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

Paul McCartney - PSA says "no" Roger Epperson says "yes."

I find this very perplexing. I found an autograph of Paul McCartney in my everpresent search for the elusive "guaranteed" authentic signature. You all have been very helpful, and I am hoping you can help me sort this out. I submitted the following to Roger Epperson, and he deemed it genuine. I also submitted it to PSA quick opinion and it came back "likely not genuine." This confuses me. I know Roger is very knowledgeable.... why would PSA come back with a negative opinion in this case? Gar.

0 members like this

Attachments: No photo uploads here

mac2.jpg, 59 KB

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Paul on July 12, 2016 at 11:08pm

Thanks, there's definitely a weak link in Psa dna's business.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard Booth on July 12, 2016 at 11:07pm

This looks good to me, especially the 'all the best'!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thomas Green on July 13, 2016 at 5:52am

Thanks everyone... as usual, you all are a huge wealth of knowledge who are extremely helpful in weeding through and learning more about the traps and pitfalls in the hobby. Much appreciated!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on July 13, 2016 at 6:09am

that is a very nice Macca signature. I would trust Roger's opinion over whoever happens to be at the PSA QO desk that day/time.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jared on July 13, 2016 at 11:32am

Not commenting on authenticity, but please be aware the PSA quick opinion doesn't typically go to the authenticator who would authenticate McCartney's (Grad). So PSA quick opinions should be taken with a grain of salt unless it's modern sports related.

If I had to choose, I'd agree with Roger. He's more then enough of an expert to tell on an item like this, especially with an inscription. I'd also bet if you sent this to PSA/DNA it would be authenticated once given the full look over.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rich on July 13, 2016 at 11:35am

Then they shouldn't be offering them for a fee.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jared on July 13, 2016 at 11:40am

It can be useful, it's just not a blanket service like a full authentication. They do the best they can, but some of these authenticators are very busy and cannot be reached in the time-frame provided. Just try to use it for what it's good for, which is modern sports autographs.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rich on July 13, 2016 at 11:42am

I still think it's irresponsible and greedy. Reduced fees for reduced competence and/or effort? People make decisions based on these calls, and regardless of the level of service, this is still the PSA name brand making a call and possibly putting a stigma on something accordingly.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jared on July 13, 2016 at 11:50am

You can certainly argue that & I can see your point. It's just easier to use the tool for what it provides then try to change it in my opinion. I wish it worked universally as well.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rich on July 13, 2016 at 11:55am

Yeah, I just can't stand carelessness when it comes to high profile professional authentication, even if there's a disclaimer for it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Full Time Flipper on July 13, 2016 at 12:22pm

a decent seller can be closed down on a quick $10 opinion most buyers on e bay etc take that quick opinion as the definitive answer more care should be taken by PSA to stress to customers that it isnt a definitive service

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James on July 13, 2016 at 9:56pm

Not only is there harm being done to legitimate sellers who lose out on a possible sale, but also, buyers lose out big time as well. When a potential buyer gets an LNG response from PSA QO, they usually just move on and don't buy the item. The sad thing is that the buyer may have missed out on an absolutely great item all because a PSA apprentice gave something a thumbs down after 5 minutes of effort.