Christie’s Auction today

[the-illini]

I agree with you Ryan - I have trouble seeing how Jackson could have signed the photo that cleanly. I always heard he basically had to draw his signature on the rare occasions when he would sign.

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

I hope it’s real, bc if it is, it’s awesome. However, I know several people who are dubious about the authenticity of the auto; the feedback being the writing does not seem shaky enough for Joe Jackson’s signature. I was also told to question all Jackson signatures unless it was on a check of official document where it’s much harder to fake. The PSA authentication means little in my book.

Compare the one at Christie’s with the signatures on the two documents in these two articles.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.spo...01nrodg07iw6eo

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...ed-to-auction/

[oldjudge]

Looks like a cheaper than expected price on the signed Gehrig rookie.

[MVSNYC]

I'm not an expert, but the Jackson signature also struck me as a little odd. IMO, his other examples, known to be authentic (on legal documents/checks, etc) have much shaker, and less fluid signatures.

Close friend of mine won the W514 Jackson. Killer card. He was bidding in the room.

[Peter_Spaeth]

What a shame that someone paid that much for an apparently inauthentic signature.

[Jobu]

I am not an autograph specialist, but if you blow it up, Jackson's signature is really shaky. The provenance is also pretty good for something like this - Cleveland photographer and all these other signed pics too.

[Vintageclout]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Looks like a cheaper than expected price on the signed Gehrig rookie.

Jay - that’s because it is not a 1925 rookie card & major hobbyists know that. It’s a 1926 second year BLUE TINT Gehrig exhibit inadvertently slabbed as a 1925 gray tint rookie. Virtually every high-end collector I know that would have bid strong backed off knowing it’s a true 1926 exhibit.

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by Vintageclout

Jay - that’s because it is not a 1925 rookie card & major hobbyists know that. It’s a 1926 second year BLUE TINT Gehrig exhibit inadvertently slabbed as a 1925 gray tint rookie. Virtually every high-end collector I know that would have bid strong backed off knowing it’s a true 1926 exhibit.

My god. Unreal. Reminds me of that annoying quote "life is like a box of chocolates. . .you never know what you are going to get." That's Christies. I've bought things from them that were not as advertised for the better and for the worse. You never know. They aren't sports specialists. By a long shot.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

My god. Unreal. Reminds me of that annoying quote "life is like a box of chocolates. . .you never know what you are going to get." That's Christies. I've bought things from them that were not as advertised for the better and for the worse. You never know. They aren't sports specialists. By a long shot.

This is more a problem with PSA, the grader, than it is with Christie's but both could have done better in this case.

[Dardevl]

I think it's a good 1925 Exhibits. I'm not seeing a "blue tint". Plus, the 1926 Exhibits, from what I've seen, have the same player information in the same location on the card, but does not have a box for the info. See pic.

I would assume what hurt the Christie's Gehrig, was that the card itself was not graded. The PSA 6(mk) just cleared $1mil not that long ago.

[Vintageclout]

Incorrect. The 1926 exhibits DO HAVE the same text box as the 1925’s. They are exactly the same except for the gray vs. blue tint. Unfortunately, the example you used was likewise graded incorrectly - it’s not a 1926 blue tint exhibit.

[ballparks]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

My god. Unreal. Reminds me of that annoying quote "life is like a box of chocolates. . .you never know what you are going to get." That's Christies. I've bought things from them that were not as advertised for the better and for the worse. You never know. They aren't sports specialists. By a long shot.

Like selling the "1919 Game 4 Ticket" that was really from Game 8!!?? Sloppy.

PSA F'd that up too. Sloppy and Greedy.