Warning: Disturbing Autograph "Authentication" Material!

[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]

How can you tell definitively, with the level of Parkinson's that has set-in?

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by perezfan

How can you tell definitively, with the level of Parkinson's that has set-in?

Because that is not a later signature, or if it is forged, its suppose to mimic an earlier signature, not later. a later parkinsons affected signature is very shaky, and this one is not shaky, it looks rushed, but doesnt look like other rushed ali signatures, it looks too rushed. like he was signing a photo out of the window from a moving car going 60 miles an hour. its just very weird looking.

it generally has some of the tell tales signs of his signature, but looking at it closely it looks a little different with some things that don't add up.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by travrosty

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.

I wouldn't buy one that looks like that. He was a prolific signer in his asymptomatic days so there is a ton of material out there. As for rushed versus not rushed, I've shown these before but they seem aporpos:

Lennox Lewis I obtained in person at a promotional event for the Klitschko fight. He was on the move:



Lennox Lewis a friend of mine obtained back stage at an HBO event:



No way could a TPA authenticate the one I got.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I wouldn't buy one that looks like that. He was a prolific signer in his asymptomatic days so there is a ton of material out there. As for rushed versus not rushed, I've shown these before but they seem aporpos:

Lennox Lewis I obtained in person at a promotional event for the Klitschko fight. He was on the move:



Lennox Lewis a friend of mine obtained back stage at an HBO event:



No way could a TPA authenticate the one I got.

That's right, you know it is real, but it really can't be authenticated. but all too often you will see something like this or an autograph of muhammad ali signed M.A. authenticated and they really shouldnt be because there isnt enough to go by.

Not able to authenticate doesnt mean fake, it just means for various reasons they can't conclude positively that it was signed by the celebrity or athlete in question. One of those reasons is that it is an abbreviated really quick, short signature that doesn't leave enough of the autograph to study.

a rejection letter means fake. but a lot of collectors will take offense to get an unable to authenticate but not every autograph is able to be authenticated. A lot more autographs should receive the unable to authenticate, or no opinion than currently receive it. they like to push it one way or another and its not fair to do that in many circumstances.