Step 1 to solving the ongoing problem with authentication of autographs is finding knowledgeable enough graders, not only with the autographs themselves but the environment we’re in now with signings. Until then, all of this is moot and while it may be fun to discuss, won’t change anything at all.
Personally, while I agree it’s shameful and cringeworthy to wipe off a personalization from the artist, I think BGS has every reason to continue to authenticate and encapsulate any legitimate autograph that falls into their lap. They did their job by properly authenticating what was handed to them. It’s the buyer or seller’s responsibility to make a judgement on the item.
The social media face-saving is telling and laughable, although not unique in any way. I remember a 9-month stint where CGC social media rep(s) seemed to take joy from shit-stirring like this…
Man that era of cgc’s IG was wild. It was like a high school bully responding to comments. That guy posted more clown emojis than the wallstreetbets subreddit!
The question really gets back to what your definition of “authentic” really is. Is an authentic autograph one that is completely unaltered, with all aspects of the auto as the artist originally wrote? Or is your definition of authentic solely that the artist’s signature (and signature only) is unaltered and written by them?
I would come down more on the side of “authentic means completely unaltered” but this is a very gray area. Grading companies, especially for autos, should clearly lay out their definition of authentic and whether they consider things like signature wiping to compromise the authenticity of the auto. I think there is space in the market for several definitions of authentic and this is a good thing. The problem arises when we have companies that don’t publicize this standard or adhere to it.
I’d also like to point out that if we only consider an auto to be the signature, this gets us into a lot of shady territory. Is a Himeno auto from the early 2000s that someone added a Pikachu sketch to in 2024 authentic?
Are psa and other graders this sloppy with non pokemon signed items? Is this just a pokemon issue or are there tons of fakes/wipes/questionable sigs being graded/authenticated for other things
In general they just go off the autograph. If the autograph is authentic they slab it. The signature is the o ly thing that matters.
They don’t care if it has a sketch or other stuff added.
Removal of personalization is a common thing in normal celebrities autos. I know most major dealers don’t disclose removal of personalization on photos,guitars and records.
Personally i think it should be on the buyer to know what they are buying and think its wishful thinking that any company is going to change how they authentic for pokemon artists directly.
Pokemon autographs are actually one of the easiest to authenticate because of how strict pokemon is about letting artists sign. For example in sports, there are so many more signings, many that aren’t even public. I remember a friend of a friend paid 500k to an upcoming rookie to get a bunch of stuff signed. That type of situation would not happen today in pokemon.
Basically since every pokemon signing is documented and tracked so heavily by fans, it makes it much easier to authenticate.
Oh and someone can correct me if I’m wrong but I’m pretty sure cgc authenticated a few arita autos even though they weren’t at the event.
There always seems to be a drama around pokemon autographs. I personally avoid them. This just further throws into dispute the authentication from grading companies. I know theres many fakes that have been graded in the past as authentic.
Kind of, CGC authenticated several high-end cards including the Arita-signed No. 1 Pika trophy via Signature Series, but they refused to do signature series labels for any other Arita-signed cards at the event. I know CGC was present at the event, but I don’t know if they physically witnessed the cards being signed.
One set of rules for the well-connected and rich, another for the regular collectors.
