Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Pete Bendu on June 12, 2015 at 6:13pm

I am not a fan of the show, in fact I have never even seen it. Donal Logue is the only graph on the poster that I am even remotely familiar with....loved him in Terriers and SOA. Aside from Logue which looks normal, looking at the samples that I have found, the stand out autograph is McKenzie, which doesn't match up very well in spacing between the letters.

I certainly won't defend the poster or the opinions of PSA, but I can understand why they might call it likely not genuine. The story lines up if there was 8 posters, and I will give it the benefit of the doubt until we hear otherwise.

I feel bad for a new collector trying to get into this hobby with a piece like this.

Most cast pieces will have a stand out signature to help guys like me make a call if the whole thing is legit or not.... this just doesn't.   

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason Ortiz on June 12, 2015 at 6:28pm

I like your reply about the spacing. Had PSA just noted something like that it would make their rejection much better. And I kinda tiptoe in this hobby now and I do appreciate all the comments. Thanks

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on June 12, 2015 at 6:19pm

A Quick Opinion is just that, a "quick opinion." For $10 they are not going to spend hours doing exhaustive compares for 20+ signatures.

The fact of the matter is this item fits the pattern of hundreds of fake movie posters on eBay at any given time. They would probably be right 95% of the time rejecting an item like this that fits the pattern of many fakes.

I'm not condemning or defending them, but this is the reality. Quick Opinion is probably fairly accurate in weeding out obvious fakes, mass forgery styles and the like. I don't know if I would bank on it for more esoteric items.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Carlos on June 12, 2015 at 6:24pm

Except did they even look at the autographs and compare them? Because if not then they didn't do a quick opinion on the signatures at all

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on June 12, 2015 at 6:36pm

They provided what was paid for -- a quick opinion on the authenticity of the item. Apparently they felt it fit the pattern of mass produced forgeries and failed it.

You seem obsessed with this "comparing signatures" business. Part of "comparing signatures" is if they seem too carefully formed and neat... that is usually a red flag and a possible sign of a fake. Especially with cast posters, which are rarely signed in a controlled environment condusive to neat signatures. I don't understand what you don't get about that.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Carlos on June 12, 2015 at 6:42pm

Lol well if they compared signatures they were obviously wrong right? Do you get that? Lol

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on June 12, 2015 at 6:50pm

Nowhere did I defend the call they made. However, it is certainly understandable how they arrived at the conclusion they did. A nuance lost on you.

If you want to keep banging the drum about the results of this quick opinion like it is the crime of the century, be my guest. I won't waste any more of my time trying to add some perspective.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Carlos on June 12, 2015 at 6:52pm

Lol a nuance lost? I get it they saw it was "too carefully formed and neat" lol but obviously didn't realise people can sign carefully and neat. A nuance lost on you

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason Ortiz on June 12, 2015 at 7:02pm

It's all cool Carlos and Steve. I based my opinion first on me examining the signatures and then the quick opinions. I also took advice from this site and looked at what other items the seller was selling. I bought it all according to my own due diligence and in the end I am the one responsible for buying an authentic item or a fake item. I hold no grudge against PSA for their quick opinion but will think hard about using them again. Maybe just on a single signed item, maybe all cast items are failed because there is so much going on to give a thumbs up. What Pete said makes a lot of sense.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Zarelli on June 12, 2015 at 7:27pm

Jason, you are wise and taking a sound approach.

No one is perfect, but if you use your own due diligence, partner with reputable authenticators and network with experienced collectors, you will significantly mitigate risk and grow a solid collection.

Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on June 13, 2015 at 5:04am

I am not a huge fan of quick opinions they are too cautious in my view wile GA I believe is the opposite.  If you are determined to get a TPA and do not want PSA then go with JSA.  If I owned that and did not want to sell it then I would not bother with a COA.  If I did want to sell it I would merely offer a Lifetime Money Back should it not pass any of the three you mention.  I include GA because that is a safe bet they will pass it with flying colors.  Another reason for doing that in my book anyway is that your poster looks great but every time it is rolled and unrolled and sent through the mail the danger of wear and tear occurs.  So keep that in mind anway. 

Permalink Reply by Pete Bendu on June 13, 2015 at 5:17am

Scott, the only way I would send any Entertainment item to JSA is if I was guaranteed to have the item put in front of JD Bardwell. He is listed on their site as their Modern Entertainment expert, but I doubt highly that he is in the NJ office daily. The other people working at JSA, day after day, they keep stickering things that they know nothing about. Maybe it is a cost saving move, not to have to pay JD, maybe it is just laziness ......whatever the case a JSA sticker on an entertainment item is becoming like a GA sticker.  

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• Next ›
• Page