Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on March 5, 2018 at 2:16pm

Hi Nicky, how can you tell he is "signing your album"? That "proof" photo shows nothing at all?

Permalink Reply by marc e on March 5, 2018 at 2:47pm

the photo is worthless of him signing something

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on March 5, 2018 at 3:18pm

Concur with others that you can't tell what he's signing.

I think it's a good signature though.

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on March 5, 2018 at 3:27pm

I ran this seller though the search here - at least one member here says this seller swiped his own proof photographs to boost sellers sales. I don't know this signature, but I can't stand it when folks use these photos - they speak directly to integrity IMO.

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on March 5, 2018 at 6:08pm

Yeah i hate that too. Drives me crazy when I see sellers using stolen proof pics.

Permalink Reply by goodcat on March 5, 2018 at 3:33pm

It looks like a legit sig

but as the other's have stated, that photo is meaningless unless you aquired these items yourself

If you purchased it, then why did you buy now and ask questions later? 

Do the photo and LP match up in age, because that's a newer LP pressing

Permalink Reply by nicholas pansini on March 5, 2018 at 3:59pm

The photo and record appear to be contemporary signed in Seattle on Feb 6, 2016. 

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on March 5, 2018 at 4:10pm

Followed a hunch - seller is indeed using "Nicky's photo" for 2 additional Butlers live on eBay now. Signatures aside, I just don't like this practice or what it implies about sellers customers. One reason I do not like this can be seen in the title Nicky gave to the JPEG posted - "Geezer Butler singing my album".

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on March 5, 2018 at 6:11pm

The photo doesn't "suck" - he is misrepresenting it. Why is he using the same exact photo to sell other different LP's?

Permalink Reply by nicholas pansini on March 5, 2018 at 6:41pm

Thank you Tim very much

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on March 5, 2018 at 6:46pm

Then why call it "Proof" at all when it proves nothing? Why not say "the photo shows when I met him" or "one of the times I met him"? It can be misleading - as here (Nick's JPEG title). I am speaking to the practice of using inappropriate terms (proof!) and images (not showing anything) to sell autographs, not whether Lance is "an Honest Person!!"

Permalink Reply by J. Mikael on March 5, 2018 at 10:23pm

While I agree that the practice is silly, I'm not sure if it's worth getting hung up on the terminology. I don't think the terms, or their proper usage, has been defined explicitly enough for that.

When I see "proof" in the title, I mostly expect it to be a shorthand term for something else, usually not amounting to anything more than window dressing, a little something to give your listing some extra flair.

More explicit expressions like "exact proof" should of course be accompanied by exactly that, and nothing less.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 5
• Next ›
• Page