Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Daniel Alayof on April 3, 2018 at 11:22am

Here are two emails that I got from Roger Epperson. First one when the auction was still active and I asked for his quick opinion. Second email when I got the autograph and scanned it for him with high resolution. In the first email Roger said "It looks authentic in my opinion". In the second email Roger said "Yes, the ink looks live to me too. You are fine". Please take a look at the emails below:
 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel Alayof on April 3, 2018 at 12:38pm

When the auction was still active I also emailed Perry for his opinion. To keep his privacy I will not show you the emails, but I'll tell you what he wrote verbatim. On the first email Perry wrote "It's good in my opinion". When I got the autograph I sent him high resolution scan of it and asked again for his opinion and he answered "I can only comment on the script. And it looks good. Enjoy". Only after this answer I decided to send the autograph to him for examination in person. By email Perry could only confirm the script, but when he saw it and examined it with his own hands and eyes he confirmed that it was real ink made by the hand of George Harrison.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on April 3, 2018 at 1:13pm

Daniel,

As I replied to you in an email in February, "I have mixed feelings about the autograph. It looks very close, and spontaneously signed, but I'm not confident that it was signed by George."

I'm very cautious on rare and popular autographs like this one and Daniele's Lennon because unexpectedly nice examples of such names have been coming out the last few years, and autograph and handwriting reproduction technology is getting better all the time.

Go to RR, HA.com, Sotheby's, Christie's and other major auction sites that often sell Rock, and look up the rare names signed on index cards, and album pages, and see how many pristine, perfectly signed, uninscribed lots you find of music artists from the 1960s and '70s. See what pieces signed by the same or similar names often look like. Many of those sites have archives going back 10 years or more.

Few will be as fresh and perfect as yours and Daniele's. Then to be able to buy your pieces at bargain basement prices, typically from dealers who aren't well known respected sellers in the genre, is especially concerning to me. "Bargains" on rare and popular autographs are rarely true bargains. 

I'm afraid that someday we'll find that pieces like these really were too good to be true.

But that's just my opinion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on April 3, 2018 at 1:33pm

I told him it was probably authentic, but that I couldn't be entirely confident about it because I hadn't seen one quite like it. This apparently turned into my believing that it's fake. I'm still not entirely confident that it's authentic, but I never said it was fake. He proceed to write off my concerns by telling me that this one likes it and that one likes it, and besides that I told him his IP Macca autograph doesn't look real. I never even commented on his Macca autograph. I still think his Harrison has unusual traits, sold for an unusually low price, and there may be a discrepancy related to its provenance. However, apparently I'm not supposed to express any concerns. If you don't want an honest opinion, don't ask for one.

Permalink Reply by goodcat on April 3, 2018 at 2:54pm

Daniel

It's really not necessary to keep posting emails and pleading your case. Are you trying to convince everyone it's authentic or are you trying to convince yourself it's legit?

Are YOU happy w/ your purchase? 

Many/most/all  atypical signatures will have varied opinions. Someone who has doubts doesn't mean it's fake. You just have to live with these facts...period

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by goodcat on April 3, 2018 at 10:03am

Daniel

the positive feedback is mostly meaningless in the world of ebay authenticating

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel Alayof on April 3, 2018 at 10:19am

You said and I quote:
"that's a great signature for a great price"

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by goodcat on April 3, 2018 at 10:45am

these are 2 separate statements and not meant to be connected

it's becoming a broad commentary now

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel Alayof on April 3, 2018 at 10:49am

Have you changed your mind? Or do you still think it's a great signature?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by goodcat on April 3, 2018 at 10:56am

let me be blunt and clear, since you seem to be getting confused on the reply's now

IF, you got Tracks, Cox and Epperson to OK your Harrison sig, then darn straight I think it's a great piece at a great price and I would have bought it too.

However, now you must not take everyone's comments as a direct judgement on this sig as it's now moving in different directions. 

Permalink Reply by KarlKeaton on April 1, 2018 at 4:21pm

I think this is something that we are seeing more of and the trend will probably continue, basically opinions as to authenticity based upon the ‘form’ of the signature put into doubt by possibly legitimate concerns over whether the signature is actually pen to paper or been transferred/replicated by some other method.

I think it’s just an inherent weakness in the process of posting a picture of an autograph for opinions as to authenticity on an Internet forum as opposed to a proper inspection; an autograph can look fine in terms of the formation of the signature but that isn’t proof that the item was actually signed.

I think the only ‘solution’ is for everyone to accept the limitations of opinions based upon reproductions posted on the Internet. 

There’s nearly always the possibility that things aren’t quite what they seem but on the other hand I think that there is also value in getting an opinion from people on this forum. Everybody just has to accept that it’s no substitute for a proper in person inspection of the item.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe W. on April 1, 2018 at 4:23pm

+1

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• …
• 9
• Next ›
• Page