Ghost Signers and Stamped Autos

[toddgreen]

A few questions,

Are there any players that for sure use ghost signers? I know Nomar Mazara has been using a stamp this season, I got one back from him all smudged up and yet the outline of the stamp was still super clear hahaha

More importantly.... what I'm wondering is...

Do ghost signing and stamping really invalidate the "purity" and value of the signed item?

I ask this because, the players are still approving the inking of the item. If I let my wife sign my name on a check, the value of that check is only questionable if I were to personally choose to question it... otherwise it's just as good as if I signed it. Same should go for these items, no? If a player doesn't want to sign too many items wouldn't they just not sign or charge for them?

Another example: I realize the hobby is inundated with forgeries and fakes, but if a forgery were to pass PSA/DNA does that suddenly change the purity of the auto? There's no way to 100% guarantee a signature, right? So I feel like an autograph that's been approved for stamping or ghost signing holds just as much weight as a regular auto... maybe not... I don't know...

[zjlwolves3]

Shaq and Roger Staubach use ghost signers. Phil Mickelson and Jon Rahm use stamps. Luka Doncic has his mom sign his autographs for Panini.

[toddgreen]

Thanks! I guess I'm more curious about the collectible and monetary value in something that a player sanctions having his/her signature on, but the signature comes from stamp or ghost signer. I wonder how an auto by proxy is not legit if it matches other signatures. But then again, if such a thing were acceptable then who is to say additional autos couldn't hit the market after a player's death because ghost signers are legitimatized by collectors.

[zjlwolves3]

If you're selling something stamped or ghost signed, then 99% of the time the buyer is buying it under the assumption that it is authentic. There's exceptions, of course, such as Dak Prescott "auto-pen" autographs having monetary value to those who KNOW it is auto-penned. Signatures derive value from it being real. Period.

[toddgreen]

I'm not selling anything stamped or ghost signed. And I agree that most sellers, especially on eBay, intentionally mislabel cards. I've seen plenty of 1980 topps baseball cards being passed off as an AUTO because of the facsimile signature on the card. I have also noticed REPRINT autographs of modern topps certified autos that STILL SAY topps certified on them. I think that's criminal. I think Topps should sue every single one of those people for IP infringement and damaging their reliability in the marketplace.

But for in-person and TTM autos, what I am asking is: when is an autograph is no longer an autograph, even if sanctioned by the player. How do you determine what is "real?"

So you seem to be saying that the only way an autograph is an autograph is if the player actually signs it. Doesn't matter if the player applied the stamp or autopen. Unless pen/sharpie/pencil/crayon/whatever are moved along the surface of the object by the player then it is not a real autograph. Meaning, if you were at Yankee Stadium and Aaron Judge approached the right field wall with a stamp and stamped every card there, wanting to be sure he signed as many as he could before the game started... that would not be an autograph? Even though he handled the card. Even though he inspected and approved the stamp. Even though his intent with the stamp was to autograph the card.

What if a player was paralyzed, but technology allowed him/her to apply a signature through a robotic mechanism. He/she sends the signal with their brain to the mechanism which then applies the signature. Or they no longer have hands, but apply the signature with a prosthetic hand. How does that differ from the use of a stamp or autopen? A pitcher for instance might use an autopen to avoid undue stress on his hand. He is still stamping the item with his signature, intending to autograph it for you, and does so with the knowledge that the value of his signature is contingent on his being able to protect his pitching hand/arm from injury.

I'm not saying one way is better than another. I'm merely curious about where the line can actually be drawn.