We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

A Rolling Stones assignment. Is it real?

Awhile back I purchased a Rolling Stones newspaper. It was OKed by Roger Epperson before I purchased it. I didn't see, nor can I now see, there was any problems with it. I matted the paper and eventually offered it for sale on eBay where it was pulled by them.

I have since found out that this item sold on eBay in the past without a problem.

Yesterday, I received information from a member on this site who noticed this in a previous discussion and was informed by them that this is a known forgery style.

To also be fair, I have seen an email where Roger Epperson again(today) responded this set of signatures looks fine. Also, I have in my possession a ticket to the event on the same date as the newspaper, attendance wristbands for the event, and photo of the event site and inside during the concert.

I simply would appreciate to figure out if these signatures are, indeed, genuine or do they appear suspect. I both love and dislike a challenge and this is one to me. Appreciate any and all thoughtful responses.

Thank-you.

0 members like this

Attachments: No photo uploads here

005.jpg, 2.2 MB
006.jpg, 579 KB
007.jpg, 1.1 MB

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on September 22, 2018 at 9:25am

I see nothing wrong with how you presented this, Joe. It was an interesting discussion. Not sure why someone would be "stressed" over it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tiziano Vianello on September 22, 2018 at 9:35am

But i don't understand... Roger Epperson say no good, not genuine????

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on September 22, 2018 at 9:42am

As of yesterday, Roger still maintains it's genuine.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on September 22, 2018 at 10:27am

Thanks, terrier. I've tried to present the facts without name calling nor finger pointing. If anyone should feel stressed it should be me. I own it and it's my money. I can also understand some pressure on the one who sold it to me. But, on others? Why? Maybe the rabbit hole runs deeper?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on September 22, 2018 at 10:50am

I agree. They obtained a ticket and photos from the show, so a newspaper from the same date adds additional provenance to the signatures.

It goes something like this: I attended the show and took photos. Here they are. The only thing I had for the Stones to sign was that day's newspaper.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on September 22, 2018 at 10:58am

I agree on all points with you, Ballroom. I readily admit it's become quite clear, to me anyway, these signatures are not genuine. Still, someone did a lot of work to convince people but why on the silly newspaper. Seems they could have picked a better medium and gotten a few more dollars for their effort. But....it worked....until now.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by goodcat on September 22, 2018 at 11:02am

Interesting set of events

We all know Joe as a good person and upstanding member... no question there

I also agree that "NO-ONE" carries the stress other than Joe himself. The seller was never outed and no names have been publicly slandered.
And not one negative remark was directed towards Mr Epperson either.
SOOOO..... it's all good in the grown-ups sandbox as I see it.

This is soley a discussion to find the truth in a peaceful and mature manner and it has been nothing but respectful in every way.

And YES a big shout out to Steve Cyrkin for this fabulous community... I for one have so much appreciation for this place I can barely express it in words. Thanks Steve.

Joe presents a valid concern though...
Maybe the "rabbit hole" does indeed run deeper?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tiziano Vianello on September 22, 2018 at 11:02am

If roger say real the set is real for me... Roger know the recent signatures of stones ... Sure! The signatures is bad and it's easy to see... But not for this are fake... The more strange signature for me in this set is the keith richards signature... The other have the correct style... For me...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on September 22, 2018 at 11:10am

Just curious, Tiziano. You seem to have an extreme distrust concerning Elvis Presley's signature. Would you say the same on any Presley signature as long as Roger says "Fine" on a quick opinion?

This is NOT a slam on Roger, whom I highly regard. But, nothing should be simply based on anybodies quick opinion exclusively. Nor has Roger had the opportunity to do a full, hands on authentication.

And there seems to be only mounting evidence these signatures are highly suspect to say the least.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rfitzz on September 22, 2018 at 12:00pm

Great point Joe. I am interested in Tiziano's response to this as it somewhat relates back to my previous Elvis discussion. This is a very interesting discussion overall with all of the pieces of corroboration and the signatures themselves. I look forward to hearing more...

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rfitzz on September 22, 2018 at 12:05pm

Having said that, the only thing of substance that I can add to this discussion is my in person autograph from Charlie Watts. I believe it was in 1994 and I think that is also indicated by Charlie on the signature...