Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bjarne Soderholm on June 2, 2012 at 4:21am

I should say Yes to this. Is it signed on a poster or what is it signed on? If that is the case, that will explain why it's looks a little different.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by A.B. on June 2, 2012 at 4:40am

Yes it is a tour poster from 1988...but it was supposedly signed in 2005.

I have mixed feelings about this...but I also lean towards "it´s good"

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by A.B. on June 2, 2012 at 6:54am

No, it´s not the item...I am a little unsure about the signature.

May be it´s the long "p" that bothers me...on the other hand the rest looks pretty solid. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by mark peterson on June 2, 2012 at 11:49am

It looks good to me as well.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on June 3, 2012 at 7:14pm

I'd wait to buy it until "The Boss" of Rock autographs pipes in, but I agree with the the others...that Springsteen looks great.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bruce Juice on July 21, 2012 at 3:02pm

Do you mean Roger Epperson as I'd like to know your opinion on the best Springsteen authenticator. Thanks!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by roger epperson on June 4, 2012 at 8:50am

Unless the photo is distorted in some way this is not authentic in my opinion, it's way too long and just goofy looking all around.  I also do not like the "R" in Bruce at all.

• ▶ Reply