Michael B, I would agree with you on most of this.
Anyone who says 90% or some such number is blowing smoke out their rectum. Their eyes and hair are probably brown as they are full of it up to there.
I spent the better part of 3 years reporting fakes online to eBay and LiveAuctioneers. Hundreds a day. Worked with local auction houses to remove items and refuse to take similar consignments. Gave the State Attorney all the info I gathered about the sources. Months later they called and said that the value of any single transaction didn't meet a threshold. I stopped to save my sanity* once I realized that it was futile reporting "authentic" reproductions passed as original. They are on eBay right now, along with the Garo, Rocchi, and other Operation Bullshit. *(Sorry, maybe I didn't stop soon enough.
)
(Not meant as an appeal to authority, but as a look into my perspective, which may be skewed)
One comment was that the reporters always check their facts - really!!!
No one said that.
When you are going for big headlines you are going to make outrageous claims not borne out by statistics. If such a claim came from a paid opinionator, they are NOT, NOT, NOT authenticators, they were claiming that as a purported fact to drive business to them.
Possibly. But what if the source is the FBI, or a State Attorney General?
This broad brush statement is so silly as it is never qualified. What does it mean? It is just baseball? It is all of sports? What is it.
Agreed. Without definition of the set or subset AND a known quantity of each, it is a guess.
Yes, there is a higher incidence of forgery in the well known names. Why? That is where the money is for a forger. Forgeries on lesser known names are usually done by people who know they can do it and get a thrill out of being able to deceive. No one is going to pay more than a dollar or two for a signed 83 Fleer or any similar card. It does not pay.
660 x $1-$2 =
I am sure there are a lot of old time in person collectors who will tell you stories of players who would sign stacks of cards for a person and think nothing of it. I used to see it for hockey teams. Most players would stand there and sign 10-15 cards for a person, then the same amount for the next. Some basketball players were the same way. I had an acquaintance who saved basketball photos from every possible magazine and newspaper he could find for all college and pro players. When the teams came through town they were more than happy to sign his 4 or 5 photos. Back in 1984 I was the first person to get Michael Jordan in Boston. The night before the game he came in after the team with another player and signed 6 or 7 magazines for me - SI's and High School Sports. The next year a friend gave him literally a shopping bag filled with items - foam mounted magazine photos, magazines, index cards and the such. He took them to his room and gave them back, all signed, the next day.
There are also Olympians, musicians, actors, authors, politicians, scientists, etc. who should be included in any conversation. I can say from personal experience that Olympians are very accommodating. I can show you about 15,000 genuine signatures without trying. I can think of two fakes I have ever seen in that category. Musicians were always very easy and would sign a lot. I have gotten multiples, usually 2 or 3, from even big names at one time - David Bowie, Pete Townsend, Paul Stanley, Elton John, Roger Daltrey, Ted Nugent, etc.
Absolutely. But the question is how many are how many of these items are changing hands. If Whitey Ford signed 100,000 items in his life, is it reasonable to think that on any given week 100 of the exact same item would be for sale?
Certainly ebay and online have changed the dynamics, but so much was signed and is still legitimately signed that it far outnumbers the fakes and forgeries.
Again the difference between what exists vs. the subset of what is offered for sale.
One poster tried to suggest that fakes and forgeries were different. How possibly is that? A forgery is a fake and a fake is a forgery.
Agree somewhat. But it is mostly semantics.
Autopen, pre-printed, secretarial and the such are not intended to be malicious representations of the real thing. To assert otherwise is just silly. Those are all done with the express knowledge of the person, thus not a forgery or a fake, just not a genuine signature.
This is true until those non-malicious representations are then misrepresented as "genuine signatures". And the "the such" you referenced above includes reproductions of genuine signatures onto never signed items, or just straight up digital prints of the original, again represented as genuine. And, as opposed to a hand forged item, they can be made by the hundreds (per hour, if desired).