Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by john connor on June 17, 2019 at 7:12am

The Autographs look fine , However I see this paper has been glued to a piece of stock card to bleed the ink through around each name . I doubt this was a case to warrant because of the tear through Starr  ? -  But I have seen plenty of  examples like this in the last 14 years ...1964 period , so look good to me - Any history or where this appeared from ?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Autographtastic on June 17, 2019 at 9:51am

It just says signed in 1964, which matches your opinion. Are you sure the paper is glued down to a backing? If it is, then it's not been affixed particularly well as the edges appear to be loose from the backing in certain areas.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by spaceman on June 17, 2019 at 1:48pm

A great set of signatures, well spaced with no overlapping. Very nice set !!!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Invest_In_Graphs on June 17, 2019 at 8:23pm

I have looked at this, and looked again. I just don't like it. I think they're really good attempts, but I just don't like it. That's why I'm not bidding on it in the auction that ends soon.

There are a number of problems. Here's one - Paul's "t" isn't wide enough. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by fab432 on June 18, 2019 at 4:52am

I also have mixed opinions on this set.  It’s too perfect, very carefully signed, lacks the flow I’d expect to see from four individuals signing at the same time. I’m not bidding either.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on June 18, 2019 at 5:00am

+1 same observations here.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Cushman on June 18, 2019 at 5:20am

It's not by the "Southern California Forgers"...it's not a Joe Long set...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by john connor on June 18, 2019 at 6:53am

I emailed the sale of this piece to ask questions yesterday. No answers were  given & no reply even to the question of stuck down in the centre or glued onto over card base ? On closer inspection I see other members views & as previously mentioned these sets are in abundance in the market place over the last decade IMO + in any event the paper was Est £2000/£3000.

Subsequently it closed at £1400 on the block today . I think that says it all !

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Autographtastic on June 18, 2019 at 8:14am

I agree with the comments that they look almost too neat and perfect. If it is the work of a forger, they have some serious talent. It's a shame they can't put it to use in less deceitful way ...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by john connor on June 19, 2019 at 7:18am

Yes unfortunately its a good FAKE 100% & seem to be turning up 8 days a week now !Once you have a trained eye these are easily spotted when studied my friend , that's why as a good community we can come together on this site & fish out the bad as Money certainly cant buy you a clean genuine set whilst the deceitful are active!

Just before spaceman comments another comment was made by George Enrique saying this set was a ( nice 1964 set )  but has been withdrawn & taken down now , I think he should have kept this post up & explained more why he thought this as in his comment ? rather than deleted the post as the discussion went on ... as I like George & his posts !

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Invest_In_Graphs on June 19, 2019 at 7:34am

John, I thought you liked this set. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by john connor on June 19, 2019 at 9:17am

Hi , No...not at all as I explained they looked fine & good as they do to an untrained eye & to get the discussion started really with my comment , but after taking a more serious look & clipping this set plus magnifying the said piece Two of us & a Strong IMO - its a Fake , I don't like it & clearly what I see .

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page