We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

PSA/DNA Certified Items - Right or Wrong

Not being a dealer or auctioneer I am perfectly suited to referee this discussion if need be. This section is mostly for Items that PSA/DNA has certified that in an opinion of authenticators has missed the mark (AND NOT as far as they know been corrected) along with any other items of significance.

In some cases the certification provided might be a simple rejection while in other cases it's certifying it as authentic when it may be far from it.

The thread is not about the good, the bad or ugly of 3rd parties as there is already an excellent thread in the forum on this started by R&R's Bobby Livington that everyone should follow. That thread alone has produced three disccusions on Farrah Fawcett, Elvis, and now this.

Hopefully, AM members will follow this thread (I am sure the fraudsters & propaganda machines will) and point others to it - Perhaps, the owners of the item that is cited. Those owners can then deal with the authentication firm or sellers and report back their journey.

Since I don't expect the PSA/DNAs of the world to come online and defend/refute (althugh the have an open invitation) the postings then be advised this is not a thread to speculate, accuse, or otherwise besmirch what is or what isn't being done.

So 'nuff said and on with the items. To keep discussions focused and contained - Each Item contributors need to stay in the realm of that item so commentary is not all over the place.

remember if you post an item denote the PSA/DNA number on their sticker... One, if they choose can also validate the item's number on the PSA/DNAs database to see if it is in fact a product of PSA/DNA as we have heard that the fraudsters are/have created bogus ones and report your findings here.

Tags: certification, certifications, errors, forgeries, psa, psa/dna

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mike Miller on February 11, 2011 at 9:06pm

P.S. I used the term "secretarial" loosely, meaning could be any proxy signer like a manger, attorney, someone at the agency he may have given ok to sign for him, etc

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on November 23, 2011 at 5:49am

46101

Rat Pack Signed Contracts. ... (Total: 5 )

2011 February Beverly Hills Signature Music & Entertainment Auc...

Well it appears that someone bought a worthless Frank Sinatra then for $896.25

thinking it's authentic. Wonder when and where it will resurface. BTW, HA was aware of the concerns thus claiming not aware would not be an excuse. Thus, HA would be no better or worse than the Top Sellers on EBay selling "secretarial Hestons", presuming the sale went thru, that have TPAs on them as rock solid "proof".

The presumpion of course is that the collective is on this item better than JSA. I have found the collective is typically on-target.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on February 15, 2011 at 4:04pm

I know, I know - this is about PSA/DNA but of late in a few other blogs around here - Heritage Auctions popped up as well as the debacle according to A/Alert on JSA. The latter however, just by it's source, is usually misleading. Of course it was plainly obvious that in "documents of comparison" it purposely left out JSA alleged certs as one of those documents.

Nonetheless, it still irks me that when we have issues with something (legit or questionable) it goes unanswered. We have seen some good blogs around here - Wayne, Fawcett, Elvis and so on that get at the meat of the matter and some closed groups that could be getting into the nitty gritty.... Steve also runs from time to time some authentication ones such as the beatles of late.

but, the people (for the most part minus the sandbagging fraudsters) are looking for informative answers. The 3rd Party authenticators have missed a great opportunity to fill in a void while improving thier press.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick Badwey on February 16, 2011 at 4:23am

DB, I agree not to take AA seriously, but the display of COA and letters showing PSA/DNA rejecting things it ORIGINALLY authenticated, based on a Morales COA appears DISTURBING.

Hearing stuff like the above and PSA rejecting people's OWN in-person autographs appears a bit different.

But in all fairness, who can authenticate a great forger's signature of a sports or entertainment figure whose signature is non descript.

Heck, Mark Hofman was a master of historical/political forgeries and went to great lengths. With signed photos, etc., "just make it look similar".......after all NO TWO signatures are ever EXACTLY alike....your, mine, anyones

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on March 12, 2011 at 11:13am

Greg, I think they're reliable, although I know nothing of Jackie Gleason autographs. But like autograph dealers, auctions and authenticators overall, things they called genuine years ago may not be as reliable as later ones. Knowledge and expertise increase over time, and reputable third-party authentication barely existed a decade ago.

Watch for items with fake PSA/DNA COAs and LOAs. The LOAs should be imaged in their online database, the COA cards aren't.

Why don't you upload an album of the ones with LOAs, cross-checked with PSA's database, and solicit opinions? How many of those do you have?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on April 12, 2011 at 4:28am

haven't visited here in awhile as there are some other threads with examples that might make it here but one item that is giving me pause is this "pre=certified" statements appearing all over the place. Most that have followed my perspective on this know the auction housee LOA got out of hand and was misused and frankly questionable when it came to "multi-signed" items -vs- just notables but that is for a different day.

So what do you receive when you acquire an item that was Pre-Certified? NOTHING! To obtain something in wirting other than perhaps the listing one has to buy the upgrade. Of course, you could print the listing but ever heard of editing software... if it was in a brochure you could remember to rip the page out but haven't we seen guitars inserted fraudulently....

Sounds to me that this "pre-certified" is becoming like what you receive; Nothing! In God We Trust for me Stops at auction houses after what we've learned here. So why isn't there something supplied by PSA/DNA if it's "pre-certified" by them?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brandon Mysinger on April 12, 2011 at 8:14am

I agree! If something in the past was Pre-Certified then failed when the item was submitted by the buyer then the system is broken. Even if this happened once.

A lot of people see this as "Double Dipping" by PSA/DNA. I think that this could be lightened some if the buyer received something with the item. At least a reference # showing that it was pre-certified and by who.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on April 12, 2011 at 2:16pm

Brandon, I don't see the "double dipping" per se although I understand what is implied. I was surprised to find that although Pre-Cert there was nothing tangible.

Is that the same with others that have items labeled as pre-certs? If so, I think that's just wrong as they ought to be providing something "tangible" with regards to anything certified (and it would be nice to know the examiner but we know that "ain't" gonna happen with PSA/DNA) so there it becomes part of the provenance.