There is an ebay seller named schu45. I have no idea if his autographs are authentic or not.
However, he has over 800 items listed on ebay and all of them have a In The Presence COA from PSA. My question is how does PSA issue such a COA for all these Hollywood stars? Are they sending a representative into the field to cert. this items on the spot? Does not sound likely.
Or is there another way that they can cert 800+ Hollywood in person autographs.
Last time I looked Al Pacino , Cindy Crawford, Laura Linney and 800 other Hollywood personalities have not made any personal appearances to sign autographs.
The PSA In The Presence COA specifically states that the autograph was WITNESSED by a PSA representative.
Is this seller a PSA representative too, besides being a seller of autographs?? Conflict of interest I would think if that is the case. Is the seller a friend of someone on the PSA authentication staff? I am just asking a question.
I have written to PSA and await an answer or perhaps even an appearance here to answer.
Not to even mention that the authenticator is probably juggling his own 11x14 photos to get signed.
There is supposed to be 100% certainty with In The Presence COA's. But ask the poor collector who bought that Joe DiMaggio autographed baseball 10 years ago, the one that was EYEWITNESSED by a PSA rep.
I agree that the above scenario is set-up to fail. However, these "on-the-street" signings are chaotic. Which lessens the chance that any one person can witness everything being signed.
I think I read where the authenticator and the dealer are best friends. If that's the case, maybe that plays into the process. I have no idea.
I SAW IT SIGNED COA HDAA
Humpty Dumpty Autograph Authenticators
We promise that this autograph, whoever it is, was signed by the star who is pictured. The owner of the autograph is a friend of ours so we swear that we may or may not have seen it signed but we "know" it to be good.
We are on page 7 and a lot of things have been discussed here but it comes down to this. You have either an opinion, or a "signed in the presence of". Once is subject to whoever is looking at it, and the outcome questionable, the other is 100%, if it is indeed "SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF". Just because PSA had that nightmare with the DiMaggio's previously (I was a temporary victim), doesn't mean they are doing anything wrong in this case. But I do agree that the one seller with all of the "signed in the presence of" COA's certainly raises a huge red flag in this program, and based on the history with the DiMaggio's, demands an explanation from the seller and/or PSA. Is PSA just taking this seller's "word" that they were signed in person? I doubt it. But with all of the money that people spend with this company on authentication, they should be willing to address this directly and quickly. After all, if they are not doing anything unethical, then what is the big deal?
if you look at PSA's website, it is actually stated in the heading:
Just a cotton pickin' minute...What on earth is an authenticator doing selling autographs?!?
I brought up this question millenia ago with Bobby Livingston and the "experts" who vet material at R&R while aty the same time consigning material there and selling goods from their own websites and stores.
Either you are an authenticator or a dealer...not both. There simply leaves too much room for hanky-panky, as this episode so vividly illustrates.
And once again, PSA has shown (through their silence) their commitment to the hobby. I'd rather sell Hitler's mustache.
Good on you Richard for fighting the good fight. Be careful...you may soon get tarred with the "Koschal" brush for saying anything against the pro-PSA cabal.
I would agree Harry. Even a patron saint would have a hard time being impartial under those circumstances.
On the surface perhaps but as long as the item is authentic and not being rubber stamped to make a "non-authentic" item "authentic", I could care less about perception. In this instance perception would not equal reality. Last I knew a buyer can go anywhere there little heart desires.
It would be beneficial to have authenticators on the street authenticating what they see if they were ethical and trusted. For example, this would be a nice way to authenticate the Pacino scribbles that are often for sale.
The financial benefit to an authenticator selling an "in the presence" coa to signatures they actually did not see (but trust the guy turning items in to them) signed would be hard to resist.
Mike, there are alot of good things you have pointed out as well as the fundamental flaws. At one show, I had a psa/dna rep sitting right in front of the signers but even then he could not keep track of who was getting what in person as there were others who were either requesting stickers or dropping off items. In that instance, a PSA/DNA cert for my items was just fine. At a number of shows where PSA has had a presence I have yet to see a "signed" in the presence" cert being issued. Doesn't mean it hasn't happened but haven't seen one until Simon brought up this thread.
What has been pointed out is that it appears the "signed in the presence" ones regardless of observations are questionable at best regardless of who has them as evidenced by the Harrison Ford ones. This also doesn't mean that they are not authentic but the ITP if performed as has been your observation surfaces a highly questionable approach to certing ITPs.
Mike, I think it is easy to see what gets signed if you the authenticator ore not getting items signed yourself. If your attention is focused on your items, as they should be, then you cannot give your full attention to that which is going on around you. I do agree with you that I think the concept is a good one, it's just something that is unfamiliar to most of us.