We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.

Questionable Stan Lee signed comics

Well, there's actually nothing questionable about them to me; I'm just being polite. Among the problems are the completely wrong 'S' and the fact that he simply doesn't write such a large signature.

ebay seller: jwantitihaveit 98.3% Positive feedback

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stan-lee-autograph-SPIDERMAN-WOLVERINE-/251...

Here are 2 completed items from the same seller that I reported when they were first listed. Nothing was done and they were sold to unwitting buyers.

Here's the nice generic signing picture used for "proof", which was appropriated from this blog about the London Super Comic Convention

http://www.liveforfilms.com/2012/02/28/london-super-comic-conventio...

Here are a couple of legit Stan Lee CGC Signature Series autographs for quick comparison.

2 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tom Schwartz on August 10, 2013 at 8:52pm

Most of the flaws that you mention happen to be present in the 3 CGC Signature Series examples at the top of this thread that you previously endorsed. (Non-figure 8 'S', trail hugging the name, malformed 'ee')

Not arguing, just saying...a rushed or tired signer can certainly exhibit minor variations like that.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on August 11, 2013 at 10:31am

The PGX Stan Lees look okay to me, except the X-Men 1 looks funky as Tom noted. The signature on the Iron Man/Submariner 1 appears to get off to a rough start, but looks fairly consistent with the signature I obtained earlier this year. His signature is getting more compressed and herky jerky.

This is another problem with the goonart sigs... they are too easy flowing relative to Lee's recent signatures. Goonart is replicating an earlier look.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on August 11, 2013 at 7:48pm

I agree I looks a bit off, but it is almost inconceivable someone would risk ruining a several thousand dollar comic with a fake signature. The addition of the signature is a very small premium relative to the book itself.

I guess anything is possible, but it would surprise me.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on August 12, 2013 at 4:04am

Good point. I guess there is some pressure to not totally botch it so even a label can't explain it away, but much of the risk has been removed.

Permalink Reply by Tom Schwartz on August 12, 2013 at 10:08am

"The addition of the signature is a very small premium relative to the book itself."

This is a good point and I think the lower that premium ratio gets, the less comfortable I feel having the book signed at all.

There's definitely a camp that feels any autograph on a comic defaces it like any other writing would. I'm not on that extreme side, but I don't think I would want my X-Men #1 signed by Stan either. (And that goes double for the specimen he may have turned out above)

X-Men #10? Sure, go for it. But if I was in the market for any of the truly iconic, high-value issues, I'd prefer they were completely clean, as much for resale value as anything else.

You can have a real hard time convincing someone who's not a fan of autographs that anything is authentic unless they saw it signed with their own eyes...no matter what type of certification it has. To these people, it's just another scribble on the cover.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on August 12, 2013 at 11:42am

For a key book like X-Men 1, I think CGC Signature Series can add a significant premium to a low grade or restored copy. I would not add a signature to a higher grade or even mid grade copy, such as this 6.5. A sig may even detract in a higher grade copy where the buyers get a lot more picky.

Permalink Reply by Barry S on August 12, 2013 at 5:46am

I would love for you guys to look at this. I always assumed it was fake since I bought it from Park West Galleries on a cruise ship. Looks like this is a great time to dig out and see.

Attachments: No photo uploads here