We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks.
Authenticity is Everything
Is this Nirvana Real?!?
- Attachments: No photo uploads here
-
-
nirvana.jpg, 122 KB
-
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by autographcollector1 on
-
Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on
-
Yuck. Thanks.
-
-
I don’t wish to sidetrack this discussion, and I have no experience with Nirvana and no opinion on this piece. But what I am intrigued by is the nature of the discussion. Specifically, I often read here on AML that only the ink matters, that everyone has a story and that no story should validate or invalidate any signature. Not this time though? This time it’s whats the story and the seller has fakes in his/ her store so this one is automatically no good - regardless of the ink? I know this is a dangerously subjective hobby but the hypocracy is utterly amazing.
-
Permalink Reply by Joe W. on
-
Just putting in my two cents. Who the seller is does matter, at least, to me. When I see something I like and I've never heard of the seller, I check out his/her inventory. If I see too many red flags, I run. I make enough mistakes without taking the extra risk. I know others may feel differently or have other more effective ways of dealing with unfamiliar sellers.
-
Permalink Reply by Bjorn VDB on
-
Nirvana is one of the most difficult signatures to authenticate, easy to forge and very expensive. I would only consider buying something with rock solid provenance and a respected COA like Epperson.
Why would you consider buying a Nirvana from a crappy seller that sells dozens of forgeries. The ink doesn’t lie and it is the most important thing that’s true. But other aspects are important too.
It is also impossible to buy a Nirvana for 700 dollar.
-
-
Christopher,
Some members may think that only the ink matters, but that's not what I think, and many members think similarly.
You're right, that stories rarely matter, except ones you often hear sellers tell along with obvious fakes—those are warning signs.
Actual provenance on the other hand HUGELY matters. Provenance can be who is selling the autograph, verifiable documentable prior sales of the autograph, the original source (seller) of the autograph, with image support as far as it can go back; things like that, and the reputations of the persons throughout the chain of provenance.
In this case of this seller, the autographs provenance links directly to a seller with a high percentage of highly questionable autographs. They're questionable both from the way they're signed and by the prices asked. A dealer rarely prices his or her inventory at a fraction of the price they could readily sell a genuine example for. This is a dealer to avoid, period. Even if the autograph looked very likely genuine, its provenance is now tainted by its current seller.
-
-
I personally believe, and always have, that background matters. I’m far less likely to dismiss a piece or consider it tainted by who is selling it. I suspect that some enter into the business of buying and selling as it may appear to be a marginally profitable side gig. Those who do this may not have any idea of the market value or relative rarity of what they’re dealing with and certainly no experience authenticating. On top of that, from time to time here someone will post an authentic item that they found on ebay for a price far less than market. Should these automatically be considered fake because the seller didn’t know what he/ she had? Now clearly, most sellers of volumes of fake items probably understand what’s they’re doing. And sometimes completely irrespective of the seller, a piece is just totally wrong (Pink Floyd The Wall display on ebay right now for like $13,000, for example). I’m not suggesting otherwise. But the next time someone shouts that only the ink matters, particularly to be disparaging, lets take a more balanced and rational approach and remember that overall context matters. That’s all I’m sayin.
-
-
for nirvana ill chime in as i work indirectly for a couple years with them
tracking there back story helps with this band.as theres so many fakes and there very hard to authenticate.if u can get something directly from some who worked with or dealt with them and can back it up it definatly will help.
some one from the lable , managment or direct access to band on tour ,belive it or not not many people who work directly on the road or with the actualy band dont ask for autographs first we dont care ,second its kinda of frownd on.
-
-
The item should stand on its own, yes. Doesnt sound like this person has any paerwork or proof to back it up, just pass.
Nirvana is tough- they only wrote first names and they wrote like children almost.
Pretty good forgery if it’s bad.
-
Permalink Reply by John William on
-
Thanks for weighing in everybody. Naturally I sought out Roger's quick opinion, and like most of us, the rest of the seller's inventory discredited him/her. Roger did, however, have a favorable opinion of these at first and then wrote back an hour or so later. For what it's worth, Ink and Provenance matter and i think both should be taken into consideration. There is a difference between forgers who sell their own crap and those individuals who would simply sell anything with some scribble on it to make a buck. Those individuals sometimes do come across a good item and not even know it...I was hoping this was that one off. Luckier things have happened. Thanks again forum for all the feedback.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
Photos
Videos
Groups
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
