Warning: Disturbing Autograph "Authentication" Material!

[yanks12025]

Did anyone notice in the next April Heritage's auction, they have 6 Ruth signed balls in mint shape.

[Caseyatbat]

I had mentioned the item in question here may have been issued an auction LOA rather than a full LOA because there is evidence in the story that suggests that. The original auction description mentions it has LOA's from so and so. It does not mention whether it is a Full LOA or an Auction LOA, so it could be either.

In the story, it mentions the LOA itself reads that all the autographs are 9's and 10's in the description. This does not happen in a Full Letter. Spence does not "grade" autographs and this service was not available until years after this by any TPA. This would only happen in a Auction LOA, because in an auction letter the entire Lot description is used as the description in the Auction letter. And that sounds like what is going on here to me.

And this should clear up a little about "Auction Letters". They are not issued by the actual TPA. The Auction Letter is actually issued by the Auction House itself. The Auction House uses their own lot description in it, and it is not signed by the TPA either. It contains a facsimile pre-printed version. An auction letter is a way for "The Auction House" to guarantee the item. They guarantee the item to pass a Full LOA from that particular TPA within a certain amount of time (45 or 90 days I believe), or you have the option to return the item to the auction house if not. So the tough part to understand here is, it is not the TPA guaranteeing it is going to pass the full authentication process. It is the Auction House saying it is guaranteed to pass the full authentication or you can return if it does not. So it is very important to get a Full LOA ASAP within the allotted time or you will not have the guarantee anymore from the auction house. Because all an auction letter really is, is a letter from the auction house itself. And of course, we all know how risky that can be when you think about it.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by Caseyatbat

I had mentioned the item in question here may have been issued an auction LOA rather than a full LOA because there is evidence in the story that suggests that. The original auction description mentions it has LOA's from so and so. It does not mention whether it is a Full LOA or an Auction LOA, so it could be either.

In the story, it mentions the LOA itself reads that all the autographs are 9's and 10's in the description. This does not happen in a Full Letter. Spence does not "grade" autographs and this service was not available until years after this by any TPA. This would only happen in a Auction LOA, because in an auction letter the entire Lot description is used as the description in the Auction letter. And that sounds like what is going on here to me.

And this should clear up a little about "Auction Letters". They are not issued by the actual TPA. The Auction Letter is actually issued by the Auction House itself. The Auction House uses their own lot description in it, and it is not signed by the TPA either. It contains a facsimile pre-printed version. An auction letter is a way for "The Auction House" to guarantee the item. They guarantee the item to pass a Full LOA from that particular TPA within a certain amount of time (45 or 90 days I believe), or you have the option to return the item to the auction house if not. So the tough part to understand here is, it is not the TPA guaranteeing it is going to pass the full authentication process. It is the Auction House saying it is guaranteed to pass the full authentication or you can return if it does not. So it is very important to get a Full LOA ASAP within the allotted time or you will not have the guarantee anymore from the auction house. Because all an auction letter really is, is a letter from the auction house itself. And of course, we all know how risky that can be when you think about it.

no it couldn't because there were no auction loa's yet, that concept wasn't invented yet. they were all full loa's back then. show me any auction listing from 1999 to 2001 that says auction loa anywhere. There just wasnt auction loa's back then, there was no 'upgrade service' , give us more money then we will say it is 'really' real.

[Caseyatbat]

you are right, I am not sure if they had Aution LOA's that far back either. But show me a full LOA where it states all the autographs are 9's and 10's as well.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by Caseyatbat

you are right, I am not sure if they had Aution LOA's that far back either. But show me a full LOA where it states all the autographs are 9's and 10's as well.

nowhere does it say that that is what the full loa says. it simply says that the sigs are graded as such in the auction listing.

Those grading terms were informal back then, not official grades like they have now, and the only one saying that the loa's say the grade on the actual loa, thus making them an auction loa, is YOU!

The listing says loa by spence and guttierez, so thats what it is, loa from spence and guttierez, you just have to live with it, that they inspected the piece, blew it big time, or certed a piece they had seen two years prior and forgot? that the wagner was barely there the first time.

I'd like to get answers too as to how they could do that. but "auction loa" is not the answer, and is not the skirt to hide behind for these authenticators.

[RichardSimon]

So basically what this post of Casey's is saying is that there is a good chance that if you buy an item from an auction house, with an alphabet auction COA, it might not have even been looked at by a TPA.
WOW!!

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by travrosty

nowhere does it say that that is what the full loa says. it simply says that the sigs are graded as such in the auction listing.

Those grading terms were informal back then, not official grades like they have now, and the only one saying that the loa's say the grade on the actual loa, thus making them an auction loa, is YOU!

The listing says loa by spence and guttierez, so thats what it is, loa from spence and guttierez, you just have to live with it, that they inspected the piece, blew it big time, or certed a piece they had seen two years prior and forgot? that the wagner was barely there the first time.

I'd like to get answers too as to how they could do that. but "auction loa" is not the answer, and is not the skirt to hide behind for these authenticators.

Hey Travis,

I don't have a dog in this fight but what do you think of this Ali with COA on Ebay. I just ran across this by accident and it was certed just a few days ago. Doesn't look like any Ali I've ever seen.


http://www.ebay.com/itm/MUHAMMAD-ALI-AUTOGRAPHED-8X10-PHOTO-CERTIFIED-J-SPENCE-/230733986662?_trksid=e11010.m8&_trkparms=algo%3DMW%26its%3DI%252BC%26itu%3DUCC%26 otn%3D5%26ps%3D63%26clkid%3D5865993226508237477

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Hey Travis,

I don't have a dog in this fight but what do you think of this Ali with COA on Ebay. I just ran across this by accident and it was certed just a few days ago. Doesn't look like any Ali I've ever seen.


http://www.ebay.com/itm/MUHAMMAD-ALI-AUTOGRAPHED-8X10-PHOTO-CERTIFIED-J-SPENCE-/230733986662?_trksid=e11010.m8&_trkparms=algo%3DMW%26its%3DI%252BC%26itu%3DUCC%26 otn%3D5%26ps%3D63%26clkid%3D5865993226508237477

Dave,

I havent seen anything like that before either. i've seen messy ali signatures, but that h is muhammad is something new for me. As well as the A in Ali. I wouldn't be able to cert it with certainty, and thats what certs are for, when someone is certain. I'd have to take a lot longer look, but as it is right now, I don't particularly like it.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by yanks12025

Did anyone notice in the next April Heritage's auction, they have 6 Ruth signed balls in mint shape.

Brock:
I cannot find that auction on-line. Can you send or post a link, if you have access?

Thanks!

[johnmh71]

Let's all believe everything Nash says. He would never do anything phony or fraudulent himself. I wonder how the fresh slice of humble pie tastes?:

http://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com...series-trophy/

[travrosty]

What was written about the Honus Wagner signature on the induction covers (disappearing and then reappearing) is not a matter of opinion, you don't have to "believe" anyone. It is a matter of record.

The auctions that are referred to are available to anyone and everyone, they are public information. Look at the 2001 auction listing online and the other auction in the catalog that is mentioned, and you will see the same pictures that haulsofshame showed.

Do you believe your own eyes?

And I would like to ask Leon to ask these posters to please post their own full name as I was recently asked to do so, and I graciously obliged.

[Vintagedegu]

-

[johnmh71]

Originally Posted by Vintagedegu

It's been talked about many times here (and I believe in the card forum) in the past. If we reject out of hand everything someone says because they may have a dirty nose, then we'd never be able to learn much about the dirt in this hobby. Unfortunate but true. You just have to take the info you get and digest it the best you can.

This is such a dirty business, it's really depressing...

It isn't necessarily the material but the motive behind sharing it that I question. Do your own research and judge for yourself. I just happen to believe that those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

John Hatcher

[gnaz01]

Originally Posted by johnmh71

It isn't necessarily the material but the motive behind sharing it that I question. Do your own research and judge for yourself. I just happen to believe that those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

John Hatcher

John,

Understand your point fully, but as for me, I could care less about the motive as long as it exposes the material. Just my .02 cents worth.

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by johnmh71

I just happen to believe that those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Ah, but it can be such an amazing spectacle when they do...

[Mr. Zipper]

Originally Posted by johnmh71

It isn't necessarily the material but the motive behind sharing it that I question. Do your own research and judge for yourself. I just happen to believe that those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

John Hatcher

There is no denying the TPAs have made some mistakes and I think reasoned criticism is completely valid.

However, what I find interesting is that the two sites dedicated to dredging up every mistake made in the past decade and utterly destroying the TPAs, are run by people who are anonymous and/or would not hold up well themselves if a bright light was trained on them.

[gnaz01]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

However, what I find interesting is that the two sites dedicated to dredging up every mistake made in the past decade and utterly destroying the TPAs, are run by people who are anonymous and/or would not hold up well themselves if a bright light was trained on them.

Steve,

Maybe, but does that matter with respect to the fact that TPA's get it wrong many times?

[thekingofclout]

Originally Posted by Mr. Zipper

There is no denying the TPAs have made some mistakes and I think reasoned criticism is completely valid.

However, what I find interesting is that the two sites dedicated to dredging up every mistake made in the past decade and utterly destroying the TPAs, are run by people who are anonymous and/or would not hold up well themselves if a bright light was trained on them.

like