Too many things that look false IMO (and the opinion of some of my collectors friends in the US and Europe). Any opinions here?

Views: 1629

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

first one could be ok ? not others

I'm not that hot on later solo Paul's but I concur with Ricardo's opinion. I'd say the first signature has a fair chance of being genuine but I don't like the other two.

All three come with a COA from Epperson at RR auctions....

I rate all 3 as false - very easy to spot IMO.

What features about the first one are you concerned about? I've see a few genuine ones that look like this

So nobody appears to like the two signed photos. The consensus on the first autograph is mixed. Could someone who thinks it is not authentic explain what makes them believe so?

I don't like the extra round P, the unusual u, the bottom of the l, the unfinished M, or the C-swoop. It could be real, but there's way too many unusual things in 1 autograph for me to like it.

I dont like everything after "Paul"....

It is funny - nobody likes them - but they all have a COA from Epperson and if you look at the prices reached in the recent RR auction most of the bidders had no trust either...

First might be real. Others... not likely but still possible. It's sometimes a bit hard to judge on Paul's graphs from the past couple of years...

I dislike all 3, too.

Word. I also dislike those cold and hard Maine winters. I just learned that Maine weathermen are colder and harder than the weather!

Yeah, Maine is a disaster. Just gotta buckle down and try to make it through. Happy to see Spring here again.
I also don't like the two signed photos.

RSS

© 2009-2017   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Community Manager.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service