Authenticity is Everything
John, George & Ringo Signed Slips of Paper
John, George & Ringo individually signed slips of paper. Any thoughts on these 3?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jim Cushman on
-
So many "clean" Beatles autographs cropping up lately...no signs of "aging"...even after 60 + years?
-
Permalink Reply by Eric Keith Longo on
-
"I'm really very mistrustful." - George, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
-
Permalink Reply by Bruce Juice on
-
I'm stopping buying ANY signatures on scraps of paper (too easy for the forger to practice again and again until he gets it right). Maybe if it had rock solid provenance -- but even then I'd be wary.
-
Permalink Reply by JDZelenka on
-
In my view these are good forgeries. I don't usually like to nitpick with signatures and recognize that there can be great variance even within a signing style. But the Ringo is way off even compared to the more slapdash 80s style of signing (note the distance of the underline from the signature and formation of the letters after the capital. The T is particularly bad, not reaching the actual letter. For George, it looks carefully drawn and the "eor" not quite linking up right. The John is very good but the Lennon has the letters too shallow in formation while the curl on the L is a dead giveaway highlighted by Frank Caiazzo in his guide.
-
Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on
-
All three have unusual traits and look like good forgeries to me too.
-
Permalink Reply by fab432 on
-
I agree these do look like good forgeries and would fool most people. I guess the forger wasn’t very good at Paul’s signature thus no Paul.
Now more than ever buying from reputable dealers with strong provenance is a must.
-
-
They are reasonable. I might guess Paul was omitted to add believability, despite the odd Ringo. They are very fresh looking.
© 2025 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
