JOHN LENNON Opinions Please

Hello,

Around 10 years ago I shared images of TTM autographs (JOHN LENNON 1976) that I was very fortunate to receive and opinions here were mostly positive. Several years ago, I requested and received COAs from Roger for the 45 sleeves and the sheet music, but at that time I did not request one for the piece of mat board (pictured) that was in the return envelope.

As I may be interested in trying to sell it sometime in the future, a COA or LOA from a respected TPA may or may not be benficial. So, I submitted this photo along with some history information to a well-known authenticator and unfortunately, it was rejected - determined to be a "failure".

What say you?

Thanks for taking a look once again,

Steve

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steverino on March 7, 2025 at 9:14am

Thank you all for looking - I appreciate it. There are some interesting responses here. The mat board with the signature, doodles, etc. in question was definately part of what was returned to me. It was in the return envelope to keep the other items from getting bent or mangled in the mail. Of course, I cannot prove that, but have no reason to state what isn't true. This piece measures approximately 7"x10"-it's somewhat large and perhaps that helps to explain why the extended signature may look a bit off - I don't know. I'm not a Beatles autograph expert... but I believe that some of you are and I thank you for taking the time to comment.

Cheers~!

Steve

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 To Steverino on March 7, 2025 at 9:45am

So you included images of the other John signatures you received through the mail when submitting the one on the mat board?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steverino To BallroomDays67 on March 7, 2025 at 2:00pm

Hi Ballroom. Yes, and after messaging Justin about the "failure", I sent uncropped pics and the link to the old discussion here (https://live.autographmagazine.com/forum/topics/john-lennon-1976.) Haven't heard back. Kinda disappointed and it cost me $100....Oh, well...Who am I to argue with their "team of experts"? :)

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 To Steverino on March 7, 2025 at 2:17pm

Interesting. I wonder if they think that it’s a secretarial signer or that you’re providing false provenance.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo To Steverino on March 7, 2025 at 3:04pm

Is this ACOA you are talking about? In my experience they have always answered questions when asked.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steverino To Eric Keith Longo on March 9, 2025 at 6:11am

Yes, ACOA - reponse below. Apparently the experts are not provided with backstory, provenance or any information about the source, etc.....

"Sure- happy to hear any insight or backstory, source etc associated with the item prior to the team taking a look.

We also don't share backstory info with them- they are solely reviewing based on formation."

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by a pug called eva To Steverino on March 9, 2025 at 7:15am

That's an odd answer from ACOA.

Why on earth wouldn't the team be given all the available facts when looking at an item? Surely they would at least need to know the supposed date of the signature?

It also seems odd that ACOA are "happy to hear any insight or backstory" but "don't share backstory info" with the reviewing team.

Maybe they look at the item in isolation first before considering any background information but that seems very strange approach given the importance of timeframe and the circumstances under which the signature was obtained (rushed in-person, signed at a table etc.).