Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jim Cushman on November 2, 2020 at 3:51am

Exactly...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on November 2, 2020 at 10:28am

It’s a minefield for sure.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on October 31, 2020 at 1:32pm

Remember this discussion? Same forger, I believe.

https://live.autographmagazine.com/forum/topics/beatles-autograph-o...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by fab432 on October 31, 2020 at 1:35pm

You might be correct and it looks like he/she has gotten better with this style/period.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on October 31, 2020 at 1:39pm

You’re right that collectors should find a solid set and hold onto it. So many scammers...

Here’s another one. The authentic set that Spaceman posted is actually posted in this discussion as well:

https://live.autographmagazine.com/forum/topics/january-1963-beatle...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim McFiver on October 31, 2020 at 4:08pm

Interesting posts. The early years seem especially good for forgery since most rip-off artists focus on late 1963-1966, when the band was most accessible to the public.

It's a very frustrating determing legitimate sets today. And finding genuine signatures for cheap just ain't in the cards.

I'd hate to pay premium prices from the few exclusive dealers out there; those prices seem (to me) to be so wrong. But when a band has a legacy such as The Beatles, the crooks always smell money. And thus, fakes, forgeries and just plain junk abound.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on October 31, 2020 at 5:11pm

It is indeed tough to find a good deal, which leaves a lot of room for scammers to produce these perceived bargains. The Beatles signed tons of autographs and there are plenty of solid examples out there, but the demand is so high and you have to compete with the resellers.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by mel torment on October 31, 2020 at 6:23pm

Thanks everyone.

Seems that overall  from the comments posted its a toss up as to their authenticity.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by fab432 on October 31, 2020 at 6:41pm

Mel, I don’t think there is any ambiguity regarding the autographs you posted. They are most assuredly not genuine.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on October 31, 2020 at 7:05pm

+1. The authentic “template” set is included in this discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jamnick Jarms on November 1, 2020 at 5:11am

The majority have apparently been mistaken. I think, the OP is the same as Roger's COA.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on November 1, 2020 at 5:38am

of course Jamnick, we are all wrong.  Believe what you like.

• ▶ Reply

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