100 of the greatest, boneheaded blunders ever made coming up, watch for it!

[travrosty]

HOS (haulsofshame) has leaked that they are preparing the 100 greatest blunders and mistakes ever made by TPA's. Look for it. It will be blockbuster. It will be the page collectors can go to forever to look at the documented non-expertise by the ones who claim to be worlds experts. It will be THE public record of the malaise, malfeasance and malpractice of all the greatest so called authenticators. I can't wait.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by travrosty

HOS (haulsofshame) has leaked that they are preparing the 100 greatest blunders and mistakes ever made by TPA's. Look for it. It will be blockbuster. It will be the page collectors can go to forever to look at the documented non-expertise by the ones who claim to be worlds experts. It will be THE public record of the malaise, malfeasance and malpractice of all the greatest so called authenticators. I can't wait.

I wonder if the Cooperstown Forger ever got anything past the "greatest so called authenticators?"

[travrosty]

the tpa's don't discriminate on the source,

oh wait, yes, they do.

[thetruthisoutthere]

If I sent Peter Nash just a few of Todd Mueller's "blunders," do you think he will post them?

[travrosty]

todd mueller is not a third party authenticator. show me where nash posts blunders of individual non third party authenticators?


the list of 100 will astound I am told. Incredible to have so much non - expertise exposed on one article. People will bookmark it for years. Incredible reference tool and it is free.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by travrosty

the tpa's don't discriminate on the source,

oh wait, yes, they do.

I have seen plenty of proof of the TPAs' ineptitude, but I have yet to see proof of this discrimination.

[travrosty]

Originally Posted by mighty bombjack

I have seen plenty of proof of the TPAs' ineptitude, but I have yet to see proof of this discrimination.

really, you didnt see jsa approve several items then issue letters of rejection for those same good items just because they had a morales sticker on them? that isnt looking at the autograph, it is looking at the source. where have you been?

of course they go by the source.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by travrosty

really, you didnt see jsa approve several items then issue letters of rejection for those same good items just because they had a morales sticker on them? that isnt looking at the autograph, it is looking at the source. where have you been?

of course they go by the source.

I would do the same thing if I were issuing opinions of authenticity. One needs to consider every aspect of an auto when judging authenticity. To that effect, if someone posted an auto asking for opinions, and I were to say that it looked legit to me, I would change my opinion real fast if it were revealed that the auto in question was currently up for sale in a CC auction. If the TPAs did the same thing, which I vaguely recall, I actually applaud them for such. I know you will disagree.

What I'd be interested in is evidence that TPAs change opinions based solely on who's submitting the autos (meaning they thought it was bad until it was submitted by regular customer X). That would constitute fraud in my eyes, not just the run of the mill incompetence that is on display regularly.

[ibuysportsephemera]

Originally Posted by travrosty

really, you didnt see jsa approve several items then issue letters of rejection for those same good items just because they had a morales sticker on them? that isnt looking at the autograph, it is looking at the source. where have you been?

of course they go by the source.

Travis... Instead of hedging, why don't you tell us if you think that Morales is a good authenticator? Plain and simple, no misdirection...just answer the question.