I was thinking. and its baffling.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

It may look strikingly different, but it's perfectly legitimate. Just a rushed version.

[GrayGhost]

Thanks for the education.

[Leon]

Thanks to Rob L, from REA, for the nice summarization on autographs and authenticity. kind regards

[wrapperguy]

I sometimes write out over 100 checks in one sitting to my officiating staff. My signature changes dramatically from #1 to #100 as my hand gets tired, time becomes an issue, distractions (a Cub victory), etc. It drastically changes from the first check in the pad (with a backing of 29 other checks) to the last check in pad that has relatively no backing. It seems difficult at the very least to think that anyone can say if a signature is real without witnessing it.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by wrapperguy

I sometimes write out over 100 checks in one sitting to my officiating staff. My signature changes dramatically from #1 to #100 as my hand gets tired, time becomes an issue, distractions (a Cub victory), etc. It drastically changes from the first check in the pad (with a backing of 29 other checks) to the last check in pad that has relatively no backing. It seems difficult at the very least to think that anyone can say if a signature is real without witnessing it.

Although the overall signature may not look the same, there are consistent characteristics that never vary.

It always amuses me that you card guys constantly harp on the "impossibility" of determining an autograph's authenticity, as if the problem exists there and there only.

Every valuable collectible is forged or counterfeited. The skill and resources brought to bear are in direct proportion to the collectible's value.

If you really believe that no extremely high-end card has been successfully counterfeited, you're living in a dreamworld.

[HRBAKER]

I am not in disagreement with anything Rob wrote, the fact of the matter is it is a "best guess' based on the information/exemplars/etc. that they have at that time. Furthermore calling something a Letter of Authenticity if that is indeed what it is called seems to be a misnomer as well. It is actually a "Today, we think it looks good" letter. It is just part of the leap of faith you take with autograph collecting.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

It is just part of the leap of faith you take with autograph collecting.

I just want to try another approach here. I don't think it's a leap of faith, per se, if there is a market for PSA/DNA authenticated autographs.

Put another way -- if 10 people would buy a PSA/DNA autographed Babe Ruth baseball for $1,000, but only 5 people would buy a PSA authenticated Babe Ruth card for $500, then the market for the ball is better and you are more likely -- at least in the short term -- to be able to recover your investment.

That is really how I look at autograph collecting. I am not overly concerned with genuine authentic certainty to 100%. In the end, my opinion of whether a signature is authentic is totally meaningless anyway at the time it comes to part with the item (remember, we're not taking any of this memorabilia with us). As long as there remains a market for what I collect, and I can recoup my investment when its time to sell, then I am quite comfortable collecting autographed items -- signed pre-war cards in particular. PSA/DNA or JSA/BVG basically provide sufficient consumer confidence at this time to make autograph collecting a sustainable pursuit.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

I just want to try another approach here. I don't think it's a leap of faith, per se, if there is a market for PSA/DNA authenticated autographs.

Put another way -- if 10 people would buy a PSA/DNA autographed Babe Ruth baseball for $1,000, but only 5 people would buy a PSA authenticated Babe Ruth card for $500, then the market for the ball is better and you are more likely -- at least in the short term -- to be able to recover your investment.

That is really how I look at autograph collecting. I am not overly concerned with genuine authentic certainty to 100%. In the end, my opinion of whether a signature is authentic is totally meaningless anyway at the time it comes to part with the item (remember, we're not taking any of this memorabilia with us). As long as there remains a market for what I collect, and I can recoup my investment when its time to sell, then I am quite comfortable collecting autographed items -- signed pre-war cards in particular. PSA/DNA or JSA/BVG basically provide sufficient consumer confidence at this time to make autograph collecting a sustainable pursuit.

Are you saying that you really are not concerned if it is real as long as you can get your money back out of it? To follow that line of logic wouldn't one of the major benefits of third party autograph authentication be to make it easier to pass along an auto, real or not? If you did not see it signed but you buy it because based on x, y or z you believe it to be real or at least be sellable/liquid then to me that is a leap of faith. To each his own though.
BTW, I have thousands and thousands of autographs (10,000+) and I have seen only a small portion of them signed personally so I am not coming at this from an uninterested perspective. Autograph authentication seems to be to be a business where you can claim or be regarded as an "expert" but you are really required to have no skin in the game, IOW you are not guaranteeing your expert opinion to be anything other than that, an opinion. Jeff

[T206Collector]

1. Provenance is so important -- whether it is a signature on a check or you know the guy who got the signature himself, knowing the history of the signature and how and where it was acquired always improves the value of the autograph. Which brings me to my second point:

2. Value -- the market takes provenance (or the lack thereof) and applies a price to it. A ball signed by Ruth with a video of the ball being signed by Ruth is obviously worth more than the same ball without the video. When you buy an autograph in the market, you are paying a price that factors in known provenance. The better the provenance, the higher the value. Take any price I paid for any of my signed T206 cards -- I would have paid more for them if they had a video accompanying them showing the same card being signed by the player.

I don't think it is much a leap of faith if you are buying and selling in the same universe of accepted authenticators. The game changes if PSA/DNA goes out of business as a result of a massive, public fraud. But the same could be said of PSA and the super minty cards that SGC won't cross over. In that sense, I think of autograph collecting and authenticating a lot like I think about super high grade pre-war collecting -- there is always an element of faith/opinion. And as long as the opinions are generally respected by the collectors in that market, then there is no concern over a super drop or loss of value based on that opinion. But one ought to have more than one base covered -- more than one authenticator/grader -- in the event one has a high dollar item that would be worth sh*t if that particular autheticator/grader went AWOL.

A bit rambling, but there you have it....