Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on November 27, 2017 at 4:39pm

Here's an image with all 3 Jaggers for comparison:

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Josh Board on November 28, 2017 at 9:24am

The Mick and Morrison are good, in my opinion. 

I don't think people understand autograph authenticity. They say things like "But look...the M isn't the same as the one I got in 1974." It doesn't work that way, folks.

And, as Roger explained about the book of autographs...I've purchased collections like that before. Where I get 300 albums that are signed, from somebody that was a hardcore collector or worked at a concert venue, and has ticket stubs with all the concerts. Does that mean one can't be fake in the bunch? Well, yes...yes it does. Because...why would somebody that had a personal collection (that wasn't an autograph dealer), have a fake one in their collection, when they went to the venue and got them signed? The family is selling them because the dude died.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MarkG on November 28, 2017 at 10:38am

Josh, I don't disagree with what you are saying.

Having collected 3 specific music artists/bands autographs since 1978 (Bowie, Floyd and the Stones), I am not daft enough to think that many variances can happen according to hundreds of factors including the surface (or lack of) they are signing on, how hassled/rushed they are, signature changes over decades, different pens etc and even the mood they are in.

In the case where an opinion is asked for in an area where you seen the artists concerned giving their autograph over many years, the first instinct is to say either that's bang on - or that doesn't seem quite right - or that's a total forgery. Even then its only an opinion of one person...

In this instance after Roger added the background story and the credence and Steve kindly put all 3 side by side, it appears it is a genuine signature with some nuances that are pretty unusual and not often seen but nonetheless probably genuine which is good news for Nicholas. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sling on December 17, 2017 at 8:27pm

whast you mean is that there would be no known band intentional forgeries. But secretarial and manager signed things could easily get into the mix

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Xwiesy on November 28, 2017 at 6:41pm

This is why I dont like showing my sigs any more- everybody is an “authenticator.”

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by goodcat on December 16, 2017 at 2:13pm

Can't say I agree with this comment. The more eyes the better. And many people here have great eyes. Showing what I am interested in buying is better than hiding it. I've bought many items and passed on many items based on the inputs of AML. And because I have a wide range of interests, I can't possibly know them all. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on December 16, 2017 at 2:27pm

Agree - I have no problem showing my items and autographs. I love all the different input and one can learn too. All seems good to me. And much of the qualities and various presentations really need to be seen. Like a copy photo and a first gen - easiest to differentiate when seen.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on December 15, 2017 at 1:53pm

Yes, I have a larger flat on scan from when it was loose on eBay perhaps last year. I saw the current scan already and also the one used in the previous sale. What are you getting at?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on December 16, 2017 at 8:38am

+1 MarkG

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on December 16, 2017 at 9:36am

+1 re 1979 45 Bowie comments re MarkG

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on December 18, 2017 at 5:27pm

PS - Alexander, all that handwriting in the lyrics of the guestbook were of no use? I thought you'd recognize this one from the sale!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on December 19, 2017 at 2:55am

Alexander, 

I thought the scans should be posted again so everyone can follow:

Alexander, you wrote that #2 above was "very questionable", but this signature has been shown to be sourced from the guestbook of the Château d'Hérouville. You then decalred #4 was "fake" - I thought some more of the page might interest you - I found it while looking for the source to post for you:

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• Next ›
• Page