Shoeless Joe Jackson Auto- Fake?

[drcy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As these expensive items migrate from collectibles to investments, the focus migrates from the item itself to the flip/certification. IMO.

They're investing in the "market value"

[drcy]

The problem is when authentication and grading companies "financially insure" the items.

They are giving their opinions, and the way to corrupt the process, and that has corrupted the process, when they are "financially backing the items." The opinion, and reluctance to correct the opinion, due to $$ considerations says the system is corrupt and bad.

That the T206 Wagner still has a PSA 8 label is all you have to know. Everyone knows it's not a PSA 8-- Mastro said that he himself trimmed it, and that card is trimmed has been the hobby's worst kept secret for years. The "opinion" is not about facts or accuracy or truth, it's about money.

However, the grading and authentication companies explicitly state that they are only giving imperfect and fallible opinions. If buyers and sellers treat an opinion as more than that that's the buyers' and sellers' fault. Collectors can't logically and with straight faces treat grades as 'written in stone' while resubmitting cards to get different grades.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by drcy

The problem is when authentication and grading companies "financially insure" the items.

They are giving their opinions, and the way to corrupt the process, and that has corrupted the process, when they are "financially backing the items." The opinion, and reluctance to correct the opinion, due to $$ considerations says the system is corrupt and bad.

That the T206 Wagner still has a PSA 8 label is all you have to know. Everyone knows it's not a PSA 8-- Mastro said that he himself trimmed it, and that card is trimmed has been the hobby's worst kept secret for years. The "opinion" is not about facts or accuracy or truth, it's about money.

However, the grading and authentication companies explicitly state that they are only giving imperfect and fallible opinions. If buyers and sellers treat an opinion as more than that that's the buyers' and sellers' fault. Collectors can't logically and with straight faces treat grades as 'written in stone' while resubmitting cards to get different grades.

I suspect there is also an unconscious (at least) bias when authenticating or grading an item for a major client, in this case Heritage, who stands to make a lot of money if the item is deemed good or the cards grade high. The publicity isn't so bad for the authenticator either. I've seen/heard lots of anecdotal evidence over the years that convinces me all submitters are not treated the same. And yes, I understand the limitations of anecdotal evidence blah blah.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I suspect there is also an unconscious (at least) bias when authenticating or grading an item for a major client, in this case Heritage, who stands to make a lot of money if the item is deemed good or the cards grade high. The publicity isn't so bad for the authenticator either. I've seen/heard lots of anecdotal evidence over the years that convinces me all submitters are not treated the same. And yes, I understand the limitations of anecdotal evidence blah blah.

That is so groupthink of you. Show proof or do not post.

[steve B]

The "big customer" politics happens in other fields, but in slightly different ways.

In another hobby I have a variety that's a pretty big deal. If I got a cert, it would as far as I know be only the second one certified.
BUT....

The first was found by a very well connected very well known collector. His got a certificate, and ones sent in after were declined. Not because they weren't real, but because he convinced the experts (He was also an expert) That ones that didn't closely match his couldn't be true double impressions.

When I sent scans of mine to another collector who wrote a monograph on plate varieties and really knows the printing end of things he said it was totally legit, but like his would never get a cert because it didn't exactly match the first one. And indicated that he'd seen something like 4-5 of them and all had been rejected.
He also gave me the technical reasons why it shouldn't match. (Probably way too boring for here)

So the real/not real wasn't influenced for his, and there was no grading at the time. But he did influence other peoples getting certified so that his remained unique.

I might actually give it a try at some point, because he died a few years ago.