A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

[MSpecht]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

THIS THREAD IS NOW LOCKED. OVERALL AN INTERESTING AND EDUCATIONAL DISCUSSION, AND THANKS TO THOSE FORUM MEMBERS WHO CONTRIBUTED IN A PROFESSIONAL AND OBJECTIVE MANNER.

MIKE---

[bobbys]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

*

[David]

Why anonymity is not an option

Collectors of Pre-War baseball cards are familiar with the website T206museum.com This site has been around for years, offering information, including valuations on the famous 1909-11 T02 set and rare printing variations. What has long been vexing to T206 collectors is that the owner/writer/publisher of the site refused to say who he was, even to those who communicated privately. The website and information was from an unknown, anonymous source. Well, it has recently been uncovered that the owner has been forging rare overprinted T206s, selling them, submitting them to graders and consinging them to big auctions-- all while writing these informative aricles. For those who don’t follow the cards, overprints (extra prints), variations and errors can command top dollar when rare.

This is an example when a magazine or website is about delicate material, authentication, critiquing others or such, the readers should not only expect, but demand to know the identity, motive and expertise background from the writer/publisher. To readers relying on the information, anonymity should not be an option or acceptable. It can’t be idly dismissed that the writer names others while refusing to divulge his own name. One must ask, if he's hiding his name, what else is he hiding? If the information is so reliable and spot on accurate, then why does he refuse to his name associated with it?

Also note that the T206 website was not considered crackpot or off the wall. Rather it was used by seasoned collectors as an informational source. The number one complaint, or noted idiosyncracy, about the site was the owner bent over backwards to keep anonymous. This is considering that about all other collectors and dealers who love to get due credit for their articles, websites, photo galleries posted online. If a normal collector writes a good and well researched article about H & B bats, he will either put his name on top of the article on his website or insist that publisher assigns his name to the article. Surpressing one's name for a good well researched article is not only rare, but rather strange.

In the below link you will find, amongst other threads on other subjects, recent threads on the forgery and the website:


link

[sammy]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

The letter was allegedly written in Philadelphia, PA on Dec. 27, 1899.

1) Mr. Lifson discovered through Delahanty’s biographer that Ed Delahanty was not in Philadelphia in December 1899.

2) James Spence now rejects his own original assessment that the letter is authentic, and now states it is not.

Being as Mr. Delahanty was not in Philadelphia when the letter was allegedly written by him, ........

__________________________________________________ _____________________________________


"The article that started this thread - No one has shown the item not to be genuine, just suspect."

No one has shown Mr. Koschal to be a criminal, just suspect.

[trsent]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

To set the record straight, Chris Nerat didn't "uncover" this "big secret." There was an interview several years ago with Koschal, and he told of his affiliation with autograph alert and in the interview directed people towards the site. That's where I first learned about it.

Ken
earlywynnfan5@hotmail.com

Ken, that is really cool - Please find that article, I would love to add it to my file on Steve Koschal because I have read lots of materials on him and I never saw such an article. It would make for great reading.

I am sorry, when a guy is known for abusing the industry and attacks only a couple of authenticators without revealing any attribution - The site is motivational for personal benefit and everyone can keep praising them - But the truth hurts.

Time and time again this forum finds criminals - Now congratulations for praising a criminal!

The article that started this thread - No one has shown the item not to be genuine, just suspect.

[xpress34]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

The number one thing is the accuracy of the articles. If they're accurate, they're accurate.

David -

THAT has been my argument all along! And none of the items brought into question have been challenged by the Original Authenticators - and it's not like AA is some secret subvert underground site that you have to work hard to find - it's out there in the Public sector.

For readers who are not autograph experts themselves (I am no auto expert, offer no opinion on the Delehanty), then the background, ethics, motives and personal expertise (and error rate) of the writer should be relevant.

I know nothing about Ming vases, but still have the common sense to be wary of the opinion of a Ming vase dealer I know to be of dubious ethics and honesty.

I agree with this statement as well, but as I said earlier, there is NO proof that Steve Koshal is writing the postings and blindly believing that he does would be like believing that James Spence PERSONALLY Authenticates EVERY Auto that comes through his company.

Does anyone believe that with the shear volume of autos that his company handles that he alone could possibly handle, research and authenticate each one himself?

Again, I think I would be more leary of AA IF they had links directing me to THEIR OWN Authentication services, but they don't.

All the best -

Chris

[David]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

The number one thing is the accuracy of the articles. If they're accurate, they're accurate.

For readers who are not autograph experts themselves (I am no auto expert, offer no opinion on the Delehanty), then the background, ethics, motives and personal expertise (and error rate) of the writer should be relevant.

I know nothing about Ming vases, but still have the common sense to be wary of the opinion of a Ming vase dealer I know to be of dubious ethics and honesty.

[earlywynnfan]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

Chris, maybe this has gone the wrong direction.

PSA/DNA, JSA, Global (oh my!), PAAS (who?) and all the others - They have all made mistakes. Posting those mistakes is not the issue. How they deal with found errors is an issue, but someone who has made errors and sold questionable items for a long time who attacks companies attempting to do well in the industry for personal revenge and doesn't even admit they are the attackers makes for a questionable practice.

The issue is when someone pretending not to be who they are uses errors not to educate the public but for their own ego trip. They don't even admit to their posts - They are a big secret that Chris Nerat uncovered and now you want us to praise their suspect reporting?

Funny thing is the original post about the Deleahanty autograph - Nothing proves this piece is not genuine - Nothing. It is suspect, but no one has proved it not to be genuine with any 100% proof.

To set the record straight, Chris Nerat didn't "uncover" this "big secret." There was an interview several years ago with Koschal, and he told of his affiliation with autograph alert and in the interview directed people towards the site. That's where I first learned about it.

Ken
earlywynnfan5@hotmail.com

[xpress34]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

Mike -

Thank you and my apologies for letting my emotions get the better of me after taking offense to the one comment which you have now deleted.

And thank you for your comments surrounding my Clark Griffith Ball... it has to be one of my best 'under the radar' grabs on eBay... $25 for a potential $3,200 ball.. wish I could hit that daily!!!

All the best -

Chris

[MSpecht]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

Ok all y'all --- I just spent way too much time (that could have been used trying to find that elusive Doug Gwosdz GU bat) cleaning up this thread from about post 10 or 12 forward.... It would have been easy just to delete the entire thing, but as with some other threads, there is too much good info and valuable debate that is truly educational and enlightening to do that. BUT, as Chris recently posted, alot of energy is being wasted, and content blurred, on some threads because of personal confrontations --- Check out the forum rules and leave out the personalities. Agree to disagree without the name-calling and baiting. I tried to catch whatever I would have objected to if it had been directed to me ( but may have missed some ) and still maintain the important parts of the thread.

For those who may be wondering, "RK principle" is a Rodney king reference--- "Can't we all get along?" It was easier than citing all of the Forum Rule Violations.

Mike jackitout7@aol.com

PS -- I don't have any Gacy paintings, but I do have Rodney's autograph, along with Brenda Spencer's and Charles Andy Williams', and a few others. Hope I don't get called any names because of that.

PPS (or is it PSS?) -- The Clark Griffith post in this thread, along with the logic surrounding it, was very very strong and a classic example of what we have preached for over four years now---do your homework. Thanks for the post.

[trsent]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

I am sorry, I appreciate your twelve years of service to our country and I am sorry if there was a misunderstanding in our debate. I was not trying to offend you with my debate style.

[xpress34]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

Sorry, I don't like criminals attacking others. You like their facts? Part of them are made up, the other part the authenticators have made adjustments over.

Which parts are 'made up' Joel? No one has disputed ANYTHING they have posted - except you and no examples of their 'made up' stuff. Again, Please ENLIGHTEN me with your knowledge and facts.

What refunds has Steve Koshal given for all the money he has stolen from the honest public?

Oh yeah, it doesn't matter because he gave good information.

I have in NO WAY defended him, and I openly admitted that before seeing his name in this thread, I had no idea who the hell he was/is.

Therefore, this statement has no basis about ANYTHING to which I have responded.

[

Communist? I take personal offense to this I am a Disabled Vet who proudly served 12 years in the US Air Force.

.

[quote=trsent;139374]I do not believe those with a hidden agenda should be praised for revealing an error found here or there when their errors are never disclosed on the web site even though they do not take credit for their work.

Keep praising the findings of a group bent on revenge for past dealings.[quote]

Again, show me PROOF of a Hidden Agenda? How much more plainly can I spell it out for you? NOWHERE on AA do they direct you to themselves or any other AUTHENTICATOR... they simply point out the errors that hit the market place to make people more informed.

And PLEASE show me an EXAMPLE of where I PRAISED them... the above is not praise - it is simply a FACT.

[quote=trsent;139374]Finally, you attack me for not revealing where I found errors in Steve Koshal COAs? I take full credit for finding those and stand behind them. So what is your stupid issue with this? I signed my post - I posted those images.

I take full credit for them. What is the issue beyond that?[quote]

I asked WHAT the ERRORS are? You Posted a Picture and a COA and said they are obviously fake. Nothing else. No supporting facts (i.e. The J in Joe, slant of the letters, autopen) - NOTHING. JUST your written word.

So YES, YOU posted the images (which could have come from anywhere - you won't reveal your source), YOU say they are fakes (but you give NO explanation on WHY or HOW you determined that), and YES, YOU signed and took credit for your 'FINDINGS' that don't tell anyone anything. I can just go grab two PSA/DNA items I don't like, Post a Picture of each item and each COA and simply state they are obvious fakes. Thats what you did - what would be the difference?

NO Concrete Facts when that is ALL Sammy or myself or anyone else here has asked for...

JUST stating your OPINION doesn't mean anything - as the Teachers always say - PLEASE show examples of your work - like I did with the Griffith Ball... I showed you two obviously different AUTOs both Certified by the SAME Company and I showed youa NON Certified Ball and I explained exactly how I determined it is REAL. WHY can you NOT do the same to support your OPINION that the two items presented are FAKE? Show me another Joe D sig and compare the sigs for me... show me another Apollo auto set and do the same.





And again - I do NOT support Steve Koshal or him being a deadbeat ex husband, etc - and I don't dispute that he probably is a Scumbag... does that mean that the FACTS presented on AA are all BS? While the site may be owned by him, no one has been able to prove that he is the ONLY author and poster on the site...

Again, I don't support the man, but I do support FACTUAL Info that has NOT been disputed or challenged by any of the Authentication companies in question.

I don't know how much clearer I can be on that FACT.

But, I already know that ALL that you will read here is the following:



I would HONESTLY like to know - from ANY other Forum Member - have I been UNCLEAR anywhere in my posts in this thread?

Thanks!

[trsent]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

Chris, maybe this has gone the wrong direction.

PSA/DNA, JSA, Global (oh my!), PAAS (who?) and all the others - They have all made mistakes. Posting those mistakes is not the issue. How they deal with found errors is an issue, but someone who has made errors and sold questionable items for a long time who attacks companies attempting to do well in the industry for personal revenge and doesn't even admit they are the attackers makes for a questionable practice.

The issue is when someone pretending not to be who they are uses errors not to educate the public but for their own ego trip. They don't even admit to their posts - They are a big secret that Chris Nerat uncovered and now you want us to praise their suspect reporting?

Funny thing is the original post about the Deleahanty autograph - Nothing proves this piece is not genuine - Nothing. It is suspect, but no one has proved it not to be genuine with any 100% proof.

[trsent]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

Okay guys - that's my .02 on this issue - have at it and do what you will with it... I can't wait to see the responses...

- Chris

Sorry, I don't like criminals attacking others. You like their facts? Part of them are made up, the other part the authenticators have made adjustments over.

What refunds has Steve Koshal given for all the money he has stolen from the honest public?

Oh yeah, it doesn't matter because he gave good information.



I do not believe those with a hidden agenda should be praised for revealing an error found here or there when their errors are never disclosed on the web site even though they do not take credit for their work.

Keep praising the findings of a group bent on revenge for past dealings.

Finally, you attack me for not revealing where I found errors in Steve Koshal COAs? I take full credit for finding those and stand behind them. So what is your stupid issue with this? I signed my post - I posted those images.

I take full credit for them. What is the issue beyond that?

[xpress34]

Re: A 29.900.00 Worthless Piece Of Paper

Maybe autograph alert should say authenticators like PSA and JSA are accurate 99% of the time, but you'll never get THAT out of a company that wants to be the ONLY authenticators on the block.

I forgot to add... I would LOVE to see PROOF that AA has said (verbatim) that PSA/DNA and JSA are ALWAYS wrong and NEVER get it right and that NO ONE should ever trust their opinions.

And just to be clear, I am in no way affiliated with AA or any other so called 'Authenticator' - and I am sure that PSA/DNA and JSA do well at what they do, but as has been pointed out many times, unless they are there IN PERSON to WITNESS (not 'Authenticate') the Autograph, their Opinion is just the same as mine - an OPINION. They told me that my Pujols ROY Auto that I obtained IN PERSON (while working for Nike) - that I WITNESSED Albert sign for me was 'Likely Not Genuine' because they had not seen a ROY Inscription from him? SERIOUSLY? So because THEY hadn't seen one, it doesn't exsist unless it was FAKED?

That is why many of my autos will NEVER be 'AUTHENTICATED'... why do I want to waste my money on items I KNOW are real because I personally WINESSED them being signed to ahve someone else who wasn't there render their OPINION on whether it is AUTHENTIC or not?

Case in Point (and pictures to follow)... My Clark Griffith AUTO Ball... and obscure HOFer to many, Griffith was once a player and later owner of the Washington Senators - in fact the former Major League Park 'Griffith Stadium' was named in his Honor.

Well, about 6 months ago a Griffith 'Secretarial Signature' was offered on eBay - sweet spot on old ball (No visible AL/NL markings)... his reasoning for calling it a secretarial signature was it didn't match the PSA/DNA cert example he could find (Index card auto - which could have been through the mail and therefore a Secretarial sig itself):




This PSA DNA example is one I found - ON a CONTRACT that Griffith HAD to be present to sign! It's a LEGAL Document...



And Finally - this is the ball...



Notice how the 'C' and the open 'G' in Clark and Griffith on the Ball match the CONTRACT, but NOT the Index Card? And the 'line' crossing the T and H in Griffith is a straight line on both the CONTRACT and the BALL, but on the Index card it loops of the end of the H?

It is MY OPINION that the Ball is NOT a Secretarial Signature, but rather the GENUINE Article based on the two 'exemplars' BOTH from the Same AUTHENTICATOR but obviously NOT the same and using common sense to deduce that the Contract would carry the stronger Provence that Clark Griffith HAD to be ther to put his John Hancock on it.

What did this baby cost me??? $25.00. $12.99 winning bid and $10 s/h... now, go look up a Clark Griffith single signed ball in Tough Stuff or whatever Auto Price Guide you use... $3,200.00 HOFer single signed ball... I MAY send it to PSA/DNA just to see what they say... and if it comes back 'likely NOT genuine', I will resubmit it witht the two opposing examples from above and ask them to explain HOW exactly it doesn't match their 'exemplar' database. If they DO Authenticate it, then any self respecting HOF Auto collector should be willing to make me a tidy profit in order to ahve this bad boy in his collection.

I bring this example up also because I would like to hear their comments about two obviously different style sigs of the same person both authenticated by them after I have heard story time and time again where they have given the 'unable to certify' or 'likely not genuine' because the persons auto in question has alwasy been consistent???

Alright... I've ranted on long enough here... let the disection begin!

- Chris