We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.
Authenticity is Everything
Paul Mccartney?
Doing another test on authentication experts! Please give opinions the more the better
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Joe W. on
-
Frank Caiazzo, Perry Cox, Tracks, Roger Epperson, PSA, JSA, Bickett, along with a number of others are market recognized Beatles authenticators. Their certifications add value and a certain level of protection on your investment as long as they remain credible. Playing one against the other does not add much to the conversation.
As long as the buyer is satisfied is what is most important because the final decision to purchase is on them. There are many authentic autographs I would not buy but that does not mean they are not genuine. Every signature is unique and is subject to varying opinions.
Not a perfect system but it's the best we currently have.
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on
-
+1
-
Permalink Reply by Macca Fan on
-
Perfectly said Joe , I actually think it’s a good signature but it’s not one I would want in my collection
-
Permalink Reply by Invest_In_Graphs on
-
I agree. Can't argue with any of these points.
-
Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on
-
The first test involved what I believe to be a forgery style, and had Beckett disagreeing with themselves. In that case, I feel that the signature review was correct, but it seems that the apparent mistake wasn’t addressed. This one seems to have Beckett rejecting a signature in which a respected Beatles authenticator provided specific provenance.
-
-
In all fairness to Bickett, the provenance was not provided to them. Now, I'm not defending Bickett. In fact, they cost me over $500 in the past week! With that said, Their signature reviews are not equal to a full authentication. May have not changed their opinion but who knows.
BTW, I do like one feature of their signature review. It allows up to five photos for consideration instead of just one.
I would not want their job!
-
Permalink Reply by Ru007 on
-
Joe W I’m very sorry if you feel my process of elimination on who I can feel more comfortable with regarding a TPAs opinion made any member feel uncomfortable,
but I want stop challenging them nor will I stop using there quick opinion options, it’s my money to waste if I choose to, but what I can do is stop posting my finding on this forum and not let the forum know what TPAs give the green/red lights on certain items, I never meant to hurt mislead or make any member of this forum feel uncomfortable with my studies or tests for that I truly apologize and if the forum does NOT want me to post my TPA challenges then I will no longer do again, and offer my sincere apologies
Truly sorry
ROB
-
-
I'm just throwing in my opinion. You are free to discuss, test, and do as you will. Everyone does things a little differently than others. Just one piece of advise, don't over trust TPA services.
Nothing beats your own knowledge and personal experience. Most of all, your satisfaction.
-
-
I agree completely.
I'm sure that I'm not alone when I say that I've seen an LOA from someone respected, and I disagree with their opinion. No problem - I'll pass on the item.
-
-
I've also seen the flip side. I've seen an autograph fail TPA reviews and sell to very experienced collectors who firmly believe the signature is genuine.
-
-
+1!
-
Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on
-
There's nothing wrong with comparing authenticators, but a 2002 LOA isn’t a meaningful comparison with one from recent years.
Information and expertise changes over time. Joe Long forgeries were widely accepted as genuine until about 1993 or so. The real value in an old LOA like that is that it proves that the autograph has been around for a long time. That means a lot.
For me, it’s not a few autographs that matter. It’s how good they are overall.
Photos
Videos
Groups
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
