Authenticity is Everything
Paul Mccartney Signed Silver Certificate
can I get some thoughts on this McCartney signature , I am on the fence with this one , leaning towards no !
Tags: 85528106, DNA, McCartney, PSA, certificate, dollar, mcardinals1, silver, sportssignatures03
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on
-
You are no doubt correct the autograph would be later. The bill itself was printed in 1963.
-
Permalink Reply by fab432 on
-
I find it odd but the signature that looks the best to me is on the 1$ bill signed in blue ink. The double C’s in McCartney look wobbly on the black ink bill and the slip of paper. On the blue ink bill the double C’s seems to have a better flow or am I just not seeing the same shakiness on the other 2?
-
Permalink Reply by Thorsten Knublauch on
-
The black pen is thicker. In the blue one there is a slight gap in the double c loop.
-
Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on
-
Compare the two “Y”s. On the slip of paper, the end of the “Y” is sharp and complete. On the bill, it looks like it cuts off at the bottom edge.
-
-
Yes I see that. On the slip of paper the end of the y is like a v. On the bill with black ink it is missing, and on the bill with the blue ink it appears to have been added after the initial transfer.
-
-
I have received a reply from PSA. They indicated that the information I sent them would be passed on to an internal team for investigation. I sent them photos of the green slip which is in their database, the black ink dollar bill and the blue ink dollar bill. It will be interesting to see what they discover.
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on
-
+1
-
-
That’s great. It sure will be interesting.
-
-
Is there any update on this? I see that the item is still listed on eBay. Three weeks seems like a long time for a pretty obvious issue.
-
-
+1 Inquiring minds...
-
-
Perhaps it needs to be featured in a new discussion with a different title. Obviously, it could sell at any time.
-
Permalink Reply by Jason H on
-
Are these McCartney's certainly printed or are they autopen? The tale of the y conveniently ends below or right at the edge of the dollar. Does this hide an autopen imperfection? Could the black ink dollar be printed and the blue ink dollar being autopen? Or could fab432 be correct in thinking the blue ink dollar is the original? Or maybe all 3 are fake.. Either way, im keeping an open mind because of this...
Here is a new post on Facebook. These are presumably live ink but this can not ever be determined by just looking at a photo online. The first Jack Nicholson example has small differences that make me think it could have been made into an autopen template, while with the others it's harder to tell and they may be a signature reprint on top of a new photo.
Another thought, this link could be an SWAU creation solely for marketing purposes (which would be stupid because this would actually make people stop collecting altogether in fear for the future of our hobby). since no one will ever get their hands on these examples, it could all have been created by SWAU as an unthought through attempt to put a scare into this hobby to steer people to buy more SWAU in person authentic signatures. Anything is possible. How would SWAU get their hands on all of these similar forgeries, which would be the only way to tell if they are live ink, as they mentioned..The scare seems to be working in some of those reply comments.
This probably should be turned into another discussion but wanted it to be mentioned here first because this could tie in together with how these are being created in general?...
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/16wPrMgBnk/
© 2025 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
