Elvis Presley - 5 x 7 signed Expert Opinions ?

Just saw someone's recent Elvis post and thought I would add mine to a discussion.  This came directly from Perry Cox, obviously, a highly reputable source.  A COA from Perry as well.  I've always felt the signature (on a 5 x 7 magazine page) was a little too shaky, with stops-and-starts and it concerned me at the time. However, given Perry's confidence and assurance, I couldn't pass up the opportunity to purchase it. I remember that Perry had explained to me, at that time, that Elvis went through some periods of being in an "altered state" and that could possibly explain it's shakiness.  Just wanted to see if any of you with more experience than I in this area than I had any opinions on this. Thanks and I look forward to hearing from you...

Views: 3294

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on September 2, 2018 at 7:15pm

I recall it being shown here, shown in haste to show the cert, that some big name issued a cert before the item was even shipped to the buyer...but I don't recall who. It is possible it had been seen before, but that was never mentioned because as soon it was observed (unfortunately not screencapped by me) that the item was certified in such a way (via third party scan) the cert and its telling issue date was pulled down immediately. Like many of the best threads it then died. Those with keen memories will remember. 

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on September 2, 2018 at 7:10pm

Not to me or by me it isn't. But then I neither need or care about overpriced and often unresearched slips of paper. Were I to consider an item with "papers" the same work would still remain ahead...for me anyway. When potential buyers start asking for one from me I have suggested another dealer.

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on September 2, 2018 at 9:48pm

Why not post those many high resolution scans here for all to see?

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on September 2, 2018 at 10:15pm

Hey, if it is scary please don't. I thought it would be good for all to have access to the same images that resulted in the "inconclusive" response from whoever. After all, you are asking opinions - why not allow folks to form them properly?

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on September 2, 2018 at 10:18pm

So the only person to see it in hand authenticated it, sold it, and likes it now from a scan we can't see, and he is also willing to take a return? And the "inconclusive" was based on a scan as well?  What do have to lose by showing it?

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on September 2, 2018 at 10:32pm

Forget about me, you have just swept the whole of the experts here aside? NO ONE needs to see it to answer the questions you have raised of your own will?

And wait - you are telling me I have seen enough while refusing to share the scan of the item in question? This is foolishness.

Goodnight. 

Permalink Reply by goodcat on September 2, 2018 at 10:38pm

It's a common request on AML to ask for high rez scans

If we can't have it in hand, then the best scan possible may reveal the truth

If you are really interested in seeking the truth, you may have to unframe that item and take proper photo's

FYI... you may in time get to know the members here and their experience in this hobby/profession

I would advise a bit of tact when responding to members here

Don't use me as an example.... I have no tact hahaha

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on September 2, 2018 at 11:00pm

Yes, you just did. You feel there is no need to show the high res scans in this thread - "nothing to gain" with regard to your own questions as you stated it. What does that say about all the other sets of eyes, good eyes, that could respond if you did post the scans? Say - how do you know showing the proper scans won't help your case? If you don't care, then why the thread? But to not share the scan...

BTW, I will move where I want when I want. This is the second time I have seen you attempt to stifle or get folks to leave your threads. I note this. Everyone here deserves respect (and everyone should see the scan you want discussed). 

Permalink Reply by Rfitzz on September 2, 2018 at 11:11pm

Eric, nothing to gain means I think that anyone who is interested in commenting on this particular thread, already has.  If new people care to comment then I think the attached images are sufficient. 

Btw, feel free to move where you want. I have never before tried to stifle anyone, including you.  I have treated everyone with the respect and the dignity they deserve.  All I have asked, now and in the past, is if you don’t have anything intelligent or constructive to add, please refrain from commenting. 

I now choose to move along myself and refrain from responding to your comments.

Permalink Reply by goodcat on September 2, 2018 at 5:02pm

This Elvis sig is giving me concerns and especially as the story unfolds.

Let's see if I have this straight...

Rich Consola said "uncertain" 

Roger Epperson said "not" or "not likely" in a quick opinion

Yourself and many AML members have reservations

The ONLY person who states "Yes" is Perry Cox

Does this sound about right?

Although I personally believe it's "likely" authentic, I would NOT buy this piece because of so much uncertainty and because I'm not 100% comfortable looking at it. 

I also know that R. Epperson has been studying Elvis for I believe well over 20 years. 
Rich Consola is top notch as well. 
Perry Cox has a good reputation.

Is 2 outta 3 not bad? (song reference btw lol)
In this case, 2 outta 3 IS indeed bad.

Take this further...
If you were to sell this item here on AML, I wonder if Steve would allow it?
Usually if an item is questionable, he won't allow the sale to continue.

Food for thought

Permalink Reply by Rfitzz on September 2, 2018 at 7:10pm

"Rich Consola said "uncertain" -  He said inconclusive at this time, he intends to continue to look at it further to attempt to make a definitive conclusion. 

"Roger Epperson said "not" or "not likely" in a quick opinion" -  I don't know the answer to that, he consulted with Rich

"Yourself and many AML members have reservations" - As I said, my only reservations were prior to purchasing, those were alleviated. There is nothing wrong with getting more opinions and information and having the prerogative of possibly changing my mind based on those opinions and information. I am not an expert and I didn't guarantee it for life.

"The ONLY person who states "Yes" is Perry Cox" - No, YOU, in fact stated that you believe it to be authentic.  Also, I Believe it to be authentic. Perhaps now might be a good time for you to reveal the "traits" that led you to come to that conclusion.

"I also know that R. Epperson has been studying Elvis for I believe well over 20 years" - agreed, he has indeed. 
"Rich Consola is top notch as well" - Also agreed, in fact, I'll go further - He has gone above and beyond with regard to this piece in an attempt to get a definitive answer - extremely caring and professional.
"Perry Cox has a good reputation" -  Disagree. Perry Cox has an impeccable reputation for being an honest, thorough, detailed and methodical collector and businessman.

Finally, "If you were to sell this item here on AML, I wonder if Steve would allow it?" - I can't speak for Steve - perhaps he would like to weigh in on this... I look forward to it.

Thanks

Permalink Reply by goodcat on September 2, 2018 at 7:17pm

"The ONLY person who states "Yes" is Perry Cox" - No, YOU, in fact stated that you believe it to be authentic.  Also, I Believe it to be authentic.

What did I miss?

Isn't this Elvis certed by Perry Cox?

Yes I did say I believe it to be authentic. I did NOT say I think it's 100% Legit. 

There are definitely traits of Elvis' hand in this item as far as I can see.
My point is that there are doubts about this Elvis.
If there was no doubts, then this thread would have long since gone away

RSS

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service