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

Well, there's actually nothing questionable about them to me; I'm just being polite. Among the problems are the completely wrong 'S' and the fact that he simply doesn't write such a large signature.

ebay seller: jwantitihaveit 98.3% Positive feedback

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stan-lee-autograph-SPIDERMAN-WOLVERINE-/251...

Here are 2 completed items from the same seller that I reported when they were first listed. Nothing was done and they were sold to unwitting buyers.

Here's the nice generic signing picture used for "proof", which was appropriated from this blog about the London Super Comic Convention

http://www.liveforfilms.com/2012/02/28/london-super-comic-conventio...

Here are a couple of legit Stan Lee CGC Signature Series autographs for quick comparison.

Views: 16146

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Most of the flaws that you mention happen to be present in the 3 CGC Signature Series examples at the top of this thread that you previously endorsed. (Non-figure 8 'S', trail hugging the name, malformed 'ee')

Not arguing, just saying...a rushed or tired signer can certainly exhibit minor variations like that.

The PGX Stan Lees look okay to me, except the X-Men 1 looks funky as Tom noted. The signature on the Iron Man/Submariner 1 appears to get off to a rough start, but looks fairly consistent with the signature I obtained earlier this year. His signature is getting more compressed and herky jerky.

This is another problem with the goonart sigs... they are too easy flowing relative to Lee's recent signatures. Goonart is replicating an earlier look.

I agree I looks a bit off, but it is almost inconceivable someone would risk ruining a several thousand dollar comic with a fake signature. The addition of the signature is a very small premium relative to the book itself.

I guess anything is possible, but it would surprise me.
Good point. I guess there is some pressure to not totally botch it so even a label can't explain it away, but much of the risk has been removed.

"The addition of the signature is a very small premium relative to the book itself."

This is a good point and I think the lower that premium ratio gets, the less comfortable I feel having the book signed at all.

There's definitely a camp that feels any autograph on a comic defaces it like any other writing would. I'm not on that extreme side, but I don't think I would want my X-Men #1 signed by Stan either. (And that goes double for the specimen he may have turned out above)

X-Men #10? Sure, go for it. But if I was in the market for any of the truly iconic, high-value issues, I'd prefer they were completely clean, as much for resale value as anything else.

You can have a real hard time convincing someone who's not a fan of autographs that anything is authentic unless they saw it signed with their own eyes...no matter what type of certification it has. To these people, it's just another scribble on the cover.

For a key book like X-Men 1, I think CGC Signature Series can add a significant premium to a low grade or restored copy. I would  not add a signature to a higher grade or even mid grade copy, such as this 6.5. A sig may even detract in a higher grade copy where the buyers get a lot more picky.

I would love for you guys to look at this. I always assumed it was fake since I bought it from Park West Galleries on a cruise ship. Looks like this is a great time to dig out and see.
Attachments: No photo uploads here
Full shot
Attachments: No photo uploads here

I think the Stan Lee signed litho is good.

Thank you Mr. Zipper! I'm sure I paid way too much, but thats a relief. Says 42 of 500, hard to see from pic.

Looks spot-on to me.

Let me just repost it right side up for future reference-

Thank you William, I really appreciate it! I guess it's time to frame it!

RSS

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service