What do you think of this Heritage offering?

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

Great post.

So the thing left to ask is this: While it seems you yourself sell only what you deem to be "facts," what is your opinion of Heritage selling what seems to be an "opinion"?

<Ray Charles picture>

[RichardSimon]

The Nash story, on his website, about Heritage includes nine other items.
My opinion is that I agree with what he has said and disagree with the COA's issued by the TPA's.
What do you guys think about these other items in the auction that Nash has discussed?
There have been many opinions expressed on the board about Nash, pro and con.
Let us just discuss the items.
http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=17835#more-17835

[Runscott]

Agreed - Jim's post is a great one (like many in this thread). I don't see the 'heat' as all that bad...yet - nothing like some of the autograph threads have turned into.

Thanks Shelly and David, for your comments. I have been collecting autographs for about ten years, but most of that time it just amounted to studying and comparing them. Ruth and Gehrig have always bothered me, primarily because I would like to eventually own something signed by each, but the comfort level has rarely been there for the affordable ones.

The following by Jim is something I wanted to say as well, but I didn't want Chris or David to think I was referring to them (I wouldn't have been). But I think it's the reason that the authenticators get away with shoddy work, and why the auction houses patronize us. By the way, the bold part of that last sentence is what pisses me off more than anything. They don't want to take the time to do due diligence, but they dismiss the opinions of those who do.

"all of the parties involved WANT an expensive museum quality item to be real."

I don't authenticate autographs, so I have the benefit of being able to 'stop' looking when I get to the point where I've decided the item doesn't look good enough for me to want; however, if I ran an auction house I would not accept items I felt uncomfortable with, even if I thought they might be real - unless it was just 'presentability' that got me to that point.

[shelly]

This ball was authenticated in 2002 and sold for 86 thousand. No matter what, neither one of them could change there minds. What do you think would happen if they did that.
That is why I feel that Heritage should have someone else look at the ball. That way there would be no conflict of interest. When I say someone else I mean anyone that has never worked or has any interest in Heritage. As most of you have pointed out there are some very good people on this site.
I keep on saying this but look how many pieces have been found to be bad. Why for this kind of money would you not try and make sure that every I is dotted and every t is crossed.
Richard also brings up a good point. There are nine other items in question. Do any of you have opinions on them?