Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by MrKite1970 on September 27, 2022 at 7:04am

Thank you very much, appreciate that.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MrKite1970 on May 10, 2023 at 10:49am

IMG_0117.jpeg

IMG_3492.jpeg

Hello, 

I would like to come back to the discussion mentioned below, maybe you remember.

I opened the frame and I‘m confused of what I saw. On the certificate from Frank Caiazzo is mentioned, that the signatures are „on the reverse of a Beatles promotional photocard“, but that isn‘t correct.

It’s just an ordinary photo of the girl (Carol?) who obtained the sigs (as Martin Peters wrote in his post).

Do you have any idea how this could happen, because it will cause problems in case that I want to sell it sometimes?

Thanks for helping.

PS: I apologize for the wrong format

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mark Saunders on May 10, 2023 at 12:07pm

It won’t be a problem. Maybe you can email him. I wouldn’t worry about it. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on May 10, 2023 at 12:41pm

Wow. Martin was right. Apparently it was authenticated in a frame, and it was assumed that it’s a promo card based on the size.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MrKite1970 on May 10, 2023 at 1:54pm

Ok, thank you, I think I will contact him. Maybe he is so kind to change the authentication.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bruce Juice on May 10, 2023 at 4:55pm

I think Frank will change his LOA for the benefit of Mr. Kite. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MrKite1970 on May 10, 2023 at 11:51pm

in that case, a splendid time would be guaranteed for me 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on May 11, 2023 at 10:24pm

I find it pretty odd that Mr. C didn't bother to open the frame before selling it as a signed promo card. I actually prefer the uniqueness of the private photo but I don't know what "the market" would say. I presume that a signed promo card would generally be thought to be more desirable.

I can't say I'm too impressed with the way the photo has been mounted to whatever support it is on. Hopefully those big white tapes are archival and removable.The vintage clear adhesive tape is also not the best archival-wise but I assume it would have bled through to the signed side by now if it were ever going to. Best to leave all the original tape/newspaper etc. well alone.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by fab432 on May 12, 2023 at 2:42am

Frank likely authenticated the signatures from a photo and assumed it was a promo card or was told it was a promo card. Obviously not sent to him by the original owner.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Martin Peters on May 12, 2023 at 4:52am

The small news clipping seems to be describing Ringo Starr who used to own a Ford Zodiac Zephyr automobile.  The top of the article is flipped up to reveal the image of the photograph.  The article does have the month of his birth wrong, however.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on May 12, 2023 at 6:08am

The way the certificate is worded Frank must have sold the signed photo.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tommy Byron on May 12, 2023 at 7:12am

In my opinion it just appears to be a generic letter he wrote up, meaning he didn't necessarily sell the item. Who knows. He may have just been playing the odds. Back then at an event where all the Beatles were present a fan was much more likely to have a promo card on hand vs. a regular photo of themselves. In general sellers don't remove signed items from frames. And mainly for this type of reason here. A big surprise could be waiting on the other side. Either it is not what you expected or the condition may not be great.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page