Authenticity is Everything
JSA, PSA, BECKETT - Authentication Stickers On or Leave Off the Item?
I'm starting to get some items in my collection authenticated for various reasons.. The biggest being if something happens to me, its less research for my family later on.. I'm going specifically to get a Carpenters vinyl authenticated to make sure my ebay purchase has another opinion before I'm no longer covered. That sticker will go on the LOA for sure for this specific item signed in ballpoint pen. There is no question of this being a reproduction.
Over the years, I've read a lot of old threads of collectors complaining about TPAs placing their stickers on the front of an item. This has me thinking, I'm also going to take a few index cards and cds where the sticker on the LOA won't be an option and will need to be placed on the item. Im torn with what is best for some of these. Take an index card for example. When buying on eBay, if previously authenticated, id prefer the sticker to be on the item and in front. Ive been duped into buying authenticated cards in the past where the sticker was not on the item and the seller tried to pass off a high quality reproduction claiming it was the original. Sometimes depending on the pen used, it can be difficult to tell between live ink and a printing. Its almost impossible to verify when buying items online just looking at pictures. I feel the sticker, as terrible as it looks, adds another layer of security, especially as technology advances in the future. This also goes along with framing. Once an item is under glass, it can be difficult to tell if is original or reproduced. Having the sticker visible seems like it should be more widely accepted for resale purposes down the road even if the item was never intended to be resold. It will eventually switch hands regardless unless you are buried with your collection.
On the other hand, these stickers are ugly and in most cases, collectors are able to tell the difference easily. Collectors are not the only ones buying these items though.. hard-core fans with deep pockets, who have no knowledge about authenticating, tend to rely on these stickers. At some point, I bet most of our items will hit the market again within the next hundred years.. It kind of makes sense to be more accepting of these eye sores and should be placed on the front of certain items I mentioned. If a sticker is hidden on the back of an item, once framed, how would you know without taking it all apart?
Wondering what everyone's view on this is. Im asking specifically about the certain items which can be reproduced and passed off as original. Items like glossy photos are not part of this conversation. Ive had some trouble in the past verifying heavy cardstock signed lightly with a rollerball type pen. Not impossible but can be tricky
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by eddy on
-
They've actually been stickering a series of James Dean fakes lately. All in the same hand. Just not Dean's hand but rather a recognizable and consistent forger's.
-
Permalink Reply by Jason H on
-
1st I've heard of them... Discoloration in the 2nd picture instantly makes me think they pulled off an old sticker to place this on. Looks similar to a GAI sticker but the dimensions might be slightly off.
Did a few seconds of research and found this pretty interesting
-
Permalink Reply by Rich To Jason H on
-
GFA has been discussed quite a bit on this site. And none of it has been remotely positive. Eddy was noting that a GFA sticker is basically a "forgery" rubber stamp.
-
-
Gotcha.. must never have seen all those discussions. The area of old sticker is funny to me because GAI is also known for similar but with a vast range of authentic and forgeries associated to them. (If it was even a GAI sticker removed) it make me wonder more about this item even as a forgery and how much effort was involved to try and pass it off
-
-
Here's one such blog post, but I've seen them come up again and again in discussions, often in the context of vintage sports. While GAI/GA can possibly be written off as a relentlessly crappy "authenticator" rather than an outright scam - or at best a company with an erratic past and overall dubious reputation - GFA has been shown repeatedly to be an outright forgery outfit.
https://live.autographmagazine.com/profiles/blogs/guaranteed-forens...
-
-
Interesting. Thanks for sharing. I wish there was a bit more emphasis on the flaws of the actual autographs as well but I certainly understand why. Once the actually photo is suspect, there is no point to focus on the autograph itself.
I posted a link in the Santana thread. Hopefully the people who don't venture much out of the music direct discussion will see this. Its good info to be aware of.
-
Permalink Reply by Drew on
-
I have items that have been stickered with the dealers identifying name, stock number etc, bought because they were on bids (e bay) and cheap modern autographs.
Not on any vintage stuff though, I'd pay for the LOA.
The state of that ACOA'd Steve McQueen on UK E Bay. I'd post a link but that would mean having to look at it again...
-
-
Drew -
Curiosity got the better of me. I shouldn't have.
Stickered by them and now offered proudly by Rutland Autographs.
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo To eddy on
-
:-( Yikes. Did ACOA use stickers from the start? That is...vandalism.
-
-
EKL -
Just my humble opinion, but I'm not sure it's vandalism when the item is perhaps questionable to begin with. See my recent post about it's possible "twin".
-
-
I really did not look that long. I did see a potential for two different hands but only at a glance. I saw the other post - seeing that sticker once was enough! I'll go with "vandalism in context" here.
-
-
That works! 😀
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2025 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
