Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by kevin conway on August 16, 2011 at 8:37pm

Today, JSA is the closest thing the industry has to a real professional authentication service.  Why do I say this?   Based on several experiences with both companies, JSA actual employs certain standards.   Here is one example which is an excerpt from a blog post I will be publishing soon:

About 4 years ago I submitted the often seen Leroy Neiman , Frank Sinatra litho signed by Neiman in pencil and purportedly Sinatra in dark thick marker.  There are actually a number of “Sinatra” variations so it appears to some the signature may be original.  However, mine failed JSA.   I was actually able to speak to the authenticator at JSA (forbidden with PSA) and he explained that under magnification you could see there was no “ink crossover” meaning the Sinatra signature was not applied by Sinatra himself but a machine and apparently the lithographer used a few difference Sinatra examples.    And, even though it was very discouraging that it failed authentication it was apparent JSA used a standard in their authentication process.  A process that is not based on subjective and/or potentially biased conclusions.

By the way, one of these Neiman/Sinatra signed lithos was PSA certified and sold at a well known autograph auction about a year ago.  If PSA followed a standard would that litho have passed?

I have written an extensive case study on this based on a couple negative experiences (one quite outrageous )  I had with PSA.  I am eventually going to publish it.  It has sensitive content because there are parties I respect and still do business with.  And, I truly feel no one is being malicious not PSA or any of the major dealers or auction houses.    I just think some have become too aggressive in pushing “quantity” instead of quality.    Meanwhile, I continue to be steadfast that 3^rd party authentication is critical to the integrity of this and MOST other high grade collectibles industries because with substantial  $$ will always be invitation for fraud.   But, at the same time we as community have a responsibility to keep some of these organizations in “check” when they begin to cut corners to satisfy their balance sheets.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on August 16, 2011 at 11:32pm

That was very well written. Please feel free to publish your case study here.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on August 17, 2011 at 2:09am

$$ and revenue streams are usually at the source if one discounts supply & demand that is often limited (on the reall authentic supply curve).  It's what drove GAI into the tank, is it not.

 

but before we sing allegiance to JSA with it's "process" weren't they made to look foolish when it came to rejecting their own previous work?  Granted anything from Morales is questionable to begin with but if you have a "process".  We don't know what PSA/DNA's process is, do we?  We do know some of the alleged steps they supposedly took as that was published in R&Rs catalogs or was it online....

 

Either way, a process is good but it's the people involved that execute the process.  If by the way as you suggest Kevin a conflict of interest then just about every auction house from the AList on down that knowingly authenticates an article then sells it on their auction site presumably has the same conflict.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by roger epperson on August 17, 2011 at 3:52am

DB I'm shocked at you relying on AA to make a statement against another company.  You have no idea what the truth is in regards to that "sting" they tried to pull or if it even happened.  I know the facts on the McCartney autograph as I am the music authenticator for them.  You have no idea how many items were sent to JSA, there amy have been 100's and these few failed.  Please use creditable sources when making comments on this site.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by kevin conway on August 17, 2011 at 7:43am

from DB?   Why am I NOT surprised??  ....;}

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on August 17, 2011 at 10:36am

enough time elapsed...  Unlike some I have no interest in peddling books and articles but rather simply inquire until enough factual information exists to make my own informed opinion. 

Permalink Reply by DB on August 17, 2011 at 4:15am

MOI?  Unfortunately, we have not heard from spence or anything to the contrary.  To me, doesn't matter if it is one, four or hundreds of them (unfortunately, we here which is a very small subset of collecting well know how facts get completely misconstured on the alerts & now their own website but many collectors have no idea) but we were speaking of process. 

 

if however, u have information from spence or jsa to the contrary on one of the items that dispels the claim then feel free to share it with the rest of us so we can make our own informed decision on it.

 

problem with credible sources Roger is that they are lossing ground rapidly, don't respond, don't correct their mistakes and come across as arrogant to a fault.  Speaking of which, I am surprised that noone commented on PSA/DNA's own exemplar I posted.  Based on the thread it would be apparent to me that not only did they not use that in a number of cases displayed here it would also have a slant to the secretarial variety. 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by roger epperson on August 17, 2011 at 7:06am

DB

Spence shouldn't have to respond to crap like that.  A story was painted and some, including you fell into it.  JSA has filed a lawsuit against the owner of the site, enough said. 

I know nothing about PSA/DNA or what they use to look at signatures with.  I certainly won't make up something though.

 

In regards to the McCartney, (this is the only one I can make an opinion on as it's the only music one there is) in my expert opinion it is not authentic just like JSA said.  The letter (if it is even real) was dated before I worked for them and maybe they made a mistake back then and said it was real.  They hired me so there would be no mistakes like this in music.  JSA made the correct call on this one.  See why these twisted stories can make thier way into peoples heads?  There are 3 sides to every story and they paint a very tainted side.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by roger epperson on August 17, 2011 at 7:27am

I guess I can say they do have a process, they show the music stuff to me.

Permalink Reply by DB on August 17, 2011 at 8:34am

always good to be a process of one... it usually get's complicated when 2 or more are involved and even the singular one's make mistakes.  It's what gets done when it's discovered that matters.  One would hope that they are not that stupid to fabricate documents under the circumstances they currently find themselves. 

 

haven't seen anything made up on PSA/DNA as far as gleasons are concerned yet  in these 2 threads ~ just the opposite.

 

only 3 sides ~ 

Permalink Reply by roger epperson on August 17, 2011 at 10:06am

DB

You seem to be jumping around your comment earlier.  You clearly stated that the JSA AA story was in fact the truth, I proved it wrong and you then pointed the finger at PSA.  I would like to get the JSA comment cleared up as that is all I typed about.  Jimmy runs a class act operation in my opinion.  If he didn't I wouldn't work with him.  All the people I interact with daily at JSA are class act people.

Permalink Reply by DB on August 17, 2011 at 10:32am

U need to go back and read it again as I believe it was a question.   I for one don't think Spence, Orlando, JSA or PSA/DNA walk on water as some around here think they do.  

 

U partially cleared up one item on how, why and what the parameters were that caused one item to be rejected on a 2nd pass that they claim was previously authenticated.  Whether it was approved initially or when is still outstanding and that was before your time.  

 

That is a far cry from proved it wrong.  

 

Incidently, if I recall the article correctly (salient points with out the sabre rattling) it merely said, "Morales submitted items back to JSA that they are alleged to have originally authenticated and rejected the ones that they reported".  Of course the  Morales track record as reported here numerous times is very lacking on getting it right to begin with and once again appears to coincide with his track record in this one example.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• …
• 12
• Next ›
• Page