Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on August 10, 2011 at 7:34pm

Greg,

You've done a ton of research on this...thank you! What about putting your findings on what's the real Jackie Gleason and what's secretarial into a new discussion, with everything clean and clearly spelled out in the opening? I love your sense of humor but everything should be completely clear.

Then collectors and dealers will be able to comment on it, and hopefully we can come up with a consensus we can present to the entire autograph community to see what kind of acceptance it gets.

You've done a remarkable job. I love it. Can't thank you enough.

Steve

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on August 10, 2011 at 7:42pm

although one of the examples provided as authentic appeared to contradict the IsIt study.

However, if you simply look at the flourish of the many you have noted this, to me, would not be from the same person that signed his name, as I provided, as people with terrible penmanship don't out of nowhere develope "outstanding" penmanship.  Typically, it's the other way.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on August 10, 2011 at 7:59pm

You could, but why? Let's get the comparisons of the no-question secretarials to the clearly genuine Gleasons out there to build awareness among collectors. Soon the legit third party authenticators will start calling the secretarials that they're missing correctly as well.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on August 11, 2011 at 6:06am

Mike, wrongamundo.  The black & white signature I provided was written by Gleason himself.  I just opted to show the end result.  It also doesn't imply that it is the "only genuine signature" out there as variations of theme may certainly apply.  But you are right about a number of these submssions and conjectures which is what is missing from this becoming a better signature study inclusive of isItReal.  I also believe the latter has depicted a few in person ones as well Greg however makes valid points along the way on a number of them although one of them seemingly contradicts the IsIt writeup of JA causal relationship.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on August 11, 2011 at 9:11am

greg, that is where I was focused but you had one you posted on a side by side that indicated "in person" and there was no JA contact.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CEE GEE on August 11, 2011 at 6:28am

Iam no expert on Jackie Gleason but I think I may have came across another authentic example that is much cleaner then those secretarial autos in question with a much nicer...fluid and sharper style...I feel the major authenticators may have seen so many secretarial Gleason autos that they automatically deemed them to be authentic...I would say the give away in the secretarial examples are the "M" in the my best wishes...there all exactly the same

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on August 11, 2011 at 6:37am

Airing makes some good points about the in-person that are bonafide in-persons and not the TTM ones that someone is trying to pass off as being obtained in-person.

 

While the "universe" of collectors doesn't necessarily  exist here it is rather interesting that amongst the many that do exist here not one seems to have an in-person obtained one.  Then you have the 3rd party heresay of I heard it thru someone else as in, "Also, a dealer I know did a private signing with Audrey Meadows, Art Carney, and Joyce Randolph. Meadows told him that Gleason didn't sign any of the fan mail. So even she knew!".

 

Until then it is going to be simply conjecture with some more closer than others.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on August 11, 2011 at 9:37am

@Greg,

Mike made a good point, but I know your topic is PSA/DNA as much as the Jackie Gleasons. What about a title revision that mentions Jackie Gleason as well?

What about this:

PSA/DNA and Jackie Gleason: And Away We Go!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on September 29, 2020 at 7:01am

Absolute forgery (CEE GEE's).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on August 11, 2011 at 8:52am

In my view, eBay does little to nothing to limit the forgeries being sold and offered for sale every single day. Then there are the buyers who somehow justify selling forgeries and find a way to sleep at night.

 

Here's an Elvis Presley signed picture with two certifications. http://http://cgi.ebay.com/ELVIS-PRESLEY-SIGNED-PHOTO-Autograph-AMA...

 

The history on this item, it was offered for sale a number of months ago with only the AMA certification. The item was brought by silverscreensignatures for $1,000. Then they sent it to their favorite rubber stamp at GA/GAI and listed it again on eBay. All certs aren't created equal. This item wouldn't have a PSA and a JSA letter. Two certs or not, it's not a genuine Elvis Presley signature.

 

Here's an Elvis Presley signed scarf. http://http://cgi.ebay.com/ELVIS-PRESLEY-SIGNED-SCARF-GIVEN-AUDIENC...

 

These have been sold numerous times on at least two different accounts by the same person. They're obviously facsimile signatures but being sold as authentic and signed at a concert in May 1977. They've sold dozens of these things.

 

That's just scratching the surface of Elvis forgeries on eBay. People truly believe they can buy an authentic Elvis Presley signed item for $100-$300 and continue to bid on this stuff. There are a lot of Elvis Presley autograph listings but only a few are actually authentic. Almost all of them have PSA or JSA certs or are/were being sold by brandesautographs on eBay.

 

Now here's a James Stewart signed sketch. http://cgi.ebay.com/JAMES-JIMMY-STEWART-HARVEY-HAND-SKETCH-SIGNED-J..." target="_blank">http://cgi.ebay.com/ELVIS-PRESLEY-SIGNED-PHOTO-Autograph-AMA-DNA-GA...>

 

It comes with a JSA cert but it's not even close and one of the same patterns I've seen over and over again. These are offered for sale all the time, mostly by the same sellers who must have hundreds of these things.

 

Here's a Charlton Heston index card http://http://cgi.ebay.com/Charlton-Heston-Signed-Autograph-Index-C...

 

It's one of the secretarials which have been documented on this website time and time again, encapsulated by PSA. Are they still authenticating these secretarials, does anyone know? At any rate, they're still all over eBay. Some forgers have even taken to forging the legitimate real R ones.

 

Then there all the reprints on eBay, finding ones that come from authentic signatures are rare. People can sell whatever they want on their websites until authorities become involved but eBay can control what is listed and rarely do in my estimation. They make the money from it. They're practically partners if they do nothing about it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DB on August 11, 2011 at 9:07am

with thousands upon thousands of items going up and down daily it's a never ending battle.  the best we can do is use whatever channels we have to report them (with supporting evidence and not just based soley on our opinions) and hopefully those channels are exercised as we have seen with Hestons that disappear.  Ebay has to then work thru it's channels thereafter and we'd all like to see it move faster.

 

what is concerning however is this statement "Some forgers have even taken to forging the legitimate real R ones."  How is that confirmed and where is supporting evidence to support that statement?

 

I have recently seen a PSA/DNA Char that to me says someone perhaps has updated some exemplars.  On the other hand there is a boatload of Challs with the PSA stamps still in existence.  One doesn't know based on timetables however when those were opined on or if new ones are joining the inventory.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brick Hunter on August 11, 2011 at 3:00pm

I added links the wrong way so none of what I put up is actually clickable, heh.

 

Would you agree that a majority of the items overall sold on eBay as authentic aren't such? In any other business, they'd have to give up selling whatever it is because it's being called authentic and isn't. But it's the seller who takes responsibility of the listing so eBay should patrol it much better than they are in my opinion. They could do that by stopping people like silverscreensignatures who sell a massive amount of forgeries/secretarials that pollute eBay. eBay could even stop selling autographs, not that I'm pushing that position. I think they could and should do more and that they've never done enough.

 

Also, it's a rant? How much supporting evidence do I need? It's what I see. A seller named silentsaregolden is doing it right now as well as a lot of other junk in my opinion.

 

Remember that PSA/DNA had some genuine Charlton Heston exemplars in their files but were still authenticating the bad kind as well. PSA can be a good gauge but it isn't the be all and end all, especially when dealing with classic Hollywood. As to reprints, http://cgi.ebay.com/Charlton-Heston-signed-8x10-photo-rp-MOSES-w-Ph...

 

 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 12
• Next ›
• Page