We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.
Authenticity is Everything
What do you think about this McCartney?
What do you think about this autograph? I think the formation of the "a" at "Paul" reminds me of the fakes Ballroom showed. I think a few members here said that the "a" at "Paul" can't look like an "e". What do you think? Thanks!
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Daniel Alayof on
-
You can see all the unboxing photos and videos on this FB group:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/356569274891613Ask to join and I will confirm :-)
-
Permalink Reply by fab432 on
-
Still don’t like this signature !!! Unless I was there when he signed it I’d take a pass!!! I hope I passed the audition !!!
-
Permalink Reply by Ricardo on
-
Nothing about this looks genuine to me... and if it was, I wouldn’t want it as it looks so atypical...I don’t think many experts/ auctioneers etc would pass this as real
-
-
Although it's an atypical autograph, there is no doubt that it's authentic because it's in an official limited edition signed book by Paul. Saying that it might be not authentic is like saying an autograph in a Genesis publications book is not authentic.
Although we know it's 100% authentic, still you and others say that it might be not real. Now, what does it tell us about the world of autographs? And the world of autographs authentication?
-
Permalink Reply by Invest_In_Graphs on
-
Good points, Daniel.
To answer your question, it tells us that:
1) Everyone has an opinion, and intelligent minds can differ.
2) Even if something is real, it can look "off" enough that an authenticator may fail it or a buyer won't buy it.
3) Despite its source, the true authenticity of an item may never be known.
4) Everyone has a different comfort level as to how "traditional" an autograph must look for them to give it a thumbs up.
-
Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on
-
Daniel, was your motivation for posting this signature that you "knew" was authentic, to try to use the "a" that resembles "e" argument that the ones Ballroom exposed are also authentic? That signature style is different from the one you posted, and does not change my opinion about those forgeries. As for this one, you ask what it tells us about the world of autographs? It tells me not to throw 4 grand away on a crappy signature like this.
-
-
Terrier, you are right, this signature is different from the forgeries Ballroom showed, but the "e" and "a" issue is almost the same. I guess 99% of what Ballroom showed are real fakes, but maybe 1% are real, I guess we will never know.
-
Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on
-
I don’t recall any mention of an “e” and “a” issue in the other discussion. Maybe there was and I missed it. I’ll have to read through it again.
-
-
I agree with you Daniel.
-
-
It tells us that Paul is an inconsistent signer, that there are good forgers of his signature, and that the combination of the two can sometimes make it particularly difficult to distinguish real from fake. He’s “Jerry Lee Lewis lite.”
-
-
+1
-
-
Yes, well I’ve had auctioneers at Christie’s and Sotheby’s say to me that they wouldn’t sell some of my Maccas because they did not look authentic , even though I got them in person !! And these are ‘experts’ . They will not pass atypical autos very easily , and Macca’s signatures are becoming inconsistent these days
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
Photos
Videos
Groups
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
