as anyone, but this is a discussion forum - I saw nothing wrong with David and Shelly responding to his comment the way they did. If you are going to call them "meandering rubes", please quote what you find wrong with their statements, and explain why.

[7nohitter]

David and Shelly are not the meandering rubes.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by 7nohitter

David and Shelly are not the meandering rubes.

Okay, thanks - sorry I made that assumption, but I thought Jim announced he was leaving, almost immediately after they posted rebuttals to his comments.

[7nohitter]

No problem Scott.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Okay, thanks - sorry I made that assumption, but I thought Jim announced he was leaving, almost immediately after they posted rebuttals to his comments.

I never posted a rebuttal to Jim's comments.

[Runscott]

I just went back and checked - sorry, you are right.

I was thinking about your response to his telling us that he was leaving:

"I know you know this, Jim, but not every autographed photo's provenance can be checked by asking the signee's daughter. If what you're saying is true, no "common" Ruth or Gehrig or... autograph can ever be trusted."

[shelly]

Scott, did you post that for an opinion. Here is mine. I would not touch it.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by shelly

Scott, did you post that for an opinion. Here is mine. I would not touch it.

Wrong thread. Glad to see I'm not the only one who does that.

[travrosty]

the tpa's already trying to outcheap each other. sgc authenticating and slabbing autographs for 8 dollars each? how are they suppose to do materials dating and testing on old autographs? what part of the 8 dollars will that eat up?

[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.

[shelly]

The one thing missing in that post is do the auction houses refund money. I seem to remember the Jim read into REA auctions all sales finale. If you find it not be authentic a year from now do you really have a chance to get your money back?

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by shelly

The one thing missing in that post is do the auction houses refund money. I seem to remember the Jim read into REA auctions all sales finale. If you find it not be authentic a year from now do you really have a chance to get your money back?

I think if it could be proven, as in not solely relying on another opinion, but on the dating of the material or something objective like that, then I trust that REA would refund the purchase. However, those instances are pretty rare.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by shelly

The one thing missing in that post is do the auction houses refund money. I seem to remember the Jim read into REA auctions all sales finale. If you find it not be authentic a year from now do you really have a chance to get your money back?

Shelly,

I would ask the exact same question of a dealer. I would guess a dealer who thinks very highly of their own opinion would question the buyer and ask for proof. I really doubt they would just refund say 3-5k for a gehrig or ruth no questions asked after a year.
Also... let's say a dealer passes away..no one lives forever.. what is the recourse now??
Ultimately, the purchaser needs to and should trust their own opinion and not rely on others. If they choose not to, they are untimately trusting people trying to sell them something regardless. That is why I think it is important to help educate collectors rather than create "secret societies"(seemingly) if one with info truly wants to help the hobby.
This is my opinion whether we are talking cards, photos, autos ect. .

[packs]

I was sold a bad Ruth by Lelands. When I called them to let them know about my worries they paid for the item to be looked at by JSA, which deemed it not authentic. I was then given a refund and a voucher for a future auction.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by packs

I was sold a bad Ruth by Lelands. When I called them to let them know about my worries they paid for the item to be looked at by JSA, which deemed it not authentic. I was then given a refund and a voucher for a future auction.

There you go.. I guess it would depend on the dealer or auction house whether or not you would get the same result. I am glad it worked out for you. Do you have a scan of the Ruth? It would be interesting to see what others thought of it.

[chaddurbin]

http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=161282

at least packs is glad chris spoke up about his ruth. and in this instance JSA actually agreed with the board, imagine that.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by chaddurbin

http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=161282

at least packs is glad chris spoke up about his ruth. and in this instance JSA actually agreed with the board, imagine that.

Ahh.. nice. My guess it Chris and JSA would probably agree on more sigs than not but that is just a guess. I remember this now..it was a feel good thread(Chris did the hobby a service here for sure).

[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'

[chaddurbin]

is keating still a consultant for PSA/DNA? i see his profile on the homepage. if someone submit a stack of signed ruths/gehrigs i would hope they give him a call, and leave the jr varsity stuff to grad.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by chaddurbin

is keating still a consultant for PSA/DNA? i see his profile on the homepage. if someone submit a stack of signed ruths/gehrigs i would hope they give him a call, and leave the jr varsity stuff to grad.

the consultant names for these abc, xyz companies are mostly for show. they dont show them all the signatures in their specialty. more than once did the specialist not see the autographs that is in their specialty, with the authentication company bypassing them even though they are on their roster.

[jcmtiger]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I've never collected autographs, and never had much of an interest in them. But I do read most of the autograph threads on this board. I imagine people will continue collecting autographs, and would guess that those collectors will enjoy what they are doing. That said, I've never seen a more depressing hobby or state of affairs than what transpires on Net54.

The amount of infighting among collectors and dealers is a little hard to believe. It seems like you guys really don't like each other. And the number of collectors who get ripped off buying bad stuff is truly alarming. This end of the hobby has a simply dreadful image. It looks like the place all the scammers and con men go to make a living.

If you want to see a healthy future, something has to be done. If it reaches the point where nobody can agree on whether or not a Babe Ruth signature is good or bad, then I would say the future does not look all that bright. The number of new collectors entering will grow smaller.

I agree Barry.

Joe

[HexsHeroes]

.

I, too, have pondered whether it might be best to liquidate my entire vintage autograph collection in the near future, versus holding on for another couple of decades.

My primary concern is two fold. First, the primary focus of my collection is on obscure ballplayer autographs, so the demand is considerably less, than say for a Ruth or Cobb caliber of ballplayer. My items are not the kind of material to interest too many auction houses of the quality and success rate that I would want to sell my collection. Secondly, a large majority of my collection was purchased from dealers with reasonably good/excellent hobby reputations, such as Jim Stinson, Richard Simon, Bill Corcoran, Ron Gordon, Kevin Keating, Doug Averitt, Jim Spence, etc. But most/all of these gentlemen are quite likely to be retired from the hobby in 20 years or so. With the exception of Rhys Yeakley and Jodi Birkholm, I am not overly familar with many "younger" dealers that may still be actively buying in 20 years. I can't help but think that makes for a much smaller marketplace, which would influence how much revenue the sale of my autographs would generate. And I am not even convinced that eBay will remain a viable option in 20 years.

For now, my course of action is to take a deep breath, drink a good whisky, and continue my pursuit for the autographs that elude me.

Your thoughts on the future (20 years out) on the vintage autograph hobby and whether there will be many/any professional dealers ?

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by chaddurbin

is keating still a consultant for PSA/DNA? i see his profile on the homepage. if someone submit a stack of signed ruths/gehrigs i would hope they give him a call, and leave the jr varsity stuff to grad.

As I understand it, Kevin is basically the top of the food chain at PSA, but doesn't work for them directly. He is available for consultation on ones Grad and/or others aren't sure about. Spence uses him for that purpose, too, but without any formal association.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by HexsHeroes

.

I, too, have pondered whether it might be best to liquidate my entire vintage autograph collection in the near future, versus holding on for another couple of decades.

My primary concern is two fold. First, the primary focus of my collection is on obscure ballplayer autographs, so the demand is considerably less, than say for a Ruth or Cobb caliber of ballplayer. My items are not the kind of material to interest too many auction houses of the quality and success rate that I would want to sell my collection. Secondly, a large majority of my collection was purchased from dealers with reasonably good/excellent hobby reputations, such as Jim Stinson, Richard Simon, Bill Corcoran, Ron Gordon, Kevin Keating, Doug Averitt, Jim Spence, etc. But most/all of these gentlemen are quite likely to be retired from the hobby in 20 years or so. With the exception of Rhys Yeakley and Jodi Birkholm, I am not overly familar with many "younger" dealers that may still be actively buying in 20 years. I can't help but think that makes for a much smaller marketplace, which would influence how much revenue the sale of my autographs would generate. And I am not even convinced that eBay will remain a viable option in 20 years.

For now, my course of action is to take a deep breath, drink a good whisky, and continue my pursuit for the autographs that elude me.

Your thoughts on the future (20 years out) on the vintage autograph hobby and whether there will be many/any professional dealers ?

If you're worried about the financial future of your hobby, get out now and you won't have to worry any more. Nobody knows what's going to happen. My guess is that collectibles will follow the economy: if it prospers, they will prosper; if there's a depression, there will be one in those, too. If you enjoy collecting, do it and don't think about the future. Or, as a wise man said: "Today has enough problems of its own--leave tomorrow's for tomorrow."

[travrosty]

the old rare autographs are always going to hold their value, but if anyone has a portfolio of autographs that they have assembled purely for the investment, to me that is a carpshoot.

collect them because you enjoy them, if they go up in value, great, if not, dont sweat it.

[drc]

Even where authenticity isn't a big issue, investing in any area of collectibles or memorabilia is tricky. I've been involved with baseball cards for a long time, and when some newby says "What's a good card to invest in?" I scratch my head. If you have a bar of gold that you're 100% certain is gold, it's hard to predict its financial future. I just yesterday read a newspaper article on gold and a gold dealer said "Predicting the price of gold is a crapshoot."

There will be autograph collectors and autograph collecting in the future. I can guarantee that.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by HexsHeroes

.

I, too, have pondered whether it might be best to liquidate my entire vintage autograph collection in the near future, versus holding on for another couple of decades.

My primary concern is two fold. First, the primary focus of my collection is on obscure ballplayer autographs, so the demand is considerably less, than say for a Ruth or Cobb caliber of ballplayer. My items are not the kind of material to interest too many auction houses of the quality and success rate that I would want to sell my collection. Secondly, a large majority of my collection was purchased from dealers with reasonably good/excellent hobby reputations, such as Jim Stinson, Richard Simon, Bill Corcoran, Ron Gordon, Kevin Keating, Doug Averitt, Jim Spence, etc. But most/all of these gentlemen are quite likely to be retired from the hobby in 20 years or so. With the exception of Rhys Yeakley and Jodi Birkholm, I am not overly familar with many "younger" dealers that may still be actively buying in 20 years. I can't help but think that makes for a much smaller marketplace, which would influence how much revenue the sale of my autographs would generate. And I am not even convinced that eBay will remain a viable option in 20 years.

For now, my course of action is to take a deep breath, drink a good whisky, and continue my pursuit for the autographs that elude me.

Your thoughts on the future (20 years out) on the vintage autograph hobby and whether there will be many/any professional dealers ?

I think you should sell me the ones I'd be interested in, then keep the rest for your own personal enjoyment. I trust those sellers you bought from, but nobody else will!!

Ken

[whyconform]

-removed-

[travrosty]

there will always be professional autograph dealers as long as people are signing autographs.