Tags:
This "authentication" was not even 2 years ago. Inexcusable.
Should we be surprised at this? 🤔
It's sad that folks are basing purchasing decisions on this kind of thing. And paying a premium for the privilege...
"...some folks..." ;)
Yes. very sad but avoidable.
Well, we've certainly discussed this before, but some do think they're avoiding authenticity issues when they see those LOAs. And they wouldn't necessarily want to hear from people like us who aren't "the experts".
"It's a matter of trust" - Billy Joel 1986
Experts, shmexperts. I got eyes. And I can see percentages. Just like you :-)
The rest is willful ignorance or worse.
Of course... couldn't agree more!
It's also clever marketing by the TPAs that many have bought into. I had another collector read me the riot act because I was questioning something that had been encapsulated by one of them. It wasn't blatant forgery that had been passed. I finally realized that our discussion was going nowhere for either of us.
Some see the realities at times with the batting averages of these companies. Some are not able to or choose not to.
And some disregard them altogether.
It is always disheartening to see certification of secretarial autographs. Once that happens sellers are given a green light to sell even if you show them. I had an eBay seller block me from buying anything just because I told him that an Andy Griffith, he had was a Richard O. Linke signed one. I never knew he blocked until I went to bid on another autograph. He had a good collection he bought but it did have some common secretarial along with genuine ones.
© 2025 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service