Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Xwiesy on January 24, 2015 at 11:37am

You'll have a ball with one authenticated signature.

The value will depend if tbe second signature is deemed authentic.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on January 24, 2015 at 12:04pm

Hopefully the second signature does not cover the super secret DNA marker!! :-O

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James on January 24, 2015 at 12:13pm

LOL!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James on January 24, 2015 at 12:07pm

I would imagine that most potential buyers would say that the COA says nothing about twice-signed; therefore, the buyer would only be willing to pay what it's worth once-signed. I guess most people would wonder why the seller would have it signed again after it's already been authenticated. I think the COA would be okay. It just wouldn't add any value. And, yes, I think it could de-value it somewhat; it would no longer be "single-signed", and now it would have a kind of suspect autograph, IMHO.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by RON Z on January 24, 2015 at 4:16pm

Thank you for your replies.

How do you keep a composite leather basketball that is autographed from cracking over time

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James on January 24, 2015 at 6:37pm

Don't know on that one.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dane on January 28, 2015 at 2:43am

There are a few issues on this...

1) Why would you have a player re-sign a ball after it was already authenticated?

2) Is this a LOA or COA card authentication? If it's the LOA, people would likely pay what they felt was appropriate for a single signed item. If it's a COA card, the second signature might destroy the marketability, as there'd only be a statement of a single signed ball. People would question why a dual signed item (absent the visual "proof" on the LOA) has two signatures.

• ▶ Reply