Authenticity is Everything
JOHN LENNON Opinions Please
Hello,
Around 10 years ago I shared images of TTM autographs (JOHN LENNON 1976) that I was very fortunate to receive and opinions here were mostly positive. Several years ago, I requested and received COAs from Roger for the 45 sleeves and the sheet music, but at that time I did not request one for the piece of mat board (pictured) that was in the return envelope.
As I may be interested in trying to sell it sometime in the future, a COA or LOA from a respected TPA may or may not be benficial. So, I submitted this photo along with some history information to a well-known authenticator and unfortunately, it was rejected - determined to be a "failure".
What say you?
Thanks for taking a look once again,
Steve
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on
-
I've been waiting for some sort of reveal.
-
Permalink Reply by Jim Cushman on
-
Top one...
-
Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on
-
I know "I'm just (being) a jealous guy" and an extremely grumpy one at that but I really don't understand why you didn't include the board in your original communications with Roger and why you didn't send the board to him instead of the other authenticator.
It seems pretty clear that if this came back from Lennon with the other things it is real. It also seems very clear indeed that having a COA from a reputable authenticator will help achieve a better price.
-
-
I'm still wondering if it was ACOA who failed it and why they won't answer questions in this case? They always have for me - if it was them. It appears to have been.
-
Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 To Eric Keith Longo on
-
Steverino posted an image of the ACOA result earlier in this discussion.
-
-
Thanks. Yesterday or last night - I never saw it until now.
-
Permalink Reply by Steverino To a pug called eva on
-
Hi.... I didn't include the mat board with my original submission to Roger as I couldn't imagine trying to sell it at that time and also it was a matter of money. Didn't want to spend any more for COAs. Prior to submitting this to ACOA, I did contact Roger and he told me that for this piece he would need to see it in person even though he authenticated the others based on photos I sent to him. This has nothing to do with Roger, but I'm not comfortable with putting this in the mail until and unless I have a signficant amount of money in the bank. It is too imporant to me. This did indeed come back with the other items and I think it should be clear from comparing the various signatures and inscriptions - at least in my very humble opinion that it's the same..... But some "experts" have disagreed and that's the name of the game. Thanks, Eva!
-
-
Thanks Steverino.
I'm still a bit confused.
Are you saying that Roget authenticated the other items without looking at them "in hand"? His quick opinions based on photos only cost around $15 a piece I believe.
Are you also saying that ACOA didn't ask to look at the board "in hand"? You mentioned earlier that they charged $100. That seems a lot for a photo-only opinion.
Obviously it is none of anybody's business but yours but did you sell the other items after Roger looked at them?
-
-
Howdy Eva.... I must admit that I'm a bit confused too. Yes, Roger authenticated the other items - not quick opinions - without me sending them to him. Apparently he was convinced enough by just looking at the images I sent. I payed him and he and issued his "COAs" or letters of authenticity. That was around five years ago. Recently, I contacted him about authenticating the mat board that I did not include at that time and he said he would need to see it in person because of what it was - or was allegedly signed on. I probably will not mail it out to anyone who hasnt' actually purchased it - at least not now. So, I contacted ACOA, sent photos and asked for their opinion and if they would issue a COA. I was sent an invoice on 2/21, which I paid (see attached) thinking it was all good, but then I received their "failure" notice on 2/24 . Seems like I should have only paid for an "opinion" then, no? I sold the sheet music and the "Mind Games" 45 sleeve several years ago - still have the "Got To Get You Into My Life Sleeve" and of course the troublesome mat board. Thank you.... Steve
-
-
Thanks Steverino, you have certainly been very patient in answering all my questions. You might be able to tell that I used to be in the audit field - always skeptical and firing questions off left, right and center. I assume you have to pay ACOA whether their opinion is positive or otherwise. Having that mat board is a nice problem to have. If the other items were adjudged to be real I can't believe the board isn't too. If you do sell it I'm sure you'll easily be able to forget the authentication fee you paid.
-
Permalink Reply by JK on
-
If ACOA has this as their policy: "We also don't share backstory info with them - they are solely reviewing based on formation" then I have a higher opinion of them.
A backstory can be a fun or interesting addition to an autograph, but if it is accepted as part of the authentication process then where does that leave us? A good forger is already a good liar, so a false backstory should be easy to concoct. Even if a backstory was true, there is no way to know if an item has since been switched out.
This is a general observation, of course, and not related to this particular case.
-
-
I guess the ideal thing would be for an authenticator to assess an autograph based on formation and then check that the result is consistent with any backstory - i.e. the style of autograph matches all the relevant "facts" within the backstory. Then they would earn their $100 - $300 fee.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2025 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
