Icon Authentics

[jgmp123]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

None of the major authenticators are required to train as Certified Document Examiners (CDEs), who at least try to be scientific. That's why authenticators keep popping up.



I would never send them anything. Because I wouldn't collect stuff I can't authenticate myself, and I don't know why anyone would. I especially wouldn't pay to have them look at anything older than 1950, since there is no way they can scientifically examine the item for the amount of money they charge to authenticate it.

Honest question....Looking at that site, would you trust those people with your memorabilia? I don't care if you would send something or not, just look at the site and ask yourself if you think that it is a reputable source.

[SetBuilder]

Originally Posted by jgmp123

Honest question....Looking at that site, would you trust those people with your memorabilia? I don't care if you would send something or not, just look at the site and ask yourself if you think that it is a reputable source.

It's too boilerplate, so probably no. Not enough biographical info.

If they advertised a very narrow specialization? Maybe.

If I met them at a trade show? Maybe.

There is a duopoly in authentication at the moment so it's tough to go anywhere else, especially since re-sale value is tied to the reputation of the COA.

Still doesn't change the fact that the person behind that site could have good intentions and actually be a very talented grader. It's just tough to start out in an industry controlled by two firms, where you're slandered viciously by other authenticators at the beginning.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

It's too boilerplate, so probably no. Not enough biographical info.

If they advertised a very narrow specialization? Maybe.

If I met them at a trade show? Maybe.

There is a duopoly in authentication at the moment so it's tough to go anywhere else, especially since re-sale value is tied to the reputation of the COA.

Still doesn't change the fact that the person behind that site could have good intentions and actually be a very talented grader. It's just tough to start out in an industry controlled by two firms, where you're slandered viciously by other authenticators at the beginning.

Please point out the vicious slander.

[SetBuilder]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Please point out the vicious slander.

"Who would ever send an autograph to that guy?!"

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

"Who would ever send an autograph to that guy?!"

Who said that here?

[SetBuilder]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Who said that here?

Are you being sarcastic, or are you just bad at inference?

[steve B]

Hey, if someones business practices and experience don't stand up to harsh, or even ordinary scrutiny they're probably headed for failure.

Saying "we'll compare your stuff to stuff we find on the internet" doesn't exactly inspire complete confidence does it.

Heck, I can compare stuff to stuff I find on the internet. And I suspect I'd be wrong a LOT.
Based on a not incredibly scientific "survey" where I look at autographs presented here, compare them to my massive exemplar file (the internet) and decide if I think it's good or not. Then I wait for the more experienced opinions. The results are iffy at best.

But then I'm not making COAs for pay. And that's not a bad thing when it comes to autographs.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

Are you being sarcastic, or are you just bad at inference?

First off in writing it's libel, and I don't think libel can be "inferred"

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

Are you being sarcastic, or are you just bad at inference?

You put the quote in "quotes" implying that it was an exact statement that you were quoting not implying.

"Who would ever send an autograph to that guy?!"

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by SetBuilder

"Who would ever send an autograph to that guy?!"

Sorry, if that's vicious slander to you, you've got some pretty thin skin!