Find out how to win this autographed 1993 Upper Deck Derek Jeter buyback RC in Beckett Baseball No. 44 on sale now.
Tracy Hackler
Danielle Edlund
Doug Kale
Keith Hower
The Hammer
dinkfod
Brian Fleischer
Andy Broome
dsliepka
escaladefan
Tim Trout
chrisoldsThere’s been a lot of trash talking today about the “news” report done by the Fox station in Chicago that purported to demonstrate how prolific forgeries are in the sports memorabilia field. It’s become a hot topic on our message boards, where more than a few collectors are for some reason taking glee in what they believe to be yet another sign of the impending apocalypse.
Here’s another viewpoint: As a journalist, I think the work done by the reporter here is sensationalistic and shameful. And if you approach this piece with some level of critical thinking, you probably will, too.
Give this set-up some hard thought. These JSA guys are at a show authenticating autographs. I’m no expert, so I have no idea what effort that entails for a typical piece. But this was hardly a typical piece, was it?
Former Oakland A’s star Sal Bando was signing at the Chicago show, probably 20 feet away. The reporter stood in line and got an authentic signed item. She then pulled a switcheroo. She walked over to the JSA booth and handed them a fairly convincing fake Bando autograph to be authenticated.
If you’re sitting in that authentication chair, what are you thinking when that Bando is placed in front of you? That’s not a piece that’s crying out for extensive research like a Babe Ruth or a Wayne Gretzky. That’s a rubber stamp piece of a show guest who’s been applying ink to paper a couple tables over. After all, who on earth is going to fake a Sal Bando autograph in the first place, and second, who’s going to bring a fake to a show where he’s signing?
It’s like buying an apple in a grocery store, then walking up to the produce manager with an apple in your hand and asking him if it’s safe to eat. He says yes, of course, and you tell him, uh wait, I shot this up with poison at home, so clearly you’re an incompetent judge of produce. It’s a trap that no one could avoid.
Does that let JSA off the hook? Of course not. They got it wrong, and it will probably impact the way they authenticate such show pieces in the future. But this was hardly evidence of gross neglect or impropriety on their part.
I don’t know these guys, and I have no expertise in autographs that would allow me to comment on how they do their job. But I do know a cheap trick when I see one, and this Fox station (surprise!) should be ashamed of itself.
14 Comments so far
Leave a comment
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Hm, I wonder if Beckett’s recent announcement of a joint venture with JSA influenced the overly apologetic comments above?
Make no mistake, there’s a lot of money at stake when someone gets a JSA authentication of an autograph. The JSA guy in the news story said that certification brings big money. It makes no difference whether it’s Sal Bando or Babe Ruth. The fact that JSA looks at so many autographs and rubber stamps their approval with barely a two second glance says volumes about the whole operation.
Comment by bapfan November 20, 2007 @ 7:07 pm“After all, who on earth is going to fake a Sal Bando autograph in the first place, and second, who’s going to bring a fake to a show where he’s signing?”
You may be correct in this particular statement, but what if it WAS a Gretzky? People would be very well off to sign a TON of Gretzky stuff, then go to a show he was signing at, then get the the fakes authenticated by JSA. Yes, Fox did use some dirty pool, but so what? They proved a point. The system can easily be beaten. It’s like the Gretzky Rookies. It’s obvious we are NEVER going to know what really happened. But does it mater what any of us think? Honestly? According to past Beckett policy, threads about this will simply be deleted and I’ll be suspended. The problem isn’t that something was done wrong. The problem is that it SEEMS as though Beckett refuses to let anyone speak their mind. Constant thread deletion and banning is NOT good PR. It does the exact opposite. I don’t know what else to say. It’s so very basic.
Comment by Fatty McGee November 20, 2007 @ 7:38 pmThis is true. I had Tony Romo sign a mini-helmet at a show. They just hand you the authentication along with a sticker. They don’t really even look at the autograph. I mean – it’s $6 or $7 to do this.
Comment by Lisa November 20, 2007 @ 8:19 pmI agree that the situation is misleading but I also think that an authenticator simply glancing at an autograph for 5 seconds is hardly providing an honest service.
If the autograph had been of Joe Montana it would be more serious no? One could keep the real autograph for their collection and sell the fake autograph to get their money back.
I’m sure after seeing this report that another reporter will attempt to get a fake autograph of a player like Ruth through.
The bottom line is that nothing other than witnessing the signing is 100% sure.
Fox certainly went about this the wrong way but according to the FBI there is still a real problem.
I think the true collector will see this report for what it is.
Comment by E-Rock November 20, 2007 @ 9:05 pmShameful or not, I think that you would pay the same amount to JSA to authenticate a Gretzky or Bando. Therefore why should we expect higher quality of service for a higher end autograph.
I would hope that a reputable authenticator would take the same amount of time for each autograph placed in front of them.
Comment by Gary November 21, 2007 @ 1:04 amI agree, it was a bit of a setup. But perhaps you missed the part of the video where they said their sister station monitored the same exact thing happening at another show. The average review time was 4-5 seconds. If Beckett Grading has the same type of 4-5 second express lane, how many counterfeit cards would make its way into the hobby.
Perhaps we should all wait until a big star does a signing at The National. Then we can swap out our items for bogus items to get them authenticated like Fox did. Or maybe…just maybe….Fox got the idea from counterfeiters who have been doing this same routine for years.
What’s the saying Beckett used to give us so often? Don’t shoot the messenger…
Comment by Vegaspuck November 21, 2007 @ 11:00 amOh Chris, don’t get banned from the blog for 27 years now! :O
Comment by Wes November 21, 2007 @ 11:55 amHere we go again. More bad press for the collectors market. Why is it that the media only reports the negitive veiws of collecting but never the positive ones? Because it sell and thats all. Why don’t they report all the great things of the hobby? Like the fond memories it brings from having a player stop and sign something for you at training camp for your son or the feeling you get when you pull a great auto card from a pack you have been trying to get? The greatest gift my father ever gave me was a program from the 1st ever Houston Colt 45s game played in Houston along with the ticket stub . He attended that game and kept it. It reminded me of all the great times we had going to Houston football and baseball games as a kid. I’ve been a collector ever since and am now building new memories with my own son collecting.
Comment by Bandit November 21, 2007 @ 1:54 pmMaybe perhaps a journalists’ role is to uncover what is wrong. If not, then they end up only serving to benefit one side, usually the more powerful side between your average consumer [the collector/dealer] and those who provide products and or services [grading, authentication], trying to convert the masses that this is the standard or else your collectibles are worth less, will be considered fakes, et al.
Its not sensationalistic and shameful to expose the fact authentication at a show is about collectors/dealers paying an extra $10 to have a sticker placed on their item, with no other serious glance at the item.
Comment by Larry November 21, 2007 @ 8:47 pmI couldn’t agree with you more Bandit. I’ve been a collector for almost 40 years and still love it. The great memories this hobby has given me far, far out weigh the bad ones. I’ve always felt that the majority of disgruntled so-called “collectors” are the ones who aren’t making a buck. Although I buy my fair share of boxes and packs, I have never paid for an in-person autograph and never will. I’ve always felt that it is us, the fans and collectors who pay the athletes salary and the least they could do is use a little free ink. If they don’t want to sign for free or sign at all, that’s their choice. There are plenty of good athletes who will. As a kid in 1970, I got to stand in front of the door of the Reds team bus(back then they drove much more) and got every player except for one to sign a program as they got on the bus. That one person was Dave Concepcion, my favorite shortstop at the time. I lost all respect for him and to this day will not collect his cards. Bench, Perez, Anderson, and especially Pete Rose were all happy to sign back then. It’s a shame for me to see Rose hawking his stuff now. Little did I know back then that I would be one auto short of having the original “Big Red Machine”. But I never lost any sleep over it and will always cherish the memory. Best of all, it didn’t cost me a dime and I know all the autos are real!
Comment by Mark Fiscus November 22, 2007 @ 12:56 amMark,
You are from a different time and era.
I started collecting in the 1980s when Will Clark was huge. I approached him in a parking lot, and he told me to go buy an autograph ticket. He lost me as a fan, but he was exercising something that many players were taken advantage for – if you want to call it that: ability to control their products.
Enter Barry Bonds. Not the sport’s greatest guy, but he controls his autographs, marketing, etc. Control = money, and that’s why many stars sign only exclusive deals with certain agents/companies. I don’t blame them for doing so…they must control their autographs so it holds value and keeps their reputation un (less?) tarnished.
But going back to the Fox story: you can NEVER be doing something wrong if you are supporting the consumer. Moreover, I love how this blogger criticizes Fox but then says JSA is not off the hook. Blame is where it should be: on JSA. We wouldn’t have a news story if they did their job. What is disturbing is that it showed even someone not tied to the hobby can affect the hobby negatively. That could have easily made it to eBay and some unsuspecting fool would have purchased it BASED on JSA’S sticker of authentication.
Collector know fraud is everywhere; they don’t need a Fox story or a Beckett blog to tell them so. But this reporter’s “fraudulent” action was done with GOOD intentions: to protect and inform the consumer. And THAT’S the difference.
Comment by Eric A November 24, 2007 @ 3:29 amFox being Fox. I was impressed to see you at least say JSA isn’t out of the clear.
Comment by Steve December 3, 2007 @ 6:52 pmI think JSA and Beckett should take this an opportunity to improve the autograph pavilion process. How frustrating is it stand in line to get the autograph ticket, then stand in another line to get the autograph, and then stand in another line to get the authentication sticker.
Streamline the process! Get someone to sit right next to the athelete and put the sticker on it after the signing. That would eliminate the deception variable and remove an extra line.
Comment by JRJ December 19, 2007 @ 11:14 amTom
Hats off to you my good man.
Trackback by Tom December 22, 2007 @ 11:31 am