Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Paul Hakimian on June 18, 2017 at 11:41am

Definitly not real imo.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Corey Moylan on June 18, 2017 at 3:39pm

Agreed. Poor attempt

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by johnrock on June 18, 2017 at 5:45pm

thanks,paul and corey!  And what about these 2 item? also come from eaby

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Hakimian on June 18, 2017 at 5:48pm

I like the b&w one.looks good..something about the color one that just doesn't look right.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Corey Moylan on June 18, 2017 at 5:53pm

I wouldn't go for either. Both look slowly drawn.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by johnrock on June 18, 2017 at 6:04pm

yes, but its looks better than  other forgerys on eaby

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by johnrock on June 18, 2017 at 6:06pm

speacial the second photo

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Corey Moylan on June 18, 2017 at 6:10pm

There are multiple signs of start/stop in the signature. No fluidity. Multiple large 'dots' at the end of letters which indicate autopen or preprint. Not good imo....I believe it may be related to some of the preprints that Eric Longo found from Gilmours agency

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by johnrock on June 18, 2017 at 6:27pm

thanks a lot, good study

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on June 18, 2017 at 8:26pm

I agree Corey.

See your PM's.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by johnrock on June 18, 2017 at 8:38pm

Thanks, eric

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on June 24, 2017 at 2:23pm

Hi Seamus, overlay of a known preprint and the b/w that went unsold as did the color for $100 ea.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page