Stupid sticker on nice item JSA

[travrosty]

What is the matter with JSA?

The auction house calls this item a historic document, and JSA puts their stupid, fat sticker on it. Defacing the item in my opinion. It's ridiculous. When is this baloney going to stop? It is amazing to me that the companies even offer this service.

Even Steve Grad, who is the lead authenticator for PSA, is on the record recently (speaking for himself personally) calling these ill-placed JSA stickers - quote - "awful".

PSA offers the same defacing service. The old GAI autograph authentication company did also but who wants a GAI sticker on their item now? I call it defacing, These companies call it enhancing? I don't think they would do it unless they thought it helped the piece somehow. But who knows. Funny how two different entities look at the same thing, huh?

I guess it's how you look at it. This looks bad in the sense that it totally distracts from the item and in my opinion will hurt the item in the long run. Others think differently.

I would not buy something with a sticker from one of these services on it, unless I absolutely could not find what I wanted in an unstickered version. It would have to be that rare. And then I would do everything in my power to remove the sticker. I think thin paper items like this are stuck forever with these stickers. Glossy photos might have a chance of being reversed. I don't know.

Does every piece of paper in the sports memorabilia market have to have one of these JSA or PSA stickers on the front of it?

http://www.lelands.com/Auction/Aucti...pting-Contract

[khkco4bls]

Are they kidding. Who would do that.

[travrosty]

I don't know who would do that, but there you have it, a telegram from clemens accepting his rookie contract, and a big old JSA sticker on the front of the actual item. bizarre. to JSA - just go ahead and sticker Babe Ruth's rookie contract, and the Gettysburg Address and the Declaration of Independence while you are at it.

[keithsky]

they like putting those stupid stickers on the front because it's advertisement for them. if it's on the back no one can see it.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by keithsky

they like putting those stupid stickers on the front because it's advertisement for them. if it's on the back no one can see it.

100% right,,, if people are stupid enough to give them a free venue for their advertising then they will grab it.

[dapro]

I thought when you submit you have an option to place the sticker only on the LOA instead on the item itself, but any fee less than $50 they place on the item.

[thecatspajamas]

What are those other stickers next to JSA's? One looks like MLB, but I can't make out the other. Looks like JSA weren't the only ones who wanted to get their name on there.

[Leon]

I am pretty sure if I were a grading company I would refuse to put a sticker on the front of a photo, card etc....I might not be in business long but I just don't know if I could do it in good conscience. I know it would most likely damage the item.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

What are those other stickers next to JSA's? One looks like MLB, but I can't make out the other. Looks like JSA weren't the only ones who wanted to get their name on there.

It looks like mounted memories. Which makes the JSA even more asinine; MM and MLB only do in-person, while JSA offers an opinion. Someone paid JSA to give an opinion on something with rock-solid authenticity to begin with!!

[shelly]

This really shows no respect for the item or the history behind it.

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

It looks like mounted memories. Which makes the JSA even more asinine; MM and MLB only do in-person, while JSA offers an opinion. Someone paid JSA to give an opinion on something with rock-solid authenticity to begin with!!

+1 I'm definitely in the camp that I hate authenticity stickers on the front of any piece.

My gut tells me that the collector/ dealer that allowed the atrocity to occur should also have accountability in this case. It's almost as if he was collecting "hardware" or authenticity stickers instead of letting a terrific, historic piece stand on it's own merit.

Very sad, indeed!

[Paulanthony]

Originally Posted by khkco4bls

Are they kidding. Who would do that.

The person owned the item is equally responsible. JSA gives you a choice. Pay the $25.00 authentication fee and you get the sticker. Pay an additional $35.00 and you get a LOA w/out the sticker.

[Mr. Zipper]

I believe I have shared this information in another thread, but just to bring some perspective...

It is the customer who decides to have a hologram added to an item.

I can tell you for a fact that some customers go as far as to include diagrams where they want stickers placed. The authenticators have called customers on the phone to double check. "Are you really sure you want the sticker here on the item? We can put it on the back or elsewhere..." and customers INSIST on specific placement. Sometimes that placement makes everyone cringe. It may be hard for some to believe, but the guys working at the TPA love the hobby and the material.

So as much as that contradicts the anti-TPA narrative of the thread, it is the truth. If you see obtrusive sticker placement, it may very well be the fault of the customer.

I am the space consultant for JSA.

[mighty bombjack]

I agree with Mr. Zipper here. I will quote Leon from the National photo opportunity thread, but with a couple of small changes (his original words in parentheses).

Originally Posted by Leon

How can you fault (Tri-Star) JSA? I fault the people paying the money for the (photos) stickers. If no one bought them then it wouldn't happen. Personally, I think it's crazy too.

[pooh528]

Just to play the other side for a minute. With respect certain items, especially items that someone wants to frame and also show it has been authenticated by one of the TPAs, it would make sense to put the sticker on the front. That being said, on a historical item like this I think it I think it is silly to put it on the front.

[collectbaseball]

Once I saw a regular 8 x 10 photo signed in sharpie that was matted and framed side by side with a full LOA that was the same size. it looked ridiculous.

[jerseygary]

So if the owner specifies a sticker on their piece do they also specify it to be crooked? I've seen countless JSA and PSA/DNA endorsed items with the sticker placed like it was done by a 16 year-old Shop Rite stockboy with a price gun. I have no sympathy for someone who chooses to ruin (in my opinion) their own piece, but for God's sake if you're going to do it why not make sure it's on straight!

[travrosty]

its the tpa's fault, they dont have to deface the document. they can use common sense, (which they usually lack) and not put the sticker on the piece. just because someone wants it there, doesnt mean it has to be an option.

if you go to a rolls royce dealership and ask them to pop all 4 tires for you before you drive off the lot, they wont do it. They have a brand to protect. the tpa's not only dont think putting the sticker there hurts their brand, they think it helps i.e. free advertising. It's crazy.

[travrosty]

In the future, the collecting hobby will see the folly of these stickers on the front of the photos and it is my opinion that the photos with stickers on the front will bring less money at sale and auction than those with the sticker on the cert or on the back.

nobody who gets a babe ruth photo or lou gehrig photo certed has the sticker placed on the front, but people who get williams, dimaggio and mantle DO put the sticker on the front.

Well, in the future the mantlees, dimaggio and williams signed photos are going to be the equivalent of the ruth's and gehrig's moneywise anyway, and the gehrig and ruth signed photos will be out of reach for the average collector and the williams, mantle and dimaggio signed photos will be the ones that collectors can afford, even if they are a few thousand apiece, and most of these photos will have these stupid stickers on the front of the photos, and collectors will think, "what the heck"??????????

[pooh528]

I thought the issue was defacing a historical one of a kind item or a piece of history? I can at least understand the thought with respect to those items. However, there are hundreds of thousands of authentically signed Mantles, Williams and Joe D's. It is not like someone is defacing a one of a kind historical item by putting a psa or jsa sticker on the front. And if these photos lose value because of the sticker, that's what the person who chose to do it has to deal with. Honestly, it's two seperate issues

[thecatspajamas]

Think about this: How many times have you heard someone say something to the effect of, "Aww man, you mean the sticker is on the back? I really wish they would have put it on the front, then I would be interested."

Even if a collector prefers to have the sticker on the front, I've never heard of anyone turning down a piece because it was on the back instead. I can't say the same for the converse.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

Think about this: How many times have you heard someone say something to the effect of, "Aww man, you mean the sticker is on the back? I really wish they would have put it on the front, then I would be interested."

Even if a collector prefers to have the sticker on the front, I've never heard of anyone turning down a piece because it was on the back instead. I can't say the same for the converse.

So true!

I don't know why anyone pays a TPA to do it. I have purchased many autos in slabs. I have left them there for now but will crack them out when these companies go under. I won't purchase a stickered item, and there are many who agree with me. That's the authenticator/seller's loss.