We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.
Tags:
To be honest, at the moment I'm not sure any member can give an opinion that will greatly help to clear it up. We're all operating at the level of the otherwise $15 'quick opinion service' in a sense. The item is not in anyone's hand on here and we're looking at digital representations that have their own possible variables. According to the auction description, JSA and REAL have had it in hand and have given their professional opinion that it's real via issued LOAs. I personally wish these auction houses that are offering lots and state they have issued LOAs from a third party service would include an image of those Letters/Certificates or at least the verification number for the TPAs database. I really appreciate that when sellers on eBay or elsewhere include those images or the number.
I don’t know if this is real or not, but I know JSA is the worst when it comes to Beatles.
"In no event shall a report, opinion and/or statement by any person (including the buyer) other than a Recognized Forensic Examiner be used to prove that a given lot is Not Authentic. In addition to a Recognized Forensic Examiner, GHRR considers a given item to be Authentic or Not Counterfeit if one of the following third-party authenticators have provided a written letter or certificate of authenticity for said item: James Spence Authentication (JSA), Professional Sports Authenticator (PSA), Beckett Authentication Services, Roger Epperson Authentication Ltd. (REAL) or Beatles handwriting expert Frank Caiazzo. If one of these authenticators deems the given item as Authentic and/or Not Counterfeit, then that authentication will serve as the sole determination for said lot."
What if they already have an authentication from JSA - does that mean if JSA already deemed the given item as Authentic and/or Not Counterfeit, then that authentication will serve as the sole determination for said lot"?
In a related note - In the Tamino discussion the other day Tamino stated that NO ONE will accept a single authenticators word. "We do not accept returns based on only one authenticator - Nobody does, in this business." Well, it seems that was no more true than the autographs...
How are others interpreting the above statements from GHIRR?
It seems a straightforward statement from them to paraphrase "Heads I win tails you lose."
That is how I read it too Scott. :-(
It does seem like "game over, before you start" - in a straight reading the existing JSA LOA will be it. A PSA rejection will be countered by the JSA and they have already stated that is...it, in so many words. What recourse? And how?
They are saying either or but it is word play IMO. The key is the bit where they say "...then that authentication will serve as the sole determination for said lot." "That" authentication" being the existing JSA. In this case, they already have the JSA LOA so I don't see any recourse unless you get JSA to reverse their own opinion. A PSA certificate won't help as it will be countered I believe by the pre-existing JSA from what they stated... Jokers indeed.
So GHRR is saying that if ANY ONE of those authenticators say something is real, it's real in GHRR's book. So if one of the 5 says it's real, and the others say it's not, it's real in GHRR's opinion.
That is what I was afraid if. And one has already weighed in...
This is where my attention has been. That statement. It seems "game over" :-(
That is certainly an incredibly bad policy.
Posted by CJCollector on November 11, 2024 at 6:03pm 0 Comments 1 Like
Posted by CJCollector on November 9, 2024 at 2:32pm 7 Comments 0 Likes
Posted by CJCollector on October 30, 2024 at 3:13pm 2 Comments 0 Likes
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin. Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service