In light of recent revelations are you more or less confident in TPA?

[travrosty]

I think they have shown a propensity to go far beyond the "we are human and make an occasional mistake." the blunders are too big and too close together to be accidental. Not saying they are intentional, but maybe are a result of neglect or dereliction of duty. They authenticate too fast without researching an item thoroughly enough, and it seems like they prefer to believe a backstory if the item is submitted to them from someone they know or an auction house. It's what gets them into trouble.

[mark evans]

As to cards, I think the reputable grading companies do an effective job of identifying reprints and alterations. Grading, on the other hand, by its very nature is so subjective in my view that it's impossible to assess their performance.

Collecting autographs, I have come to believe, is an inherently risky business. I'm sure those risks can be mitigated to a large degree by buying from reputable dealers. I would not put a whole lot of stock in TPAs, especially as to valuable items where there is great incentive to skilled forgers.

[Caseyatbat]

I still don't know how to feel about the whole "Operation Bambino" thing right now. We know one thing, Ruth was a pretty inconsistent signer for the most part. With several different variations over only a short period of time. For somebody that had only "8" letters in his entire name to sign, he sure did sign them differently often. But on the other hand, his hand was huge and he was a lefty. So I guess he was not built to have the greatest penmanship.

I wish they used examples of Ruth autographs on baseballs to compare the examples in question in their articles. They seemed to have used mostly signed documents and flats, which really is not the greatest comparison when comparing to all signed baseballs.

All the examples they are calling into question, for the most part you can find several Ruth examples that do support the questioned examples in the article. I guess the problem is, how do we know the examples we are using are authentic?

What do you guys think about this Ruth autograph compared to the record breaker Ruth. Any similarities? Was it perhaps signed with the same pen? on the same day? If so, was the day in 1948 or in the 90's?

(I took the second picture with my cell phone, so it has some glare) But the original auction posting can be found at: www.liveauctioneers.com/item/195440

[vintagechris]

I voted for about the same. As someone who has bought several autographed card lots from auction houses, It appears to me that the TPA's have gotten very lazy or worse.

I have seen some things pass that there could have been no way that actually looked at the items.

I would be interested in knowing the actual process of what happens when these authenticators look at these things for auction houses.

I know we have a member who works for an auction house, maybe he will chime in.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by vintagechris

I would be interested in knowing the actual process of what happens when these authenticators look at these things for auction houses.

I am just going to repeat what I have said earlier. Having authenticated for several auction houses (not the big name ones) American Memorabilia did place pressure on our team of three authenticators to pass items. This led to constant shouting matches and eventually to the team leaving Am. Mem.
I am not casting aspersions on other auction houses because I honestly do not know if what I described ever took place at any other auction house. I also authenticated for Phillips Gallery, Guernseys and Clean Sweep. None of those auction houses ever put any pressure on me to authenticate any items.

[barrysloate]

Richard- the most troubling point you brought up is the fact that one of the auction houses you worked for put pressure on you to pass questionable autographs. Since TPA don't have to stand behind their decisions, as they are merely offering opinions, couldn't these companies be bought off by aggressive dealers and auction houses? Couldn't they accept under-the-table money in return for passing bad autographs, since they can't be sued and can't be held responsible? Is it reasonable to think this already goes on?

[vintagechris]

Richard, I wonder if some of these authenticators today just pass stuff, not because of pressure from the auction houses, but because the authenticators know these auction houses bring them a lot of business and if they don't pass a large % or certain %, said auction house may decide to use someone else.

Just to be clear, I am not saying you did anything like that, but with some of the stuff I have seen with my own eyes, I wonder about some of the alphabet boys and wonder if this is going on.

[drc]

My opinion they offer valuable and learned independent opinions, but they should be used as a second opinion not the only opinion.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by vintagechris

Richard, I wonder if some of these authenticators today just pass stuff, not because of pressure from the auction houses, but because the authenticators know these auction houses bring them a lot of business and if they don't pass a large % or certain %, said auction house may decide to use someone else.

Just to be clear, I am not saying you did anything like that, but with some of the stuff I have seen with my own eyes, I wonder about some of the alphabet boys and wonder if this is going on.

A perfectly good question to ask. Unfortunately all I can say is we don't know the answer to that question.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Richard- the most troubling point you brought up is the fact that one of the auction houses you worked for put pressure on you to pass questionable autographs. Since TPA don't have to stand behind their decisions, as they are merely offering opinions, couldn't these companies be bought off by aggressive dealers and auction houses? Couldn't they accept under-the-table money in return for passing bad autographs, since they can't be sued and can't be held responsible? Is it reasonable to think this already goes on?

Such an attempt was never made to me.
The pressure was rarely put on us to authenticate an autograph that we outright said was bad. However, when we were taking our time examining something that was not immediately apparent, the pressure was put on us. "Oh, this piece came from a good consignor" "oh, this piece came from the Minnesota clubhouse guy", etc.