Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by eddie on July 4, 2012 at 5:25pm

Thanks Ballroom days 

The John is heavier handed than all the other writing if that makes sense ,the best wishes is really weak and light ,  the last name lennon goes from soft to heavy  ,im glad you pointed that out as i had that feeling .I wasnt sure if he had been interrupted during the signing ? as it doesnt look like the secretary signatures ,but i'm relatively new to this 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on July 4, 2012 at 8:01pm

I dont like anything about the Lennon, but the Ringo looks good.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by mark peterson on July 4, 2012 at 10:44pm

The Ringo looks genuine for sure.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by eddie on July 4, 2012 at 11:37pm

I also had this other signature/letter of ringo's but was told it was fake so i got rid of it ,whats your thoughts on it ? and thank you for being helpful so far 

 Eddie

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on July 5, 2012 at 5:50pm

I think the opinion you got on this Ringo was right, Eddie. Don't destroy things like this, though. They're honest secretarials and part of Beatles history. As long as they're offered as secretarial, it's A-OK to sell them.

I think the Harrison is secretarial as well, but you probably already knew that.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on July 5, 2012 at 6:39pm

Good comment, Harry. 

Are there honest forgeries? No!

Are their honest secretarials, preprints or Autopens...I think so. Look at all the land grants secretarially signed for presidents, and preprinted signatures on fan photos for the Beatles and other bands.

An autograph collector may not want them, but others might be happy to have them if they knew what they were buying.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Trapper9990 on July 5, 2012 at 8:33pm

i think that you are right most of the time Harry. They just arent good for much, but in my opinion, the Beatles are a little bit different of a ball game. Because everything of theirs is so collectible, im sure their are alot of people who would enjoy such an item, if only due to the fact that it represents a place in history, and a sense of naustalgia, of a specific moment in the beatles career. I think more people obsess over the beatles than any other band their has ever been and the appeal here would seem to be that it represents just a stage in the beatles fame. Plus i know their are alot of collectors out their and authenticators who would probably like to have these items if they could get them cheap to add to their database of secretarials. The more words on a secretarial, the more handwriting they have to compare too with legit sigs. I mean, even though they arent worth much, if i was alive during that time and wrote to the beatles and got back a standard fan letter with secretarial signatures, id know it wasnt worth much, but i still would think it was kinda cool because it has to do with the beatles and their rise to fame. That may not make much sense, but thats the appeal to me at least. Now common other preprints of other bands, even hendrix, or a president, honestly their is non appeal their in a secretarial or preprint. I dont know why, but i cant think of any other secretarial that i may hang onto other than the beatles. Maybe its just me. lol

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by eddie on July 6, 2012 at 1:38am

Hi Guys ,

  I have had some conflicting opinions on this letter ,its now 2 against 2 . I have been told the star part is the give away that the signature is real and a pre 65 signature ,and as i said ive been told its fake .This one doesnt matter so much as its already gone to a collector .The Harrison is actually printed on Steve ,but whats cool about it is its been signed on the back by Monica Rose ,Tony Holland and Hughie Green (opportunity knocks)

And again thanks for all the replies and being so informative 

 Eddie

Permalink Reply by roger epperson on July 6, 2012 at 5:40am

Hello

The Ringo looks fine but the John Lennon is not authentic in my opinion.  In regards to Julien I have never studied childrens autographs so I would have no idea

Roger

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page