Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by roger epperson on May 30, 2013 at 5:06am

Monty

Mike has been a friend of mine for well over 20 years.  I don't write him letters so excuse me for mis-spelling his name.  That has NOTHING to do with this.

Mike; being the very smart collector that he is knows what kind of pen to use on a black album cover.  It would have been correct if you had said that Mike "usually" doesn't use paint of silver markers as would be true for John.

Permalink Reply by Beatleworld on May 29, 2013 at 3:33pm

Hi Jim, I'm not 100% sure why you're getting so upset, you think The album's no good, that's cool & your opinion..which you are entitled to...however making personal & derogatory comments is not on, there's just no need for it man....I've never had any dealings with you so can not comment on your knowledge or experience, however have had some dealings with Roger, during the past 10-12 years and all I can say about him is that he really is THAT good, I don't & have never had a shred of doubt about Roger's opinions (not blindly !!) he is one of the "too few" good guys, always willing to help others, I for one would bet my last dollar on his say so....in this instance you'll just have to agree to disagree & move on.... All the very best !

Permalink Reply by roger epperson on May 29, 2013 at 3:36pm

that's what these kids do, threaten you into believing.

Permalink Reply by Jim Officer on May 29, 2013 at 4:30pm

Here ya go Rog. Please debuct this.

Gilmours. The fakes all share a similar trate. The pancake '"G", forward slanting "L" and incorrect "imour" letter formation. David signed with a backwards slanting under swoop. This is even present in the more signed out Islands CD's. Also, when he dies do a full name more often then not he dots both eyes. This is just small portion of what is wrong with them. The "David" portions are easily forged so I can look past that as the soul reason for knowing these are fakes but I should point out how he is finishing the "d" in David is not quite right in any case.

The Mason's are a HUGE tell in the case. They are all the exact same. Scrunched up from left to right, the smaller letters are too tall in relations to the general roundness he signs with when he is doing a full namer. You can see by the examples the subtle roundness of the smaller letters, this is missing on any of the fakes. Also, the "M" in Mason is horribly off. Like the "Gil" in Gilmour's signature, getting the right shape and style is not easy with the "M" in Mason. Forgers cannot do it right.

The Wrights could all pass if it were not for compounding evidence with all the others so I will leave them alone other then to say he got sloppy on the WYWH. Look weird.

Waters. They all share the same issues except for 1. The "R" is just plain wrong. The upper angle of the "R" is weird, the "oger" is even strage even considering how sloppy with guy can sign. The overall shape of the "W" and how it relates to the "aters" is not aligned right. The "Roger" and "Waters" is not aligned right. They are all not only identical but just plain wrong. Too many subtle inconsistencies to list. I will say however the one dark signed with Roger signature that is slightly different is pretty good. I would say it would fool me if not for the being with all the other fakes. As another member said who agree's with me there are guys out of the NY area pumping these out. And Roger has a home in NY and racks there so this guy could have used a real one and just finished but that is me giving way to much credit.

So expert Roger. Please offer more of an opinion then just "I think it's real". Cause that is crap.

And Carl, I am so upset because Roger should know better. He has been getting autographs for longer them me. I started in the real early 90's and I study signatures, I buy and sell, I collect. I love classic rock stuff signed in modern times. Like the sharpie era... mid 80's and up. I would consider myself an expert with several band, and not with others. Roger should know this is fake, and the other 3. It's upsetting bro. So if I am offending others I'm sorry. This is between me and Rog.

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• Pink.jpg, 104 KB
• Mason.jpg, 114 KB
• Gilmour.jpg, 80 KB

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on May 29, 2013 at 5:29pm

Jim,

This is not between you and Roger. Since you started this discussion, this has been about nothing but you attacking Roger. He rendered his opinion on the piece and posted comparitive examples. He didn't demean you, or call you names, blow things out of proportion, or accuse you of things like you have him. Which, as you can see by reading the responses of others here about your conduct, make you look like a jerk and someone invested in knocking Roger down.

Be decent, fair and civil or leave.

Permalink Reply by Jim Officer on May 29, 2013 at 9:18pm

Steve

 I believe this is between me and Roger. He authenticated this piece which is fake and I demanded an explanation and so far I have go nothing from him. All he did was say "I think it's real" and showed me some photos and a few real items that have nothing to do with the fake Meddle, and the 3 other matching fakes I found on this site. I am the only one who has offered any kind of detailed reasoning why they are fake and by the same hand and he and his "followers" are just ganging up on me. I got a couple people on here who agree with me but you wouldn't know cause his blind believers are not offering educated opinions, they are just defending Roger's opinion with ZERO knowledge in the matter and clogging up the whole message strand. I posted this to get opinions on the album. I doing so I discoverd more fakes by the same person. I really don't think people need to be diluting this forum with "If Roger thinks is real then I do".

I even got 2 messages today saying the items are clearly not real.

This was messaged to me from a stranger when Roger called me a child. I quote "Hi Jim, I Don't know what his problem is,even a child can see that this is not genuine and when he gets told this he sees he has had enough" I am not sure what the second half means but anyway I asked said stranger to post a comment and defend my opinion I got this. "There is no point defending anyone on here as the vultures will keep pecking at you as i have experienced before,its just a waste of time with people who only listen to one person on here and they attack anyone who goes against them"

Ya know, I appreciate Roger, who is one of the better authenticators out there being on this site helping others. But what I don't appreciate is how his cronies push people around who go against him all the time. Roger's opinion should not be Gospel on a public forum.

Permalink Reply by Xperttexpert on May 29, 2013 at 5:39pm

jim, this is pathetic. this is the problem when someone like roger is out there. you and many people look to bring him down. you have a problem that is vindictive and wrong. if you don't think it is real, don't bid on it. everything i have ever seen roger authenticate has always been right on, and i would trust him in a heart beat with any rock and roll item. peace and love.

Permalink Reply by Jim Officer on May 29, 2013 at 9:19pm

Everyone makes mistakes don't they?

Permalink Reply by Monty on May 29, 2013 at 6:36pm

Jim I agree that the album isn't right.  Why does everything have to end up in a bloody fight?  Everyone doesn't have to agree with Roger.  A lot of the times I don't.

Permalink Reply by Jim Officer on May 29, 2013 at 9:19pm

Thanks Monty, I am not crazy.

Permalink Reply by Peter C. on May 29, 2013 at 9:36pm

I read your opinion about Waters´s autograph.... and I think it´s almost the same as telling the feeling "I think its wrong or ok"... It´s very same - you just described what YOU think that is wrong on that particular autograph.

I can assure you that I saw awful Waters genuine autographs and THIS one looks really OK too. Roger´s signature´s are not stable and the rushed ones can get to the extremes. Sometimes only R and W is recognizable - even g in middle of his name is completely unreadable.... About Stephen Duncan´s Waters´s signs - he is lucky to have many of nice ones - not rushed!

Just check mine, which looks different to my eyes to "typical and nice" RW autograph:

Permalink Reply by Jim Officer on May 29, 2013 at 9:59pm

This is a very nice authentic Roger. Very nice in fact. Even though is sloppy, cause roger signs sloppy, it has all the subtle things I want to see in an authentic Roger. Who else signed it? Are those guys in his touring band?

About my opinion. I focused on the Mason and the Gilmour because Roger is such and inconsistent signer. I did not really want to open that can of worms. Anyone who has ever gotten Roger in person knows he writes inverted... is the the write word? His hand position is over the top of the signature... Do you know what I mean? So with that said, whether it is a really nice on like yours, or a sloppy one the back slants are consistent. HOWEVER, I have seen him sign so bad that they are unrecognizable but these fakes I mention are fuller signatures, not excuse for them to be not consistent with genuine Rogers and the only thing they are consistent with are each other, 3 of them are almost identical.

I wish I could sit you down and point out in detail each thing that is wrong, but I can't. It's hard to do in text ya know.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• Next ›
• Page