What the future holds in the autograph industry

[packs]

I know I'm having a great time looking for pieces that I like. JSA and PSA don't hinder me from doing that. I couldn't care less about the "future" as I am only interested in the past.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

I know I'm having a great time looking for pieces that I like. JSA and PSA don't hinder me from doing that. I couldn't care less about the "future" as I am only interested in the past.

They may be indirectly hindering you. Jim S has said that he thinks forgers are getting better and better, to the point that they can create forgeries that are indistinguishable from the real deal. If their quality has at least improved a great deal, that may be because the legitimate TPA's (JSA and PSA) forced them to get better.

I don't know for sure, as I wasn't collecting autographs back then, but to me it's reasonable to believe that before JSA and PSA, people HAD to buy from honest, good sellers, and/or if they were willing to study legitimate exemplars and become experts themselves (as opposed to blindly relying on TPA's and AH's), their chances of purchasing a real Ruth were much better than they are today, since the forgeries weren't as good. I hope that makes sense, but perhaps I'm completely incorrect.

[shelly]

Originally Posted by Runscott

They may be indirectly hindering you. Jim S has said that he thinks forgers are getting better and better, to the point that they can create forgeries that are indistinguishable from the real deal. If their quality has at least improved a great deal, that may be because the legitimate TPA's (JSA and PSA) forced them to get better.

I don't know for sure, as I wasn't collecting autographs back then, but to me it's reasonable to believe that before JSA and PSA, people HAD to buy from honest, good sellers, and/or if they were willing to study legitimate exemplars and become experts themselves (as opposed to blindly relying on TPA's and AH's), their chances of purchasing a real Ruth were much better than they are today, since the forgeries weren't as good. I hope that makes sense, but perhaps I'm completely incorrect.

Hello, that is what I have been trying to say. The are getting better than the authenticators. Once that happens your sunk. I think the advice of getting better equipment and doing data testing might help. If they keep on doing like they are there percentage of real vs fake will drop below fifty percent. When that happens you can flip and coin and save yourself a lot of money.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by shelly

Hello, that is what I have been trying to say. The are getting better than the authenticators. Once that happens your sunk.

I think it's worse than that, and it's the crux of why we have so many fights on this forum - it's true that forgers are passing a very high % of bad Ruths and Gehrigs (etc.) right by the two legitimate TPA's, but what's worse is that when we bring these up for discussion on this forum, where we have experts who are better than those that the TPA's use, some of our guys give the bad autographs the green light And because of the massive egos, disagreement=fight.

Take that '700 HR' Ruth ticket - many say it's good, many say it's not. But the same guy who started off by saying he's 100% positive it's bad, is the only expert (maybe there are two - also a non-board member?) here who thinks the green-ink '27 Yankees ball is good. It's really mind-boggling how much disagreement there is right here.

[shelly]

[QUOTE=Runscott;1126284]I think it's worse than that, and it's the crux of why we have so many fights on this forum - it's true that forgers are passing a very high % of bad Ruths and Gehrigs (etc.) right by the two legitimate TPA's, but what's worse is that when we bring these up for discussion on this forum, where we have experts who are better than those that the TPA's use, some of our guys give the bad autographs the green light And because of the massive egos, disagreement=fight.

Take that '700 HR' Ruth ticket - many say it's good, many say it's not. But the same guy who started off by saying he's 100% positive it's bad, is the only expert (maybe there are two - also a non-board member?) here who thinks the green-ink '27 Yankees ball is good. It's really mind-boggling how much disagreement there is right here.[/QUO

Right or wrong that was his opinion.
I like who the new authenticators. The consigner. The consigner motto"I am not in the business but I know its authentic trust me"

[slidekellyslide]

[QUOTE=shelly;1126289]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I think it's worse than that, and it's the crux of why we have so many fights on this forum - it's true that forgers are passing a very high % of bad Ruths and Gehrigs (etc.) right by the two legitimate TPA's, but what's worse is that when we bring these up for discussion on this forum, where we have experts who are better than those that the TPA's use, some of our guys give the bad autographs the green light And because of the massive egos, disagreement=fight.

Take that '700 HR' Ruth ticket - many say it's good, many say it's not. But the same guy who started off by saying he's 100% positive it's bad, is the only expert (maybe there are two - also a non-board member?) here who thinks the green-ink '27 Yankees ball is good. It's really mind-boggling how much disagreement there is right here.[/QUO

Right or wrong that was his opinion.
I like the new authenticators. The consigner. I am not in the business but it is real the end.

When someone says it's "100% bad" is that still an opinion?

[HOF Auto Rookies]

I think some type of forensic testing would be great to see, obviously non-invasive. But, with that the prices to get certification would sky-rocket.

[shelly]

If the item is worth it there are places that can do things at a resonable price. The good thing is as this testing is perfected the cheaper it will become. I only say this because look at DNA testing. 5 years ago it would cost a fortune and take for ever. Now for 99 you can get your results in a few days.
Even if this where to happen do you think for one second the auction houses would pay for it. Not a chance in hell.

[Frozen in Time]

Originally Posted by HOF Auto Rookies

I think some type of forensic testing would be great to see, obviously non-invasive. But, with that the prices to get certification would sky-rocket.

That's probably true, but in the case of Ruth, Gehrig, etc. I believe it would be worth it if the forensic testing approached 100% accuracy. Moreover if any technology-based authentication became a standard for the Hobby and major auction houses, all the existing forgeries would eventually be identified as such.

[shelly]

Originally Posted by Frozen in Time

That's probably true, but in the case of Ruth, Gehrig, etc. I believe it would be worth it if the forensic testing approached 100% accuracy. Moreover if any technology-based authentication became a standard for the Hobby and major auction houses, all the existing forgeries would eventually be identified as such.

I just got off the phone with a major forensic lab. They said at this time the cost would not be worth it. It would have to be something the U.S. government would have to be interested in. So until someone comes up with a new mouse trap we are at square one.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by Frozen in Time

That's probably true, but in the case of Ruth, Gehrig, etc. I believe it would be worth it if the forensic testing approached 100% accuracy. Moreover if any technology-based authentication became a standard for the Hobby and major auction houses, all the existing forgeries would eventually be identified as such.

I would not mind at all if I sent in a Ruth (if I had one), to take a small piece of the ink and material to do testing. I wonder if anyone on this board that knows of any certain devices that could potentially be used. I know there are some scans to see if anything was drawn over something else.