Tags:
I don't understand why anyone is giving him a hard time about the signatures still looking "fresh" so to speak. I have plenty of autographs that were signed 20+ years ago that look like they were signed recently. Do you all just display your autographs with sunlight constantly hitting it so that it fades!? Seriously, they don't fade unless they hit UV rays. Mine look just fine whether they were signed yesterday or 20-30 years ago.
The reason he is getting a hard time Tyler, isnt b/c the autographs look fresh. I have tons of fresh looking autographs that are quite old. People are giving him a hard time for 2 reasons.
One is that he came on this board to try and test the members. Which is a ridiculous practice, and will ultimately result in members not commenting on threads at all.
And two, and the biggest reason, is b/c the autographs are blatant fakes. Not only are all the autographs fake, but they were signed by the same hand.
The autographs looking new does raise some suspicions on old items, but it means nothing in the long run. The signatures are what matters, and these are fake.
In the context of albums that look well aged, worn, creased, faded etc. - I think it's a valid question as to why the signature ink looks pristine.
Am I the only one who has noticed a recent increase in the number of discussions being posted to unnecessarily test the authentication skills of members? Collectors will continue to offer opinions here regardless.
Exactly - collectors offering opinions. There are a few paid pros on here, but most people are amatuers (me included) just giving the opinions that these posters are asking for! Other than that I could almost see this guy sneering when he kept saying the "experts"on here. Some people seem to be just coming on here just to try to discredit this site.
© 2025 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service