recent auto counterfeits - the effects on auto collecting??

[MichelaiTorres83]

Originally Posted by BruceinGa

About 15 years ago I thought it would be cool to frame pics (another hobby, framing) of TV western stars and their autographs that were on 3x5 index cards. I bought 15 or 20 pics and autographed cards from eBay, none of which had a COA. I didn't care as I wouldn't be reselling and I didn't want to pay a lot of money.
More recently I have been bidding/buying pre-war hof autographed postcards, all PSA/DNA. Again, will probably never will sell.
This will be the extent of my autograph collection.
http://net54baseball.com/attachment....1&d=1546347602

I am partly OCD. It bothers me just to look at the frame covering the light switches. :|

[BruceinGa]

Originally Posted by MichelaiTorres83

I am partly OCD. It bothers me just to look at the frame covering the light switches. :|

Lol,me too. I temporarily hung it there for the photo. Maybe I should have cropped it.😏

[MichelaiTorres83]

Originally Posted by BruceinGa

Lol,me too. I temporarily hung it there for the photo. Maybe I should have cropped it.😏

So now you have a hole in the wall there that needs patching? There goes the OCD again.

[BruceinGa]

Haha, no, no, no. I replaced the original pic- a Vanity Fair print.

[irv]

I just received a Heritage pamphlet for an upcoming auction on Feb 23rd-24th.

In it it shows a 1948 Babe Ruth single signed baseball PSA/DNA Mint 9 that shows it sold for $228,000 dollars once upon a time.
As you open the pamphlet up, right in the middle it shows another 1948 Babe Ruth single signed Baseball, PSA/DNA NM-MT 8 with only an estimate of $50,000?

Is there that much of a difference between a signed 9 and 8 or is this a reflection of the current signed card/memorabilia story that is going on?

I looked for the auction on their website but could not find it? I did notice this, however.
https://blog.ha.com/2017/10/sports-a...natures-101917

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by irv

I just received a Heritage pamphlet for an upcoming auction on Feb 23rd-24th.

In it it shows a 1948 Babe Ruth single signed baseball PSA/DNA Mint 9 that shows it sold for $228,000 dollars once upon a time.
As you open the pamphlet up, right in the middle it shows another 1948 Babe Ruth single signed Baseball, PSA/DNA NM-MT 8 with only an estimate of $50,000?

Is there that much of a difference between a signed 9 and 8 or is this a reflection of the current signed card/memorabilia story that is going on?

I looked for the auction on their website but could not find it? I did notice this, however.
https://blog.ha.com/2017/10/sports-a...natures-101917

Give or take, that is indeed the difference between a Ruth ball w/an overall PSA 8 vs. 9 grade. Absolutely. FYI, the large disparity in pricing is due to the minimal number of PSA 9 single signed Ruth balls in circulation. They are few and far between. A PSA 8 ball is great, but they are not extremely rare at the 8 grade. Once again, similar to a high-grade baseball card with a low pop, pricing is based on supply vs. demand. There are many eccentric enthusiasts that crave to own a Mint 9 Ruth ball, with minimal opportunities to capture one.

[irv]

Originally Posted by Vintageclout

Give or take, that is indeed the difference between a Ruth ball w/an overall PSA 8 vs. 9 grade. Absolutely. FYI, the large disparity in pricing is due to the minimal number of PSA 9 single signed Ruth balls in circulation. They are few and far between. A PSA 8 ball is great, but they are not extremely rare at the 8 grade. Once again, similar to a high-grade baseball card with a low pop, pricing is based on supply vs. demand. There are many eccentric enthusiasts that crave to own a Mint 9 Ruth ball, with minimal opportunities to capture one.

As I don't play the auto game, exactly what differences are they looking for that are noticed between a sig designated an 8 or a 9?

It seems silly to me, but that's jmo, on how a sig can be designated a grade the same way a card can be?

I can understand an old faded one compared to a well preserved one but if say, Ruth for example signed it, what makes his signature less worthy compared to other ones he has signed?

I don't know about anyone else, but if I had a proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, signed Ruth card or ball, I really don't think I'd be concerning myself with how well it was written by him.

[Leon]

So what you are saying is Marino was better sometimes than others? How does anyone really know?

Originally Posted by Vintageclout

Give or take, that is indeed the difference between a Ruth ball w/an overall PSA 8 vs. 9 grade. Absolutely. FYI, the large disparity in pricing is due to the minimal number of PSA 9 single signed Ruth balls in circulation. They are few and far between. A PSA 8 ball is great, but they are not extremely rare at the 8 grade. Once again, similar to a high-grade baseball card with a low pop, pricing is based on supply vs. demand. There are many eccentric enthusiasts that crave to own a Mint 9 Ruth ball, with minimal opportunities to capture one.