Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rich on February 14, 2014 at 1:03pm

And it gives a bit of insight as to why it looks so darned bad I suppose. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy on February 14, 2014 at 1:38pm

There may well be a picture of the signing of the other one.

That would make sense as to why they would authentic it even though Roger will not provide an opinion on a signed baseball by a music/entertainment star.

Obviously, on this one Paul must have had a temporary lapse on the spelling of his first name. 

They didn't need Roger or another exemplar on this one. They had a picture of the actual signature in question.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason D on February 14, 2014 at 11:13am

Roger

I think that is a fair statement about people that aren't used to signing baseballs signing baseballs and I think staying away from them unless you fell 100% sure it looks similar to what it would look like on a flat item is the best way to go about it. However if someone is not used to signing a baseball why would they sign it on the sweet spot? I think they would sign the panel but who knows.

However if JSA asked your opinion because you are an expert with music and you gave them a fair explanation then how would they feel confident in authenticating it on their own when they clearly are not music experts. You also made this statement " I don't do baseballs but Jimmy or someone there might have known more about the submitter and chose to pass it."  So basically in the end it came down to the submitter and not the item itself? Is that a fair assumption? To this day I don't understand why if JSA has you as their music consultant because that's your expertise that they continue to "authenticate" music items when they don't have a music expert on their immediate staff. In my opinion they are just venturing into areas they have no business getting into and its beginning to hurt their reputation. That's just my honest opinion of course but I would never make an opinion on a signature I am not familiar with.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by roger epperson on February 17, 2014 at 4:13am

Good question, they may have had a photo of him signing it or may have known the reputation of the consigner.  Let me put it like this; if Bob Piveroff got something signed and said he did then end of the story; it's authentic.  Bob couldn't lie if it would save his life.  If I said I got something signed then again; end of the story; it's authentic.  there are some people that do have that kind of credibility.  There are not many though.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on February 14, 2014 at 11:26am

The Sharpie-signed McCartney ball has a photo of the signing. The only image I have isn't high resolution enough to be optimal, but if you zoom in I think you'll see it's very likely the same ball.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on February 14, 2014 at 11:43am

Steve, you are likely correct.  and when I first saw the sharpie signed ball here, I felt it had many positives. unlike the one in the subject, which I feel is junk.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason D on February 14, 2014 at 12:08pm

The backwards "P" on the sharpie ball threw me for a loop. Sir Paul obviously knows how to sign a baseball and rather nicely I must say according to these examples.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by roger epperson on February 17, 2014 at 4:15am

it depends on the signing circumstances too!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on February 14, 2014 at 1:52pm

Sure looks like he's signing it. Just doesn't look like he is even looking at the ball. Just scribbling and moving to the next thing.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy on February 14, 2014 at 4:31pm

I find it very interesting that JSA gets crucified for authenticating what is considered obvious garbage by most here and upon the presentation of a photograph of one of the exact autographs being signed, the best anyone can come up with is, "He's not looking. He's looking to the right, I guess the next piece to be signed."

I don't think looking at the item is a requirement for signing an autograph. 

Not a single comment to this point in time, "They were correct in at least one instance. I guess I owe them an apology. They were diligent in their authentication of this item after all."

Unbelievable.

How would you feel if you chased Paul McCartney around, got an autograph, took a clear picture of the exact autograph while being signed, presented it to JSA for authentication and they said, "Sorry, we can't authenticate that autograph because it doesn't match any exemplars in our database and that is all we use to determine authenticity." 

Luckily, for this in person autograph chaser, they didn't do that.

As Mr.Zipper has pointed out on numerous occasions but it always falls on deaf ears, they go to great lengths to try and get it right.

Yes, they make mistakes as everyone will.

I do agree that they probably do too much on site authentication for the amount of true authenticators they have on staff but I know that on any potential high dollar autograph, they almost never sign off at the show good or bad unless it is just horrible.

I have no idea if the other McCartney ball is authentic or not but I think the odds of 1 in a billion just went way down based on this one because we know he spelled his name wrong on this one so a pitiful scribble on the other one doesn't seem nearly as far out in left field and I would not be surprised if a photo exists on it as well.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on February 14, 2014 at 5:25pm

I WOULD be surprised. the two signatures are like night and day.  To answer your question about how would I feel if JSA or any TPA for that matter, told me they couldn't authenticate my item for reasons you presented, I would respect them more.  Some signatures are just not able to be authenticated.  Have you seen another McCartney signature like the one in this heading?  I could copy that with very little effort, and I am sure you and most anyone on here could.  Would JSA pass those too? I really dont understand your point.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy on February 14, 2014 at 6:14pm

My point is you have an opinion and JSA has an opinion.

Neither opinion can currently be proven or disproven with known facts. 

Since they had the item in hand and probably have provenance that we have no knowledge of, I will take their opinion.

Roger stated he does not authenticate baseballs period for individuals who would not normally sign baseballs but did not discount the fact that it could be authentic.

I wouldn't drop $2600 on it but I wouldn't drop $2600 on one that I witnessed being signed either.

The sharpie one has been proven to be authentic so they were obviously correct authenticating it and the vast majority of members here did not think that one was authentic either.

I realize you opined that one could be genuine but few others here were buying that based on the posts.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• Next ›
• Page