Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on September 2, 2021 at 11:20am

No from me.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on September 2, 2021 at 11:35am

It doesn’t look authentic to me either, unfortunately.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Cushman on September 2, 2021 at 12:08pm

"Ahhhhhh....No!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nick Dimeo on September 2, 2021 at 2:38pm

Sorry Joe, another no go(od).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim McFiver on September 2, 2021 at 5:02pm

This set is a horrible set of forgeries, clumsy fakes (although John's has potential).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe Romano on September 2, 2021 at 7:21pm

Hi Jim,

I'm new to this site and I understand that I was a fool buying this but let's not get to harsh

or mean spirited, I compared Ringo's signature with examples on current Frank Caiazzo's 

site I can't find one difference with any cuts/albums he authenticated....

Could you please identify letter by letter what you see as horrible, the one I really had a

question about was Lennon's signature if any, please help me to understand what is

so horrible about this cut, let's have constructed criticism if possible.

Yesterday I did send this to Epperson for the $15.00 quick fee explanation, you can check with

him he actually thought Ringo and George were very close but no cigar.

Thank you for your time really appreciate it, but I do have feelings...

Best regards,

Joe

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on September 2, 2021 at 7:42pm

The letter formations and size relations are off and they are all drawn with the same pressure. It almost looks like a print. The second "g" in "George" shows hesitation as does the "n" in "Harrison - same with the ending upstroke in "Lennon". The whole of the "Paul McCartney" is off in size and execution. Please don't take comments about the signatures personally - folks are talking about the signatures, not you. :)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim McFiver on September 3, 2021 at 4:46pm

Thank you, Eric.

And Joe:  No rudeness or insensitivity meant or implied, just stating the obvious opinion from an original 67 year old Beatles fan.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe Romano on September 3, 2021 at 7:04pm

Thank you for writing back and appreciate your sentiment. We are all entitled to our

opinions and expressions of individuality. If I was out of line I'm sorry.

Great to hear you are 67.... guess what - 67 here as well - March '54...

I told Ballroomdays67 that 1954 was a great year for people.

Now I think we can see more eye to eye to one another.

Take care,

Joe

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dennis Toll on September 5, 2021 at 1:52pm

February 1954.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim McFiver on September 5, 2021 at 4:57pm

Joe:  December, 1953, lol!

• ▶ Reply