PSA/DNA Results are in... a little bummed (50% success rate...)

[Anthony]

Very happy with my Ripkens. I've been meaning to get them encased for a couple of years (now I've got all his 4 major RCs signed--got them done through his company a few years ago). This is my 2nd time sending in those Bryants. Got them all at Cubs ST back in 2015. Sent them last year, they were sent back as questionable. Figured by now more people would have sent in samples of his ballpark signature--came back as questionable again. A little frustrating. I watched him sign them, but they're not passing. Maybe I'll try again if they special gets back to $10 again (really liked that it was $10 last month--wish I had more I wanted to get encased!).

I was a little surprised by the Seagers, too. I got one in person, and one was a gift from a friend who got it in person. Biggio was in person, and the two Boggs were through the mail.






Thanks for reading,
Anthony

 

[AnthonyCorona]

Great Ripkens to get though, congrats on those!

Collecting: Phil Bickford, Brandon Wood (still), Yankees and Rockies

 

[mrmopar]

That just shows how unreliable those services are. If you sent in cards you saw signed in front of you by the player that didn't pass, then how are they considered experts who can be trusted and why should we pay for their services?

 

[swish54_99]

I feel your pain. I get signatures at the low minors and often guys change their autographs when they make the majors. I got Trout and Kershaw on a ton of stuff because back then, they were 18 year old prospects and would sign anything and everything. But I can't get PSA to pass them. I know they're real, got every one of them signed right in front of me. I keep re-subbing them and have had a few trouts pass eventually, just frustrating.

 

[swish54_99]

That just shows how unreliable those services are. If you sent in cards you saw signed in front of you by the player that didn't pass, then how are they considered experts who can be trusted and why should we pay for their services?

A lot of these guys signatures are so messy and simple these days, it's easy to fake. Instead of looking at it as unreliable, I look at it the other way. It's good knowing they don't just pass anything and everything. They need to be as close to 100% sure it's legit as they can, and if there's even a shadow of a doubt, they error on the side of questionable authenticity.

 

[mrmopar]

Do you pay them anything when they fail an autograph? if not, then I can agree with you and it is a little more assurance that you may not get a fake item approved. If you still pay them when they fail an autograph, then you have just paid for some expert to tell you that the autograph you know is real, is questionable.

I don't send anything in to those companies, so it is not my money on the line. I just hear a story like this or watch that infamous Sal Bando video and know that an expert opinion is just that, an opinion. Nothing more.

 

[Austin]

If you got some signatures in person, then who cares if some "expert" authenticates them or not?
You met the player and saw him sign the card. Why do you need outside verification, unless you plan on selling them?

I just don't get paying to have autographs authenticated by some stranger when you saw the player signing them himself. If you want the protection of a holder, put the cards in airtight holders.

 

[swish54_99]

Yes, if they don't authenticate one, you are still paying them to look at it and give their opinion whether it passes or not.

I get some of mine authenticated for a couple reasons. One is to get them encased. Another is in the event that for some reason I need to sell later (or something happens to me and my family needs to sell later), I will get the most out of them.

 

[mrmopar]

This right here would piss me off to no end to have some "expert" tell me an autograph i know is real and witnessed being signed is questionable. Of course, this is why i don't partake in the first place. If I absolutely needed something certified for resale and it was worth the added cost to do so, then I could see doing it, but otherwise it is a big waste of money to me. To each their own though and I understand why people buy the services. I just won't be one of those people.

Yes, if they don't authenticate one, you are still paying them to look at it and give their opinion whether it passes or not.

I get some of mine authenticated for a couple reasons. One is to get them encased. Another is in the event that for some reason I need to sell later (or something happens to me and my family needs to sell later), I will get the most out of them.

 

[Mighty Bombjack]

Of course you have to pay them regardless of the outcome of their judgement of opinion. If they charged nothing by calling it no good, they would be absolutely FLOODED with fakes. Forgers would sit and sign Ruth's auto all day and send them in by the thousands, happily willing to pay the 150 fee if they deem one to be good.

It does one good to periodically remind oneself that these are opinions only. Many people have been conditioned to think of PSA/DNA's approval/rejection as a dichotomy of "real or fake", but that is not what it means. It means "likely genuine or questionable". It stinks when they fail something that you saw signed IP, but once we recognize that no authenticator is or can be perfect, we have to accept that false negatives are far more desirable than false positives.

 

[AnthonyCorona]

I have a Clemens fleer rc I wanted to get authenticated but would be so pissed if it came back as fake after I watched him sign it

Collecting: Phil Bickford, Brandon Wood (still), Yankees and Rockies

 

[forgerelli]

I think they do a good job. I've only seen one fake Mariano Rivera auto that was encapsulated by any of the big 3 (PSA, BGS, SGC). It was a horrendously bad fake though:



Scott F