What do you think of this Heritage offering?

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

My point is, all we have about those signatures are opinions, and opinions of people giving the opinions. Somebody paying over 100 K for a baseball with writing on it needs to be comfortable with what they are buying.

I'm more interested in the removed lots that Travis posted. We're they deemed bad after being posted to the auction, or what? We'll never know I guess.

In this hobby someone spending $100K on a ball only has to have a COA from one of the TPA's to be comfortable.
And the reasons for the removal of the two baseballs are already posted on the Hauls of Shame website. The balls were made after the alleged dates of use and signing. That info on the website came from our own Brandon Grunbaum, who knows more about baseballs then anyone that I know.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

In this hobby someone spending $100K on a ball only has to have a COA from one of the TPA's to be comfortable.

That's up to them, isn't it? I think they're crazy, but people spend bigger money than that on things I wouldn't touch all of the time. And there are clearly several people who disagree with those TPAs (though exactly who some of those people are is not at all clear).

I'm glad that, in the case of the balls that went poof, they had to be removed because of iron clad proof and not warring opinions. When all we have is the latter, the "truth" is going to equal perception and perception alone.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

That's up to them, isn't it? I think they're crazy, but people spend bigger money than that on things I wouldn't touch all of the time. And there are clearly several people who disagree with those TPAs (though exactly who some of those people are is not at all clear).

I'm glad that, in the case of the balls that went poof, they had to be removed because of iron clad proof and not warring opinions. When all we have is the latter, the "truth" is going to equal perception and perception alone.

I can assure you that the people (when I ask questions of people, I usually don't turn around and then print their names in a forum) I asked are all very highly regarded in the hobby and one of them is Shelly, who has posted his thoughts on this ball, in this thread, and who at this very moment is trembling at the thought of retribution from Heritage .

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

I can assure you that the people (when I ask questions of people, I usually don't turn around and then print their names in a forum) I asked are all very highly regarded in the hobby and one of them is Shelly, who has posted his thoughts on this ball, in this thread and who at this very moment is trembling at the thought of retribution from Heritage .

I respect that Richard, but it's very easy to say that "experts" agree that something is bad, as Nash is wont to do in his postings. Others are quick to accept that as truth because they have an agenda that needs satisfying. I could easily say that I've spoken to several experts who think this Yankee ball is good. People would ask for names then, no?

[David Atkatz]

Here's a name. I don't know if it's "the best autographed baseball, ever," or "the best 1927 Yankees baseball," but my humble opinion is that the ball is genuine.

[dgo71]

Thanks Wayne and Travis...wow, that's scary. You would think legally the auction house should still have some liability. Ignorance of the law being no excuse for breaking it, and all that. It's disheartening to see big houses essentially using the "we didn't know it was fake" excuse by hiding behind a TPA.

[RichardSimon]

So close and yet so far away. (I live at East 80th Street and the auction is at East 79th Street across the street from Central Park).
I am assuming after this thread I will have to come up with some fake ID to get into this auction .

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

I could easily say that I've spoken to several experts who think this Yankee ball is good. People would ask for names then, no?

Have you actually spoken to several experts? If you tell me you did, then I would believe you, but you are not exactly saying that now. You don't have to name the names, just tell us if you have actually talked to people about the ball and if so how many.
This looks like one of those baseballs where we have to say that the people who have been asked just disagree but two of the names of those that have offered negative opinions on the ball are at the very top of this hobby.

[David Atkatz]

What's your own opinion, Richard?

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Have you actually spoken to several experts? If you tell me you did, then I would believe you, but you are not exactly saying that now. You don't have to name the names, just tell us if you have actually talked to people about the ball and if so how many.
This looks like one of those baseballs where we have to say that the people who have been asked just disagree but two of the names of those that I have discussed the ball with are at the very top of this hobby.

I have not spoken to anybody about this ball, only the back and forth on this board. I agree, all we will be left with on this ball is opinions and opinions of those giving opinions. And there is apparent disagreement on both of those counts.

For me, the authenticity of this particular ball isn't really of interest per se, but the discussion of auction house practices and how authenticity is determined by interested parties is why I'm here.