The author would do a lot better if he just stuck to the facts and avoided "Autograph Alert School of Journalism" passages such as:
"Sources indicate that authentications like these by JSA and PSA are far from “mistakes” and show that these companies continue to certify non-genuine items to avoid the refunds and returns that would be requested from their clients if, in fact, they were to correct their flawed opinions."
Really? Shouldn't something this inflammatory be from a named source? Who is the source?
"Another source told us he believes the Matty secreterial signatures will be probed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation."
Again, really? Shouldn't something this important be from a named source?The FBI is ignoring the thousands and thousands of questionable items coming from the preferred document experts at Coaches Corner, yet are focusing on a handful of items from JSA? Who is the source again?
|