We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

PSA and JSA forgeries? Have you seen any you feel they possibly made a mistake on?

I'm not sure about you guys but I've seen a few in my years of searching ebay. What about you? Have you ever seen an autograph that was authenticated by a major authenticator ( EXCLUDING GAI ) that you thought was in fact a forgery?

If you have, please post scans if you have them available. I know when it comes to authentication it is hard to beat JSA or PSA but I have read stories about some errors made by the companies. The infamous Sal Bando incident is one that comes to mind http://rant.sportslizard.com/2007/12/01/jsa-authenticator-busted-on...

There are other examples very similar where JSA and PSA were at a show where an athlete was signing and someone swapped the real ball they had signed with a forgery they did before the show and the authenticator gave it the stamp of approval. The Pete Rose incident is another example of where JSA assumed because Pete Rose was signing autographs at the show they were authenticating at, that every person who put a Pete Rose autograph in front of them must have the real thing.

Here is another link that shows where a forgery may have slipped through the cracks. http://haulsofshame.com/blog/?p=10958

They ( PSA and JSA ) have authenticated printed signatures in books as authentic and have even authenticated a real signature of Kato Kaelin signature as being signed by Kate Hudson.

I am new here and certainly not here to cause a fuss, I am just curious as to what you guys think the % of fakes that do slip through the PSA or JSA cracks. I think we can all be wise enough to admit that forgeries do get through. There is no way they can be 100% all of the time.

I value their opinion but after looking at a Mantle that they authenticated ( It looks traced ) , I question just how good they truly are. I had a Derrick Rose autograph that failed their authentication, but in fact...It was obtained in person BY ME at a Bulls vs Bobcats game.

I saw a youtube test video where a guy forged a Bob Feller autograph on camera and sent it in to PSA and it come back slabbed. I just wonder if they are all they claim to be

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mike Shepherd on July 29, 2013 at 12:58pm

If that is true Rick then we are in trouble.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Shepherd on July 29, 2013 at 12:56pm

I agree with JXE Charles. I did not take what he said to mean that he trusts himself more than them to authenticate an item. I understood what he said to mean that he will probably only consider items that have been authenticated to begin with. The third-party authenticators would obviously have a larger selection of exemplars to compare to. The item being considered may very well be authentic but why purchase it if you can wait on one that you are more comfortable with? That is what I would do.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Shepherd on July 29, 2013 at 8:34am

PSA and JSA have both undoubtedly helped to clean up the hobby. They do not always get it right as the above examples have made quite clear but they certainly get it right more often than not. I agree with JXE about PSA being more preferable when it comes to authenticating entertainment memorabilia. I personally prefer JSA for sports memorabilia. I would also much rather trust the seller than send anything that I purchase to a third-party authenticator. There are only a few that I actually purchase from and so far I am very content. In my experience the people who have the most problems with third-party authenticators are the forgers. Do PSA and JSA make mistakes? Absolutely. Would the hobby be better off without them? Not a chance.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on July 29, 2013 at 12:22pm

I agree with Mike wholeheartedly that PSA and JSA on a whole have been a positive influence. I personally have seen more that I agree with on their opinions than those I disagree on. They make mistakes like anyone else but I think their track record is head and shoulders above some other companies in the past.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Charles O'Brailey on July 29, 2013 at 11:14am

Of course people who sell forgeries are going to have a problem with 3rd party authenticators and like I said, I think PSA and JSA mean well. I have just seen a few autographs they authenticated in the past week that look horrific and I question if it is worth the money

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on July 29, 2013 at 12:15pm

Yeah but on the same note there are thousands of forgeries bought every week that some 3rd party authenticators could of help some buyers avoid.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Charles O'Brailey on July 29, 2013 at 12:37pm

The down side to forgeries is that most people who buy them know they are forgeries. They are looking to flip them for an easy buck. I don't disagree that PSA and JSA have a higher accuracy than any other authentication company. The whole point of this post was to gather insight on how other collectors feel. I certainly didn't start the post to stir up trouble but rather to take out my frustration because of several autographs (which were authenticated by the big 2 ) I've seen on ebay lately that are highly questionable.

For the most part I agree that PSA and JSA are solid overall. I just get worried when a intermediate collector such as myself can see a forgery and yet the experts give it the thumbs up.

I honestly mean no harm with this post, It was just my way of getting a consensus from other collectors.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Shepherd on July 29, 2013 at 12:46pm

I do not agree that most people who purchase forgeries know that they are forgeries. People who are new to the hobby visit eBay with a lot of trust not realizing that it is nothing more than a garage sale and they have no idea what PSA and JSA even are. As long as there are third-party authenticators out there it is much less likely that these new collectors will get burned.

You do not come across as trying "to stir up trouble" Charles. This is a legitimate topic for a discussion.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Shepherd on July 29, 2013 at 12:39pm

It is only worth the money if you do not trust the person that you are purchasing from and if that is the case you should not be purchasing from them to begin with. In my opinion, third-party authenticators should only be used if you are selling items. I have quite a few items in my collection that I purchased from an in-person seller that I have no intention of getting authenticated simply because I trust the seller. If I were to sell the items I would consider having them authenticated because they would be much more likely to sell with a PSA sticker on them.

My concerns with third-party authenticators are that if they are examining a stack of items from a trusted client they may just rubber stamp the entire stack without a close examination. I raised this concern in a discussion that I posted back in April. I will provide the link below. I also agree that they should be more cautious about handing out stickers at conventions. They are not the only ones guilty of this however. I have seen very reputable dealers do the same at a public signing.

http://live.autographmagazine.com/forum/topics/does-it-concern-you-...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Charles O'Brailey on July 29, 2013 at 12:42pm

Mike you make some very valid points here. Thanks so much!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on July 29, 2013 at 12:49pm

Very valid points. I do think PSA/JSA give the benefit of the doubt to trusted or large volume clients. I have thought this for a awhile. Again only my opinion. I base my opinion off of seeing the stuff that is authenticated for these sellers thinking no chance in hell is that approved had I sent it in.

At the end of the day they are a money making business. If they were here solely for the preservation of the hobby they would have closed their doors long ago.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Shepherd on July 29, 2013 at 1:04pm

I once had a dealer tell me that they questioned why a third-party authenticator was placing stickers on the front of their items since they requested that the stickers be placed on the back of their items. A large stack of items was being authenticated at the time. The authenticator said that they were "in the zone" and apologized. I found that story to be very telling.