Jordan Ball

[djson1]

Yeah, that's what they always say when they can't confirm a hologram number. It must have to do with some legal liability, but I think it's really a bad reflection if they cannot find a record of something that has their hologram sticker on it. I hope there isn't a batch of fake UDA holograms going around. I thought they were tamper-proof too.

[HOFAUTOS]

Originally Posted by djson1

Yeah, that's what they always say when they can't confirm a hologram number. It must have to do with some legal liability, but I think it's really a bad reflection if they cannot find a record of something that has their hologram sticker on it. I hope there isn't a batch of fake UDA holograms going around. I thought they were tamper-proof too.

UDA holograms are not tamper proof at all. I bought a lot of signed baseballs and a few had UDA holograms. On one ball the hologram was a quarter of the way off so I just peeled it off the ball.

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by djson1

Yeah, that's what they always say when they can't confirm a hologram number. It must have to do with some legal liability, but I think it's really a bad reflection if they cannot find a record of something that has their hologram sticker on it. I hope there isn't a batch of fake UDA holograms going around. I thought they were tamper-proof too.

I have seen similar anecdotes elsewhere regarding those checking up on UDA serial numbers.

One would logically conclude that either a) data was lost and Upper deck simply cannot verify serial numbers prior to a certain date, or b) counterfeit holograms exist in certain number ranges.

Given the cloak and dagger, legally restrained response Upper Deck gives, one would tend to think the latter choice makes more sense. If it was a simple matter of data loss through corrupted files or something similar, why not just say it?