Interesting Story

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

Richard

There was a time, pre PSA/DNA and JSA, that Jimmy Spence the dealer was considered to be in that same company you list here. If you were asked the same question then, would he have been on your list?

Do you want to go back in time and buy from him 12 years ago?
I am recommending dealers for the here and now.

[PhilNap]

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

Do you want to go back in time and buy from him 12 years ago?
I am recommending dealers for the here and now.

Go back in time? That's just silly. You clearly have strong opinions. I'm just curious about the evolution of such opinions.

[RichardSimon]

Like I said my recommendations are for the here and now.

[PhilNap]

Predictable

[David Atkatz]

Quite.

[travrosty]

Speaking for myself only, if you can earn your way on someone's list, you can earn your way off.

If Spence was on anybody's list back then, but wouldn't be on the list now, so what? He would earn that distinction. There's no messenger to blame.

Don't blame anyone for holding an authenticator responsible for their authentications. Only the authenticator deserves to be held accountable.

[MacDice]

It is amazing what technology has done to the autograph hobby. I know a lot of people on this board are not into autographs but I thought that I would share with you a new trend. For autograph collectors it is very difficult to prepare for any chance encounter with an athlete or celebrity. It is impossible to always have a photo or a card of a specific person in case you get a chance to get a signature. You never know who you will bump into but technology that is no longer an issue.

Using a certain type of photo paper, a blue sharpie and a photo printer anything is possible. Once an athlete / celebrity has signed the photo paper in a blue sharpie the collector or dealer can then go and print a photo on the paper and the signature comes out perfect (assuming that it is not on a dark are of the photo that is being printed). The ink in the printer does not effect the ink of the blue sharpie. I did not believe this until I saw it done first hand.

Imagine this scenario, someone gets Willie Mays to sign the proper photo paper in blue sharpie, they could later print his obituary (when he passes away) onto the paper and you would have an authentic signed obituary. Weird to think that could happen.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by MacDice

It is amazing what technology has done to the autograph hobby. I know a lot of people on this board are not into autographs but I thought that I would share with you a new trend. For autograph collectors it is very difficult to prepare for any chance encounter with an athlete or celebrity. It is impossible to always have a photo or a card of a specific person in case you get a chance to get a signature. You never know who you will bump into but technology that is no longer an issue.

Using a certain type of photo paper, a blue sharpie and a photo printer anything is possible. Once an athlete / celebrity has signed the photo paper in a blue sharpie the collector or dealer can then go and print a photo on the paper and the signature comes out perfect (assuming that it is not on a dark are of the photo that is being printed). The ink in the printer does not effect the ink of the blue sharpie. I did not believe this until I saw it done first hand. Imagine this scenario, someone gets Willie Mays to sign the proper photo paper in blue sharpie, they could later print his obituary (when he passes away) onto the paper and you would have an authentic signed obituary. Weird to think that could happen.

I am not sure you are going to find a lot of celebrities that will sign a "blank" sheet of paper with such technology available. I can think of a few untoward applications of that scenario. I guess if it clearly photo paper, maybe. I can tell you that at Spring Training I used to like to get blank sided 3x5s signed for years, you might as well leave them at home now. I got tired oh hearing, "we've been instructed by the Players Union not to sign those."

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by MacDice

It is amazing what technology has done to the autograph hobby. I know a lot of people on this board are not into autographs but I thought that I would share with you a new trend. For autograph collectors it is very difficult to prepare for any chance encounter with an athlete or celebrity. It is impossible to always have a photo or a card of a specific person in case you get a chance to get a signature. You never know who you will bump into but technology that is no longer an issue.

Using a certain type of photo paper, a blue sharpie and a photo printer anything is possible. Once an athlete / celebrity has signed the photo paper in a blue sharpie the collector or dealer can then go and print a photo on the paper and the signature comes out perfect (assuming that it is not on a dark are of the photo that is being printed). The ink in the printer does not effect the ink of the blue sharpie. I did not believe this until I saw it done first hand.

Imagine this scenario, someone gets Willie Mays to sign the proper photo paper in blue sharpie, they could later print his obituary (when he passes away) onto the paper and you would have an authentic signed obituary. Weird to think that could happen.

Where did you see this? And can you explain how the ink in the photo does not totally cover up the sharpie ink of the autograph?
I can see this coming to card shows. The promoters and players charge more for "premium" items,, how much will they now charge for signing this special photo paper?

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by MacDice

It is amazing what technology has done to the autograph hobby. I know a lot of people on this board are not into autographs but I thought that I would share with you a new trend. For autograph collectors it is very difficult to prepare for any chance encounter with an athlete or celebrity. It is impossible to always have a photo or a card of a specific person in case you get a chance to get a signature. You never know who you will bump into but technology that is no longer an issue.

Using a certain type of photo paper, a blue sharpie and a photo printer anything is possible. Once an athlete / celebrity has signed the photo paper in a blue sharpie the collector or dealer can then go and print a photo on the paper and the signature comes out perfect (assuming that it is not on a dark are of the photo that is being printed). The ink in the printer does not effect the ink of the blue sharpie. I did not believe this until I saw it done first hand.

Imagine this scenario, someone gets Willie Mays to sign the proper photo paper in blue sharpie, they could later print his obituary (when he passes away) onto the paper and you would have an authentic signed obituary. Weird to think that could happen.

A little bit removed from technology and autographs but there have been instances with Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon where Ford signed a blank piece of paper and then the collector typed in "I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone" (Ford was a member of the Warren Commission) and Nixon signing blank pages and then collectors typing his presidential resignation above his signature.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

Predictable

I noticed how active you have been in all these threads Phil.
You have not posted in almost a month and most of your posts are for the purposes of selling autographs.
Get active, tell us what you think.
Nobody here knows your opinions Phil, be they 12 years old or 1 day old.
At least I posted a list of dealers I think are trustworthy. How about you posting one.
You have bought from me,, who would you recommend?

[PhilNap]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

I believe Richard answered your question twice. Why the hassle?

Chris

Richard responded twice. However . . . stating that he elects not to answer the question is not in fact answering it. I wasn't aware that asking a question constitutes a "hassle". Richard's a big boy. I'm sure he can speak for himself. But thanks for your input.

Originally Posted by RichardSimon

I noticed how active you have been in all these threads Phil.
You have not posted in almost a month and most of your posts are for the purposes of selling autographs.
Get active, tell us what you think.
Nobody here knows your opinions Phil, be they 12 years old or 1 day old.
At least I posted a list of dealers I think are trustworthy. How about you posting one.
You have bought from me,, who would you recommend?

You are correct, I am not real active on here. Like the large majority, I mostly just lurk. I try to post only when I think I have something productive to add. Voicing opinions and piling on in a public forum really isn't my style. I simply had a legitimate question which for some reason you choose not to answer. That's your choice and to be quite honest I wasn't surprised.

I have bought from everyone you mentioned and I'm pretty sure you are aware that I have bought from you as well (multiple times in fact). My question had nothing to do with disparaging you or questioning whether you are a trustworthy dealer. Rich, I don't have a dog in this fight. Its just that if you are going to put yourself out there as much as you do, you are bound to elicit questions. I simply had a question. A question I'm sure others would like to hear the answer to as well.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

Chris

Richard responded twice. However . . . stating that he elects not to answer the question is not in fact answering it. I wasn't aware that asking a question constitutes a "hassle". Richard's a big boy. I'm sure he can speak for himself. But thanks for your input.




You are correct, I am not real active on here. Like the large majority, I mostly just lurk. I try to post only when I think I have something productive to add. Voicing opinions and piling on in a public forum really isn't my style. I simply had a legitimate question which for some reason you choose not to answer. That's your choice and to be quite honest I wasn't surprised.

I have bought from everyone you mentioned and I'm pretty sure you are aware that I have bought from you as well (multiple times in fact). My question had nothing to do with disparaging you or questioning whether you are a trustworthy dealer. Rich, I don't have a dog in this fight. Its just that if you are going to put yourself out there as much as you do, you are bound to elicit questions. I simply had a question. A question I'm sure others would like to hear the answer to as well.

Well, if there are several active posters who would like an answer , post that guys, and I will answer.
I don't usually respond to lurkers who use the board to sell and write nothing of value.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

Chris

Richard responded twice. However . . . stating that he elects not to answer the question is not in fact answering it. I wasn't aware that asking a question constitutes a "hassle". Richard's a big boy. I'm sure he can speak for himself. But thanks for your input.




You are correct, I am not real active on here. Like the large majority, I mostly just lurk. I try to post only when I think I have something productive to add. Voicing opinions and piling on in a public forum really isn't my style. I simply had a legitimate question which for some reason you choose not to answer. That's your choice and to be quite honest I wasn't surprised.

I have bought from everyone you mentioned and I'm pretty sure you are aware that I have bought from you as well (multiple times in fact). My question had nothing to do with disparaging you or questioning whether you are a trustworthy dealer. Rich, I don't have a dog in this fight. Its just that if you are going to put yourself out there as much as you do, you are bound to elicit questions. I simply had a question. A question I'm sure others would like to hear the answer to as well.

Richard answered the question.

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

Chris

Richard responded twice. However . . . stating that he elects not to answer the question is not in fact answering it. I wasn't aware that asking a question constitutes a "hassle". Richard's a big boy. I'm sure he can speak for himself. But thanks for your input.

What's with the inquisition here? Richard gave an answer, and just because it wasn't one of the one-word choices you want to pigeonhole him with, you get all pissy? This isn't a courtroom here and Richard isn't on the witness stand, so he can choose to answer you (or not) any way he sees fit. To me, your question sounds like more like a set-up for a follow-up slam than a question borne solely out of curiosity. Maybe I'm wrong, but your continued baiting of Richard isn't helping to change that.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by PhilNap

Predictable

I believe Richard answered your question twice. Why the hassle?