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

Roger Waters BAS / Beckett Certed Forgery

Wanted everyone to be aware of this common Waters forgery style, which is being slipped up by Grad and co. Going to be plenty to choose from after this tour. Another reason not to trust solely the sticker

https://www.ebay.com/itm/272697741523

3 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by David K on June 5, 2017 at 8:32am

No. bu not bcause it was rejeced.I never bothered to try..actually R Epperson said i was GOOD..but this is the second opinion ive got that the Gilmour is not good..so..?? was a lot of work to put the other 3 graphs on it.... Im not sure what it is worth wit the 3 real sigs and one ??? gilmour..... it also has as can e seen stain on it... I got Gilmour myself only 3x of like 25 tries..on a blank white card...his On An Island CD and on the Mom Lapse of Reason LP since Waters had nothing to do with it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on June 5, 2017 at 8:43am

Roger knows his stuff on Pink Floyd. I wouldn't count it out yet.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Corey Moylan on June 5, 2017 at 9:37am

Two signatures with identical styles that I have never seen from Gilmour, even in very rushed settings. I'm not convinced

Permalink Reply by Adam Halloran on June 4, 2017 at 8:47am

There are bound to be problems with ANY TPA. Mistakes are going to happen because of the human entity being involved. The bigger issues are the "close ties" between sellers and TPAs, where certain pieces are deemed authentic on good faith because those sellers either have a good reputation or friendship.

I like Steve Grad, but I was taken aback when they posted a photo of him and Beckett posing with Press Pass. I am not saying that Press Pass is bad (make your own judgement) but a TPA should act like a judge in my mind, be impartial.

The problem is with these modern signatures you almost NEED to trust the source. The problem with that is, when it comes to money there is always going to be the possibility of contamination.

You will always have to use your own best judgement no matter what other opinion you receive.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nick Maas on June 4, 2017 at 8:59am

You got it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rich on June 4, 2017 at 9:03am

Yeah. My knowledge of both parties is more limited than that of other members of this forum, but that looks like a relationship based on profit over integrity. Regardless, these types of business relationships undermine any ability to be the authoritative TPA they apparently striving to be.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by wascher on June 4, 2017 at 9:21am

I normally don't get involved in these types of discussions - but I just ran into this today.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Michael-Jackson-Signed-Autographed-8x10-Pro...

A secretarial Michael Jackson with a full LOA from Beckett being sold by autographs-for-sale on eBay

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nick Maas on June 4, 2017 at 10:17am

Press Pass also had a Beckett certed Beach Boys poster that clearly had a fake Carl Wilson autograph.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike White on June 20, 2017 at 2:03pm

There are bound to be problems with ANY TPA. Mistakes are going to happen because of the human entity being involved.

I don't know that I necessarily agree with this.

If you stick with solely what you know and err on the side of not passing anything that you find even slightly questionable, then any forgeries you pass will be as good as real.

A fake $100 bill that's indistinguishable from the real thing, even by the experts in the Secret Service, is as good as a real $100 bill. There is no practical difference because nobody can find any difference.

Similarly, if there's an autograph that everyone, experts and laymen alike, agrees is good, then it's good--regardless of who actually signed it.

Any TPA who keeps their knowledge current and only authenticates those pieces won't have many, if any, problems.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Adam Halloran on June 20, 2017 at 2:12pm

Absolutely true, but that is why people like Frank Caiazzo have such a great reputation, because his focus is solely on The Beatles.

However I still believe there are going to be mistakes made, unintentionally, when it comes to trying to decide whether a modern scribble signature is real or fake.

I believe it is smart to error on the side of caution, but some examples of modern celebs can be so awful or rushed that it would just be safer to say inconclusive. That doesn't make it any easier on the person who saw the celeb sign it and are trying to sell it though.

I do think some TPA's bite off more than they can chew and for sure need to scale back and regain a positive reputation in the market.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike White on June 20, 2017 at 3:38pm

I believe it is smart to error on the side of caution, but some examples of modern celebs can be so awful or rushed that it would just be safer to say inconclusive.

That's what I'm saying: it's possible for a TPA to only certify when they're as close to certain as possible, not dealing in questionable.

The issue with that is it doesn't get them clients. When you deem 99% of the items that come in as "Unable to authenticate", then 99% of the people won't give you business. Your word will be gold, but that won't mean much if people send their business elsewhere.

I don't have evidence to back this up, but I'd be willing to bet that people generally send stuff to a TPA because they want it to be authenticated, not because they want to find out if it's real or not. Until that changes, TPAs will keep erring on the side of giving people what they pay for.