Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Daniel Alayof on January 2, 2020 at 11:16am

You can see all the unboxing photos and videos on this FB group:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/356569274891613

Ask to join and I will confirm :-)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by fab432 on January 2, 2020 at 8:32am

Still don’t like this signature !!!  Unless I was there when he signed it I’d take a pass!!!  I hope I passed the audition !!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ricardo on January 3, 2020 at 2:31am

Nothing about this looks genuine to me... and if it was, I wouldn’t want it as it looks so atypical...I don’t think many experts/ auctioneers etc would pass this as real

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel Alayof on January 3, 2020 at 5:04am

Although it's an atypical autograph, there is no doubt that it's authentic because it's in an official limited edition signed book by Paul. Saying that it might be not authentic is like saying an autograph in a Genesis publications book is not authentic. 
Although we know it's 100% authentic, still you and others say that it might be not real. Now, what does it tell us about the world of autographs? And the world of autographs authentication?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Invest_In_Graphs on January 3, 2020 at 5:41am

Good points, Daniel.

To answer your question,  it tells us that:

1) Everyone has an opinion, and intelligent minds can differ.

2) Even if something is real, it can look "off" enough that an authenticator may fail it or a buyer won't buy it. 

3) Despite its source, the true authenticity of an item may never be known. 

4) Everyone has a different comfort level as to how "traditional" an autograph must look for them to give it a thumbs up.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on January 3, 2020 at 8:49am

Daniel, was your motivation for posting this signature that you "knew" was authentic, to try to use the "a" that resembles "e" argument that the ones Ballroom exposed are also authentic?  That signature style is different from the one you posted, and does not change my opinion about those forgeries. As for this one, you ask what it tells us about the world of autographs?  It tells me not to throw 4 grand away on a crappy signature like this.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel Alayof on January 3, 2020 at 10:42am

Terrier, you are right, this signature is different from the forgeries Ballroom showed, but the "e" and "a" issue is almost the same. I guess 99% of what Ballroom showed are real fakes, but maybe 1% are real, I guess we will never know.   

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on January 3, 2020 at 11:22am

I don’t recall any mention of an “e” and “a” issue in the other discussion. Maybe there was and I missed it. I’ll have to read through it again.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on January 3, 2020 at 11:53am

I agree with you Daniel.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on January 3, 2020 at 9:59am

It tells us that Paul is an inconsistent signer, that there are good forgers of his signature, and that the combination of the two can sometimes make it particularly difficult to distinguish real from fake. He’s “Jerry Lee Lewis lite.”

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel Alayof on January 3, 2020 at 10:43am

+1

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ricardo on January 3, 2020 at 12:34pm

Yes, well I’ve had auctioneers at Christie’s and Sotheby’s say to me that they wouldn’t sell some of my Maccas because they did not look authentic , even though I got them in person !! And these are ‘experts’ . They will not pass atypical autos very easily , and Macca’s signatures are becoming inconsistent these days 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page