We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

Odd Harrison QE 2 menu on eBay

While we're on the subject of George, how about this oddity currently on eBay with a start price of $1,500.

If it were genuine it would be great but I have pretty major doubts. It seems to be trying a bit too hard and there some very odd flowery bits. Parts of the inscription actually look more like Ringo's work (e.g. the "To"). Another big problem is that George was probably not on the ship on the menu date (2 September 1971). According to a blog I saw (that may be wrong of course) he boarded the ship on 22 September. If the dates are right, I hardly think George would have been asked to sign a three week old menu.

Thoughts?

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 4, 2017 at 12:42pm

Hello All,

Beatleworld and I have become friends in here, and we were talking about this menu. I said that I had little to add to what was said here. I had mentioned, in another thread, every other researcher/author, Cunard employee and dealer I know and questioned find that date problematic for the reasons already laid out. My point was that, while certainly not impossible, it would be very unlikely, and should raise one eyebrow for caution. That was what I was trying to say. And this bit from correspondence that perhaps would be useful added here:

ll I can offer is the following analogy, which I should probably add to the thread:

Let's pretend it was known that John Lennon visited the...top of the Empire State Building on July 4th, 1976, for arguments sake. Let's say you need a ticket to be on the Observation Deck. These tickets are dated and throw-away bits of paper. Jump ahead 41 years. You are offered a perhaps slightly unusual Lennon signature on a ticket for the Observation Deck - dated 3 weeks, or even 1 week earlier, late June. How do you interpret this? Is there a suggestion? Does an eyebrow go up? Should it? Could you just totally ignore the date? Should you?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 4, 2017 at 2:58pm

Beatle, I understand you know more about Beatles autographs than I. That is obvious. Please stop saying I am stating, or have stated, that your autograph is forged/fake etc. I have not said that. I do not agree that everyone in this thread but me thinks dates of items and dates of who was where and when are totally irrelevant.

I am now learning that the date of the item signed, and the dates of who was where and when are to be totally ignored in the end. This is a lesson I will pass on.

I guessed it would be a letter from Frank that you show, and it is. It does not change my sole suggestion of additional caution when dealing with such a date discrepancy at all (that is and was my whole point).

The dates of the item signed, and when who was where will always be of importance to me in these determinations. They are part of a puzzle.

You asked "who cares about the date?" - if I were a prospective buyer the first thing out of my mouth would for an explanation of the those discrepancies. After looking into the matter further, I would then move on to another Harrison. That is me. Not you.

Anyway, I can't add anything more.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 4, 2017 at 3:26pm

You know the facts. You will find I am not known for making things up.

It is beginning to look like you have more of a problem with the date than I did. Why you say a 1 week discrepancy when we corresponded when it is actually 3 weeks I don't know or care anymore. You say it all doesn't matter anyway.

I was past this, you friended me and started in with (repeat) questions again which I tried to answer nicely. Your apparent inability to discuss this w/o getting offensive in PM has ended this discussion.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Adam Halloran on October 4, 2017 at 3:22pm

I will say that Frank is among the top of a handful of people I would even trust when it comes to vintage Beatles signatures.

Congratulations!!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on October 4, 2017 at 4:00pm

An LOA doesn't necessarily mean "end of discussion", although with a Caiazzo or Tracks LOA it's almost certainly authentic. Unless an authenticator can claim a 100% accuracy rate, you have to use your own judgement to a certain extent. As far as the George signature is concerned, it looks good to me.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Adam Halloran on October 4, 2017 at 4:05pm

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 4, 2017 at 4:12pm

+1 from me as well.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva on October 4, 2017 at 9:08pm

Has Frank started doing letters of authentication for items he doesn't sell? Maybe only for friends or fellow dealers? Quite an impressive turnaround time - or did Frank receive a scan before the item was sold?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 4, 2017 at 9:22pm

Interesting.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 4, 2017 at 9:59pm

"Has Frank started doing letters of authentication for items he doesn't sell? Maybe only for friends or fellow dealers? Quite an impressive turnaround time - or did Frank receive a scan before the item was sold?" - a pug called eva

Best observation in this thread. Especially interesting as the Ciazzo letter now appears edited out? Actually, a lot seems edited out. Maybe I can't find it? I hate when I forget to take screencaps.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on October 4, 2017 at 10:33pm

Harrison auction ended 9.28 5:15 pm, Ciazzo letter posted, and pulled, on 10.4.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by michelle on October 4, 2017 at 11:39pm

also the seller was UK based and frank is in usa so getting the menu to him and getting the menu and the coa returned so quickly is even more impressive