Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on January 31, 2015 at 1:42pm

I would want another opinion. I would not want a refund based solely on PSA's opinion, especially in Music.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike T on January 31, 2015 at 2:11pm

terrier.. i respect your opinion on the boards but this is a ridiculous statement.  For one, this question was clearly not directed towards you and there's no need to help Steve out.  Secondly, if you just spent $10,000 and the largest, most respected authenticator in the world told you that it was a forgery and that you just wasted your money I highly doubt you would just walk away from it. Who would you go to for a second opinion?  Epperson already gave one, can't use JSA because they use Epperson.. PSA rejected it.. this hobby is so broken.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard on January 31, 2015 at 2:21pm

Thank You Mike T ,. Thank You .... there is NOT one good excuse or reason for not refunding that guys money , I take that back ...there is 10,000 good reasons on why Roger kept that money and roger's phrasing of I know its good ..... is a crock of sheet  ..it is his opinion..no more ....no less

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rich on January 31, 2015 at 2:34pm

I've put this out before.  If Roger accepts the return, he's 1) accepting that an anonymous voice under the bloated PSA name brand can overrule his opinion without backing up their claim and 2) conceding - at least to the extent - that the item is fake.  At best, the item will have a stigma on it and be more difficult to sell.

PSA isn't all that good with music.  Roger is.  As I know nothing of Zeppelin sigs, I can't make any definitive comments, but this really sounds like a case of an incompetent buyer making a mess.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on January 31, 2015 at 3:09pm

With regards to #2 it will have a stigma whether a return on it is accepted or not. Good chance by not accepting the return based off PSA denial even if PSA opinion is wrong could potentially end up costing Roger a whole lot more in future business than the $10K return.

The album could have been reexamine and resold to a collector who values Rogers opinion and has little regard for PSAs music expertise. There are collectors out there who do. This thread shows that. If PSA changes their opinion it would surely look like some type of buddy system at work.

Permalink Reply by Dane on January 31, 2015 at 2:24pm

Mike T, I believe (from my limited understanding of the industry for music) that Epperson *is* the most respected authenticator in the world (of music). The only time someone spends $10k on a signature is when they're sure it's good.

My understanding of PSA Board of Experts is that they're basically a group sports autograph authenticators, Reznikoff (for history) and Camner (for theatre). There's one guy who specializes in Elvis consulting for them, but the appearance is that they don't really have music specialists. JSA's music expert is... Epperson.

So, the problem is that there are two large authenticators (PSA & JSA), with one having a music expert (Epperson) who sourced the autograph and the other not having a music expert.

Again, if someone is paying $10k for an autograph, they are basically buying provenance and opinion. For that price, I'd trust the expert in the specific field (just like I'd trust Reznikoff's opinion for historical documents, Zarelli's opinion on space, and Grad's opinion for baseball autographs) over an authenticator who may not have as large of a portfolio of exemplars.

I really hope I didn't get baited into continuing the conversation on Epp's case. I'm just posting my opinion on the different areas of expertise of JSA's and PSA's experts.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike T on January 31, 2015 at 2:30pm

I'm not arguing about the authenticity, I think Roger got the authentication right.  I think he was wrong to not refund the guy after PSA failed it.  There can't be one ultimate authority on autographs.. and I do not wish to ever purchase autographs from someone who simply says "This is real, trust me and don't listen to what anyone else says."  I don't think that is right, and I don't think that is good for any collector.  There has to be a system of checks and balances.. it won't always be correct, but it will benefit the collector in the long run.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on January 31, 2015 at 2:33pm

PSA saying no kills the value on that album whether they are music experts or not. There are many collectors that hold them as the foremost experts in everything. Value and market for it shrinks considerably, maybe even by half with that rejection being known.

For 10K I'd want it to pass everyone who sees it. I'm not a rich guy that can toss away 10K at the drop of a hat.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Baldock on January 31, 2015 at 2:55pm

I totally agree.

Permalink Reply by Mike T on January 31, 2015 at 2:58pm

100%

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on January 31, 2015 at 3:32pm

The thing is, they didn’t only say no. According to Roger, they didn’t like any of the signatures. That’s obviously a resounding rejection of the piece. When I first heard about it, I thought it might be only the Jones signature that was a problem. Considering its appearance, I could live with that result. But all four signatures? That’s akin to rejecting the piece four times over. You have four shots at recognizing an authentic signature and not a single one is deemed authentic?

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on January 31, 2015 at 3:53pm

This is way off the topic were discussing here, website rules. There's a discussion on this already, somewhere...I don't have time to look for it now. Please feel free to take it up there or in a similar discussion.

Our next AML platform will give us the ability to move replies and possibly even set up new discussions based on them. Right now we're stuck on a platform that doesn't allow that though.

• ▶ Reply

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