Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Gary McAvoy on April 26, 2012 at 12:08pm

Hi Steve,

My name is Gary McAvoy and I am the owner of VintageMemorabilia.com, referenced in your November posts where, it would appear, I’m late to the more interesting fireworks. The discussion at the time, pointed out to me by a client only yesterday, centered on Jim Morrison, and one particular item of comparative interest on my site that you and others deemed suspect (to suspend the more radical judgments here for the moment).

As background I have been a collector for nearly 30 years, mentored in the 1980s by the late Leon Becker of Rancho La Costa, California, then one of the more respected dealers around. I have taken my passion online as a dealer since 2005 (not an auction house, as one especially noxious forum poster had claimed) and, in conformance with any professional dealer who abides by the rules, ethics and best practices of the Manuscript Society and the UACC—every single item I sell is backed by a lifetime guarantee.

Obviously, most people wouldn’t invest many tens of thousands of dollars in a complex website (as I have) while acquiring the most interesting items they can, if their intent was to simply defraud the unwary or uninformed. I have exercised my best judgment, with an educated eye, in acquiring what I feel are good pieces with some form of reasonable provenance where possible. As I say prominently on my website: if I make an honest mistake, I’m good for it. My reputation is always on the line, which is the main reason I'm responding to the comments found here.

You pointed out two items you thought were also questionable: Marilyn Monroe (signed in red ink) and Steve McQueen. I think if you actually read the Monroe writeup, it clearly states it’s a secretarial. But, it’s an original vintage and rarely seen pose of her at age 25, conservation framed, and it was priced at and sold for a reasonable $1,000. There were no pretensions otherwise, and without having read the full description, wouldn't you agree your very public comment was inappropriate?

As for the McQueen, well, as just one source I can point you to an entire page of numerous completely different signatures of his—many presumably authentic (checks, contracts, etc), others not so much—and few of them look remotely similar. It’s as if he tried out varying forms of autograph over his career, never really settling on one, and other colleagues I’ve spoken with about this agree. But, I have found several nearly identical signatures as the one on the photo I have. And as long as I’m reassured by that—and guarantee authenticity to my clients—then where is one left to actually draw the line?

I’ve always been of the mind that buyers should do their own comparative research, study known exemplars, read what they can, inquire where they might, and come to their own decision on every item they buy. Otherwise their lives will be fraught with doubts and indecision, much like that guy with the Morrison issues. Many good people base their own careers on issuing “opinions” as to authenticity, but unless they were present at the signing or the item carries the weight of provenance behind it, that’s all it is—an opinion based on education.

As for your not knowing me, I have other interests, as well as being a writer, so it’s not surprising you haven’t heard of me or my business (though as any competent search will reveal, most of my inventory appears on the first page of Google). I don’t do the autograph social circuit but I do stay in touch with a few trusted colleagues who help me out from time to time, as I do them. And I encourage you to “keep me on the radar screen” as you pledged to your forum guests, though I hope your motivation to do so won’t be as sinister as it sounded. I have nothing to hide, and claim no special powers except the time and experience to track down many items of interest to my clients—very satisfied clients, I should add—and the promise to refund a buyer’s money should any item I sell be shown as inauthentic. Obviously, with many high-profile authenticators themselves being shown that they, too, can succumb to errors in judgment, no one is unblemished in this regard. But if any reputable dealer doesn’t offer the guarantees I and many colleagues do, they simply shouldn’t be in business.

Gary

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on April 27, 2012 at 12:20pm

I'm not making any accusations, but can't understand why you would sell what you believe to be an authentic Morrison signed album page, signed at the infamous Ed Sullivan Show appearance no less, for $1,500 (or best offer?)? I noticed that the framed Morrison autograph that is currently on your website is being offered for double that price. Did you have any concerns about the appearance of the paper stock used for the autograph? I would jump at the chance to purchase what I believed to be an authentic Morrison autograph at that price. If I were to sell it, I'm sure that I could make a nice profit. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gary McAvoy on April 27, 2012 at 3:28pm

Good questions, Mark, thanks. I had this particular Morrison in my collection for a long time, and it was priced appropriate to the market when I first posted it to the site many years ago. Like others, I routinely check auction sites to get a current feel for selling prices on many items I acquire, and as can be found at R&R Auctions, many of Morrison’s signatures and checks sold in the $760-$2000 range (including buyer’s premium), so my retail price at the time was in the zone. If I’m guilty of anything on this, it was simply exuberance in marketing. Though the item clearly notes “Ed Sullivan Show / September 17, 1967” in pencil on the reverse, I should have used the words “likely from…” rather than state it so affirmatively.

As it happens, the “Make Offer” notation should not have been on that page. My developer had added that capability into the site code around that time, and unfortunately it populated onto every page throughout the site; over time, I had to remove each one manually. But since I decide what “offers” are acceptable anyway, it really wasn’t an issue, nor was it intended for the Morrison at all. Regardless, the item sold for the full price shown—and it sold to a prominent Registered UACC dealer (who had no problem at all with it, having dealt with Morrisons before), and who ultimately marked it up considerably in his own gallery. We all have our different price points, as I’m sure you’ve encountered.

As for the framed piece in my current inventory, if you inspect the detail close-up and read the description, you’ll find it has been conservation-framed to museum standards, using only acid-free archival materials, not just a couple of ruinous mat boards like I see far too often on the market. That alone added over $800 to the price, but for discerning collectors, that often makes a difference.

I hope that helps, Mark, and appreciate the follow-up. I really hope to hear from Steve Cyrkin, though, since my note was addressed to him.

Gary

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on April 27, 2012 at 7:03pm

Hi Gary,

I'm away and barely checked in since your post, sorry. I need to read the entire discussion to refresh my memory, and I haven't had the chance yet. Hopefully I'll be able to do it tomorrow. 

I apologize for the delay.

Steve

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on November 17, 2012 at 6:57pm

This one was just listed on eBay with a starting price of $700. Notice how closely it resembles the one sold by vintagememorabilia.com.

 http://www.ebay.com/itm/230883449825

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chad B on November 17, 2012 at 8:58pm

There is no way I would spend $1.00 on this. The Krieger looks bad and I don't like it overall.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on November 18, 2012 at 10:38am

I totally agree. Also, the Manzarek autograph is in his more recent style, but none of the autographs look good to me. Here are the two Morrison autographs for easier comparison:

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on November 18, 2012 at 4:56pm

Here's the COA, which more accurately depicts the color of the paper stock. Quite a coincidence, isn't it? 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on November 29, 2012 at 10:21am

It was relisted, and sold for $450.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chad B on November 11, 2011 at 8:08pm

My opinion is the Christies item, the vintagememorabilia.com and the thingfish one are not good. I am no expert but have been looking at Jim's autographs for years.  I am not saying vintagememorabilia.com or the others have ill intentions they just don't look good to me. I see inconsistencies and the "feel" is not there either.

• ▶ Reply

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

You know, Chad...I think the Christie's piece is good. Atypical, but feels like his writing. Rushed as heck, tho. Let's get some pros on it. Epperson is back Monday and I'll ask a couple friends who don't like to opine publicly.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thingfish on November 12, 2011 at 2:40am

Wise up people. This guy Steve jumped on me the second I called into question the Cristies sig. Obviously others think its fake. It looks nothing like the examples we both posted. Makes me think Steve needs a 'pro' to tell him what to think when all the info he needs is in this thread I started.

Credentials? There is no licensing for expertise in autographs. I guess thats the joke here. I guess if you can't prove it's fake, then it's real and ready to go, get a commission on the auction block... but only if a handful of highly specialized uncertified, unlicensed egomaniacs say so. That's about what the autograph opinion industry standard amounts to... fraud and shills.

I stumbled on to this forum by googling around trying to find examples to compare my Morrison sig with. I thought I'd get some expert opinions instead of 'i'm no expert' comments from a clique of collectors. This guy Steve tells me I'm not who I say I am and that I am a fraud. Its a joke. Even when I present zero motive. But hey if it's a reputable auction house then it must be real even though it doesn't pass the snuff test and contradicts every comment of everyone in the thread. We've all seen all the 'official' known Morrison autographs in existence. I'm not a collector and know nothing about this business or autographs other than what I have learned here in one day and by reading articles on how to spot a fake and to beware of so called experts.

I don't feel the need to continue to argue its authenticity when egos and triviality get in the way of objectivity. Either mine is one of the best forgeries around or its the real thing. I'd like to have a real pro look at it but nobody here claims to be a pro or can point me in the right direction. Nobody can tell me its fake for certain. And that's the point. If the christie's one is real then there's no way any expert can deny mine is real as well. If anyone out there is reading this, wise up. Do your own research and you don't need an expert.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• …
• 12
• Next ›
• Page