Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on October 28, 2013 at 12:52pm

I'd like to see a clearer pic of the signature, but unfortunately it doesn't appear to be authentic.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jake Resnikoff on October 28, 2013 at 1:03pm

These are the only pics I have on my phone.  What makes you say that?  It was supposedly gotten in 2006

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on October 28, 2013 at 1:14pm

In my opinion, the shape of the signature looks substantially different from an authentic Paul signature.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jake Resnikoff on October 28, 2013 at 1:20pm

I have compared it to many and it seems very similar to me.  What part are you talking about?  I am really just wanting to learn.  All your help is useful. 

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• IMG958665.jpg, 133 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on October 28, 2013 at 1:48pm

I agree with Ballroom. I do not believe it is authentic.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jake Resnikoff on October 28, 2013 at 1:52pm

Any reason why?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on October 28, 2013 at 1:56pm

the letter formations and relative heights are way off.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jake Resnikoff on October 28, 2013 at 2:00pm

Thank you all

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Cushman on October 28, 2013 at 1:58pm

No...it's a forgery...seen this type before...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jake Resnikoff on October 28, 2013 at 2:00pm

Thank you

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Baldock on October 28, 2013 at 4:32pm

The P the L the M all look off to me

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ricardo on October 28, 2013 at 5:00pm

Does not look authentic to me I'm afraid

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page