Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Gordon O'Steen on November 13, 2011 at 3:53pm

Agreed.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gordon O'Steen on November 13, 2011 at 4:03pm

Oh, I also want to agree with others on this site by saying that even though we all may have different opinions from time, I think you are doing a hell of a job and I thoroughly enjoy the sometimes spirited discussions.  Because, like you, most of us on this site care about the hobby.

Gordon

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on November 13, 2011 at 5:44pm

Thanks, Gordon. And thanks to the others with kind words--and for your care and concern about the hobby.

Working together, I'm confident we can help protect consumers by getting rid of a lot of the fraud and forgery in the autograph field over the next few years. 

And help a lot victims and members of the forgery industry get what they deserve.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on November 11, 2011 at 10:24am

I'm familiar with all of these examples and have scans of several more, and just don't see where the "m", the first "r" and the "s" are consistent. Regrading the overall appearance of his signature, it has a certain style to it that in my opinion the signature in question is missing. I suppose it's a pretty good try, but definitely not as consistent in appearance as it's being made out to be.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thingfish on November 11, 2011 at 11:34am

This one is being auctioned at Christies. I suppose it's fake too. Because the 'orr' is connected to the 'I' and the 'I' isn't a straight line, and 'J' and the 'M' aren't consistent either. And it doesn't look like any of the check or Creatures, or Toronto business card sig that has the curvy 'S'. Just sayin'. Is this fake too? Maybe Christies should send it over to RRauctions for an opinion since they seem to be such the authority ; )

http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/the-doorsjim-morrison/5447331/lo...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on November 11, 2011 at 1:04pm

Thingfish,

One of the things we sadly have to deal with here is that people seemingly invested in the sales of forgeries post autographs for opinions and then try to make us and others look bad after we put time and effort into trying to help them. When you ask for opinions and then ridicule the people generously giving them, it says to anyone reading your posts that you aren't who you represent yourself to be. 

Now I'll be frank. Even tho I'm not an expert, the moment I saw your Morrison I noticed that it didn't look anywhere near 40 years old. It may be old paper but it doesn't look aged. And I noticed that it looked similar to other Jim Morrison pieces people with greater expertise than I have call forgeries. 

But that's neither here nor there, because it seems clear you didn't come here for advice. You wouldn't have responded as you did.

Have fun.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on November 11, 2011 at 8:01pm

Thingfish...Jim:

After this comment I'm even more convinced that you're not here why you say you are. That's OK...I'm used to it here.

If that Jim Morrison autograph came from a dusty old collection, you really lucked out—it looks like it just spent a few minutes ageing in an oven. It must have been the only piece in that collection stored hermetically sealed in a No. 2 mayonnaise jar for 40 years. Was his last name Funk or Wagnall?

Maybe I'm wrong, but you're doing the same things the fraudsters do here, so I have to go by the assumption that you're one of them. We get them fairly often. So I hope we can end the conversation here.

Steve

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on November 12, 2011 at 8:04pm

Thingfish removed his reply where he said his real name was Jim something, said he got the Morrison autograph from a friend's dad's "dusty old collection" and a few other telling things that convinced me even more he was actually another person from the forgery industry either trying to discredit us or wanting to use authentication opinions given here to sell their forgeries.

The reply he deleted was what I was replying to above.

I wish he hadn't removed it, because if you check back on Thursday, you'll see that Thingfish didn't describe it as a "dusty old collection" then. This is what he said about it:

"Thanks for the feedback. I do know its old and that is came from a friends father who was a longtime collector and he had begun his collection long before the hobby became big business. The collection was impressive. I talked him into selling it to me because I am a Doors fan."

That "longtime collectors" "impressive collection" became a "dusty old collection" overnight. How likely is that?

And do you think it as odd as I do that his barely aged, virtually perfect Morrison autograph came from a "dusty old collection"?

Then there's the paper—it's the same kind we're seeing forgeries of Ruth, Gehrig, FDR and Einstein on. Likely cut from books and old stationery. Most autographs when Morrison was hot were signed on lined notebook paper, printed material...or index cards or autograph books if gotten by true collectors. And it's not folded, creased and doesn't show any effects of being carried around at any point.

A lot of things just don't add up.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thingfish on November 12, 2011 at 8:42pm

Steve, I removed that post because my full name was on there. Which I posted because you thought I was trying to hide my identity. And you seem to think I am some scammer or forgery expert, and you also are making up a bunch of nonsense about me. And if I were you I'd shut your hole before you make more of an ass of yourself than you have.

Like I said, I got this autograph from a neighbors Dad in Ohio. He had a collection he gave to his son. That's where it came from and where I first saw it. I offered him 100 but didn't want the money. I had no idea what it might be worth, I just wanted it and had to have it. He was more pleased to enjoy my excitement about it because I'm a Doors fan. The collection I saw was a book and it had Kennedy, Nixon some astronaut and a bunch of popular sports people's signatures. His Dad was a collector. The Morrison autograph was given to me in a plastic sleeve. I never thought to ask how he got it because I'm not a collector. It was in better condition when I got it but was already darkening on the edges. The square you see where it is darker I only discovered yesterday when I took it out of the frame to take a better picture for you all to look at. It was on my wall for the last 10 years in a small frame. And I think I made it worse to be honest by putting it in the frame because now there is a dark square around the signature. So I guess it doesn't matter since everybody seems to think its a fake. That's my story and if you don't like it then bl*w me. I have a life and a career, family and plenty of people who would attest to my character.

I think you are a paranoid idiot and a shill in a sleezy business, and I could care less about autographs to be honest. I've met a lot of famous people and never once thought to ask anyone for an autograph. I'd just as soon wipe my ass with someone's signature as I'm sure Jim Morrison would. So go ahead and keep trying to discredit me. I regret coming to this hole. I couldn't possibly care what you or anyone thinks of me here. I have sent a few pics to Christies for an inquiry to appraise it. If they say its fake then no loss to me other than me believing it was real all these years.

Regards,
Jim

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on November 12, 2011 at 10:50pm

Yet you don't think you've made an ass of yourself? Bet the career is booming, life us great and the family is proud. Id be embarrassed if my dad wad an internet a******.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thingfish on November 13, 2011 at 9:06am

Grow up man. Steve doesn't know me and I don't know him. I'm sure Steve is a nice guy in real life. Maybe not. I'd compare my reputation to Steve's any day. Or anyone on this forum. If Steve wants to discredit me as a person, call me out, make false accusations in public forum, then he needs to back that up or shut up. If he wants to discredit me as a collector, then I'll back him up on that because I don't know squat.

I have not made any pointed remarks to anyone else in here. I called out Steve's contradiction on the Christies item in relation to mine. That's a valid point.

Enjoyed the discussion and respected Steve's input until he had to go think there was some conspiracy and saying I'm not who I say I am, etc. So no, I don't expect an unbias opinion from an egotistical groupie who makes a living doing this crap and calling it a career or rocket science. I'm sure its a fine hobby for some people but not my area of interest or expertise. So there's your response Mr. internet tough guy.

Permalink Reply by Steve on November 12, 2011 at 10:53pm

You're sure trying awfully hard to get some approval.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 12
• Next ›
• Page