Colossal Auctions?

[travrosty]

A few dealers I know were forced to either get ALL their stuff either certed by one of the three companies on ebay's pre-approved list or else they could not list the items on ebay. either pay for the sticker or get off ebay. it has happened.

[RichardSimon]

I would assume and just guess that those companies might have been selling questionable items and ebay made their selling conditional on approval by one of the authentication companies.
Everybody here knows I have no love lost for the authentication companies but lets keep our facts straight here.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by travrosty

A few dealers I know were forced to either get ALL their stuff either certed by one of the three companies on ebay's pre-approved list or else they could not list the items on ebay. either pay for the sticker or get off ebay. it has happened.

Travis, maybe those "few dealers" you refer to can come here on Net54 and tell us their story.

[travrosty]

there is another related point that is important, and that anything that gets a psa or jsa cert cannot be booted off of ebay, even if it is obviously fake. And that is just as concerning as anything else.

I have seen both a jsa and psa certed 8 x 10 signed joe louis photograph, (400 dollar plus items), both totally bogus, that wouldnt get taken off of ebay because they have a coa from an ebay pre-approved authenticator. i could show them my joe louis signature study all day long and go point by point and ebay isn't going to do anything.

that's a big problem too. so even more problematic than items requiring jsa or psa to sell on ebay are items that are jsa or psa but fake but can't be taken off ebay. ebay is a terribly flawed system.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by travrosty

there is another related point that is important, and that anything that gets a psa or jsa cert cannot be booted off of ebay, even if it is obviously fake. And that is just as concerning as anything else.

I have seen both a jsa and psa certed 8 x 10 signed joe louis photograph, (400 dollar plus items), both totally bogus, that wouldnt get taken off of ebay because they have a coa from an ebay pre-approved authenticator. i could show them my joe louis signature study all day long and go point by point and ebay isn't going to do anything.

that's a big problem too. so even more problematic than items requiring jsa or psa to sell on ebay are items that are jsa or psa but fake but can't be taken off ebay. ebay is a terribly flawed system.

You are unfortunately correct.

[slidekellyslide]

I've sold more than a few autographs on ebay...at least a dozen minor league team signed balls, a 1930's Brooklyn Dodgers team signed ball, a Kennesaw Landis signed document, and signed letter, a Lefty Gomez single signed ball...NEVER have I had a single one of them certified by anyone. I simply guaranteed they would get a cert or your money back...never got a single autograph back.

[drc]

For honest sellers of authentic autographs on eBay, the following go a long way: 1) Big clear images-- give bidders (many knowledgeable, many knowing what a real versus fake Nolan Ryan or Dizzy Dean or Joe DiMaggio signature looks like) a good look and give bidders confidence in you as they see you're wiling to give an up close look, 2) Good return/authenticity guarantee. Big clear images can never be underestimated. A good feedback/reputation as a seller also helps the cause.

[perezfan]

Likewise... I've sold about 45 - 50 autographed pieces on ebay. Most without a Cert or LOA of any kind. Have never had a return or any issues with ebay.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by travrosty

there is another related point that is important, and that anything that gets a psa or jsa cert cannot be booted off of ebay, even if it is obviously fake. And that is just as concerning as anything else.

I have seen both a jsa and psa certed 8 x 10 signed joe louis photograph, (400 dollar plus items), both totally bogus, that wouldnt get taken off of ebay because they have a coa from an ebay pre-approved authenticator. i could show them my joe louis signature study all day long and go point by point and ebay isn't going to do anything.

that's a big problem too. so even more problematic than items requiring jsa or psa to sell on ebay are items that are jsa or psa but fake but can't be taken off ebay. ebay is a terribly flawed system.

that is disgusting and most likely happening more than anyone would like to admit with many other items at these 2 respected companies.

They really need to go back and correct many of the mistakes past and present when they blatently know they have messed up. Infact all authenticators should practice this policy, but sadly no one does....

[travrosty]

Case in point.

http://www.fighttoys.com/Firpononauthentic.htm

If it ever goes to ebay, good luck getting it off. And I heard but can't confirm that all the authenticators at JSA look at each item and they all have to pass it for it to pass. What is going on? When you click on the link, the firpo on the bottom left (circa 1958) is one i obtained myself from a friend who lives in Buenos Aires, Argentina, so it's directly from Firpo's stomping grounds. Show us your exemplars you used to authenticate this item, Mr. Spence. I want to see your Firpo signatures. Please discontinue boxing.

When I first saw this Firpo, I figured it had to be an April Fools joke, or a Halloween prank. But it has a valid JSA cert, which is equivalent to getting a passport and visa, ready to travel the world.

It's insulting to people who study boxing signatures and it would look the same to baseball collectors as calling the following Babe Ruth "authentic." When i see this Firpo, that's what I see, the boxing equivalent to this Ruth ball. Why do they bother with boxing?

I don't know. They don't seem to have the phone number of someone who can figure out this Luis Firpo, which ends up going to auction. And they aren't autographs on the fence in my opinion, not questionables that could go either way. They are obviously no good, but how can you get this through to Spence so he can understand the gravity and width, depth, and breadth of the situation?

Now if Morales name were in place of Spence, all the guys would pile on and say "yeah, get him!" (That's fine, I don't have a problem with that), but evidently JSA is above reproach. The third rail of autograph authentication? Why is it so sacrosanct to ignore the criticism and NOT hold these guys feet to the fire and demand explanations when they authenticate like this, and instead just make excuses for them? (My favorite is that "hey they just make a few mistakes like anybody else. They authenticate a lot of autographs. If you only knew how many autographs they cert.") Maybe they should do a little less then.

That's attitude seems fine if you don't collect boxing, but if they start doing this to YOUR favorite sport, then you might think different.

They don't even make excuses for themselves. They just say nothing and hope it goes away?

This is all my opinion, and if people want to use JSA, more power to you. I think people are scared to say anything about the top two authentication outfits because they think they need their certs to sell.



(I didn't make the ruth ball, it came off the internet, looks like the sig is computer generated.)



Travis Roste

[perezfan]

The difference is that 99 - 100% of Morales' stuff is bad. No one in their right mind (on this board) would buy a piece that he's authenticated.

What you presented represents a tiny fraction of what PSA and Spence have authenticated. Most would estimate that they are right 95% of the time (give or take a few percentage points). Granted that 5% potential error rate represents a large number of items. And I am sure you are all over this 5% segment, as you have an apparent "axe to grind".

But to answer your question, the outrage you're seeking doesn't occur- because the vast majority of PSA/Spence authentications are correct. There is a massive difference between 5% (PSA/Spence) and 100% (Morales).

Nobody is above reproach... Spence's Firpo authentication is awful. No argument there. But for you to compare the two outfits in the same breath is preposterous. Best of luck with this interesting mission

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by perezfan

The difference is that 99 - 100% of Morales' stuff is bad. No one in their right mind (on this board) would buy a piece that he's authenticated.

What you presented represents a tiny fraction of what PSA and Spence have authenticated. Most would estimate that they are right 95% of the time (give or take a few percentage points). Granted that 5% potential error rate represents a large number of items. And I am sure you are all over this 5% segment, as you have an apparent "axe to grind".

But to answer your question, the outrage you're seeking doesn't occur- because the vast majority of PSA/Spence authentications are correct. There is a massive difference between 5% (PSA/Spence) and 100% (Morales).

Nobody is above reproach... Spence's Firpo authentication is awful. No argument there. But for you to compare the two outfits in the same breath is preposterous. Best of luck with this interesting mission

I am not comparing the two in the same breath, i am just pointing out the hypocrisy. Should I not have shown the Firpo? Is showing the Firpo an axe to grind and nothing else? Maybe they should be RESPONSIBLE for their authentications. Novel idea I know.


You admit that no one here will buy a morales piece, so morales isnt that big of a problem, is he? You wouldnt have known about the firpo authentication if i hadnt shown it, and if you thought it was a cool autograph, might have even bought it based on spences opinion. THAT'S the problem.

People buy all the time with a spence loa trusting it is good because it is signed off by spence. If no morales piece is ever good in your mind, you will never buy one. Morales can never harm you.

What I am trying to say is that people are buying COA's, not autographs, and if what spence is doing to boxing is the best he can do, then in my opinion we are all in trouble, because people are buying his coa's by the peck and bushel, and Morales doesn't have anything to do with that.

Everytime there is criticism of spence, people bring up morales, and they keep saying "well, at least he isn't THIS guy." That's the fools argument that is brought up every time spence is put on the hot seat to explain and be responsible for his authentications. Morales is put out there to get him off the hook again.

I noticed another member say that jsa and psa are the closest thing we have to reputable authenticators. Notice he didnt say they were reputable authenticators, he said "closest thing we have to reputable". Even he didnt believe they were reputable. That's a problem. Shouldn't we have an authentication outfit that is reputable, not "the closest thing we have to reputable?" it's their opinion when they make an opinion on authenticity, it's not their fact. you can believe them or not, or you can believe me or not. it's up to people to decide whether what i say holds water in my opinion, or what they do and say holds water.

Everyone has an opinion as to whether psa or jsa is reputable. but if someone brings up an opinion that questions their authentications, all of the sudden it is "Morales" just like "THIRD BASE" on the abbot and costello baseball routine.

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by travrosty

Case in point.

http://www.fighttoys.com/Firpononauthentic.htm

If it ever goes to ebay, good luck getting it off. And I heard but can't confirm that all the authenticators at JSA look at each item and they all have to pass it for it to pass. What is going on? When you click on the link, the firpo on the bottom left (circa 1958) is one i obtained myself from a friend who lives in Buenos Aires, Argentina, so it's directly from Firpo's stomping grounds. Show us your exemplars you used to authenticate this item, Mr. Spence. I want to see your Firpo signatures. Please discontinue boxing.

When I first saw this Firpo, I figured it had to be an April Fools joke, or a Halloween prank. But it has a valid JSA cert, which is equivalent to getting a passport and visa, ready to travel the world.

It's insulting to people who study boxing signatures and it would look the same to baseball collectors as calling the following Babe Ruth "authentic." When i see this Firpo, that's what I see, the boxing equivalent to this Ruth ball. Why do they bother with boxing?

I don't know. They don't seem to have the phone number of someone who can figure out this Luis Firpo, which ends up going to auction. And they aren't autographs on the fence in my opinion, not questionables that could go either way. They are obviously no good, but how can you get this through to Spence so he can understand the gravity and width, depth, and breadth of the situation?

Now if Morales name were in place of Spence, all the guys would pile on and say "yeah, get him!" (That's fine, I don't have a problem with that), but evidently JSA is above reproach. The third rail of autograph authentication? Why is it so sacrosanct to ignore the criticism and NOT hold these guys feet to the fire and demand explanations when they authenticate like this, and instead just make excuses for them? (My favorite is that "hey they just make a few mistakes like anybody else. They authenticate a lot of autographs. If you only knew how many autographs they cert.") Maybe they should do a little less then.

That's attitude seems fine if you don't collect boxing, but if they start doing this to YOUR favorite sport, then you might think different.

They don't even make excuses for themselves. They just say nothing and hope it goes away?

This is all my opinion, and if people want to use JSA, more power to you. I think people are scared to say anything about the top two authentication outfits because they think they need their certs to sell.



(I didn't make the ruth ball, it came off the internet, looks like the sig is computer generated.)



Travis Roste

Travis, as if your JSA example isn't bad enough, I just spotted this PSA slabbed HORRIBLE Nolan Ryan on eBay this morning. This is so far off, it's not even funny. Please note the inscription "5 K K's"??. This would insinuate that Ryan signed this 1979 Topps card after he struck out his 5000th batter in 1989. This signature does not look like a Ryan signature from any era, and especially one signed post 1989. Ryan would never have written the inscription that way; he would have used "5,000 K's". Give me a break! I saved the photo just to remind myself how far off authenticators can sometimes be.

Another example: JSA signed off on this clubhouse signed Ryan ball that is in a current auction.
Another mistake on a very common signature. BTW, this ball was actually signed by one of the Angels bat boys during the 1970's, which was a pretty common practice back then.

Both are examples of pretty bad detective work, IMHO.

[travrosty]

What I find interesting is that it seems to be okay by many if jsa or psa makes horrendous mistakes, (not tough mistakes, that could go either way, but simple, glaring, obvious errors), it seems to be okay as long as they didnt TRY to make the mistake.

As long as they tried to do it right, then its fine. why?

If a towing company tows your car by mistake, it's okay as long as they didn't try to do it on purpose? Wouldn't you be mad if the towing order said red lamborghini and you drive a silver vw beetle?


I don't get it. If you bought a 30,000 signed letter by a certain hall of famer, and they got it wrong but they "tried", do you feel better now? Is it worth more now because they tried? No, it's still worth zero.

Think of a mythical authentication company.

They cert 100 babe ruth baseballs, get 50 wrong, for an error rate of 50% on Ruth.

They then cert a stack of 9900 Josh Hamilton signed photos that took place at a signing session with photo proof, and a representative present with documentation. (no brainer). Error rate 0%.

They then claim they certed 10,000 autographs that week, and if 50 were found wrong, then they had a weekly error rate of only .5 percent, so come get your Babe Ruth ball certed with us because we get 99.5% of our autographs right!


If they have a 5% error rate, and if some autographs are no brainers (which many, many are) that doesn't require an expert authenticator, or they are certed from signing sessions "in the presence" (0% error rate,) then the error rate for the others is higher to even it out at the 5%, now isn't it? And a so called error rate of 5% doesn't take into account the autographs that were good that they called bad, because no one tries to sell them one ebay or elsewhere with the rejection letter, do they? Those are the hidden errors so you can take the 5% and practically double it.

The tough ones are much higher than the 5%. We all know it. BUT THE TOUGH ONES ARE THE REASON A LOT OF US SEND IT IN, because we don't know!

Firpo isn't particularly tough!

All I want to see is the Firpo exemplar he compared that one to, to make his "authentic" decision. Show the exemplar, go ahead. Me and the guys with 20, 30, 40 years experience each can't find an exemplar anything close to that and we do boxing 24/7/365 for our entire lives. Spence can't call a boxing guy?

But good thing this is a mythical company, because in real life it is all gumdrops and lollipops.

People can send their autographs in to psa or spence if they want and that's their choice, I advise people to do what they want to do. They can trust who they want. But the system is broken in my opinion.

But people keep defending a system that is broken because they want the certs, because it is the certs that sell. Someday collectors might have the certs displayed on the wall that represent autographs, proudly looking at a cert that shows that an autograph of Al Hbrosky is out there somewhere and it is "authentic".

I am not against 3rd party authentication, just the way it is being done now, but I am against the status quo, so I have an axe to grind? A lot of people want silence to reign supreme. Chirp, chirp goes the crickets.

I once gave a `15-20 point reform post with suggestions that I know the companies saw, and 3 years later, NONE implemented. Guess my suggestions, all built on responsibility, transparency, and accuracy, check and balances, and a customers bill of rights is just too radical.