Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Michael Reesoun on December 19, 2012 at 1:29pm

8HOF- Did anyone bother to say: "in my opinion"; and/or "i think"; and/or it "it looks like"; or "I'm pretty sure"; etc.  NO, THEY SAID NO SUCH THING!  One person said matter-of-factly that it was fake, and another one piled on and claimed he knew the source of the forgery and was definitive that the same person was behind multiple identical forgeries. Then continued on to say that it was very sad and that people needed to be educated.

I was told about this site and given negative feedback about it. I am a fair person and wanted to give it the benefit of the doubt, so I elected to find out for myself. There are people on here who ARE charging a fee, who I was considering paying to authenticate some other items of mine. I wanted to gauge the quality of feedback on here and the only way to do that was to post an item of mine that I know for sure to be authentic, and see if people were able to identify an actual signature by Sir Paul.

Now you and some others here are upset by your own inaccuracies, yet you are quick to get upset with me for doing absolutely nothing other than testing the waters. Can you say sour grapes?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thorsten Knublauch on December 19, 2012 at 1:54pm

It is too much work to say long words about why an autograph appears not to be authentic - thats why i comment very short. Most of the items shown here are bad fakes and all long words are waste of time. I refered to the RS album that it is a fake because some parts were very uncommon and i have never seen a full name signed album for many years. If me or other long year collectors were wrong, no problem. Some things are too difficult for each of us.

thorsten

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael Reesoun on December 19, 2012 at 2:07pm

Fair enough, Thorsten, but then why not first ask a person if they have any idea of the year acquired (I believe that particular signature I got around '91), and/or perhaps even say, "I haven't seen a full signature in a long time" (which is good to know, btw, thank you).  This way you are truly helping a person help you help them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony Bautista on December 19, 2012 at 2:15pm

Here is the thing about Paul Mccartney , His lif is pretty much documented after he formed a group called the beatles. If he went to kiis fm in los angeles in 1991 . It would somehow be documented somewhere. No where is it documented that he was there , nor why he was there.

If I met Mccartney and had sign my rubber soul album . I would know the date, time and place. Answer that and I ll buy your story .

The autograph still doesnt match up with a real mccartney from 91. it matches up with a a few known forgeries floating around , that have been told they where signed in 91.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony Bautista on December 19, 2012 at 2:16pm

I would sit here and tell you why the autograph is fake , but Im sure its a waste of time .

 

 

Permalink Reply by Gary Harvey on December 19, 2012 at 2:01pm

Mike

I will repeat again , there are problems with McCartneys and Jacksons and I stated the item you posted was signed at the angle of other questionable items that have generated from the UK recently

People do need to be educated, perhaps this post will do just that

I repeat Im no expert and I charge no one a fee, not one penny / cent / rupee / baht or shekel

The people you want an opinion from are available for a fee, why not try them and get a fully guaranteed opinion ?

People are now asking about you and your ethics, did you actual post this thread to generate debate or a argument ? 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony Bautista on December 19, 2012 at 4:15pm

What person on here was gonna charge you a fee to authenticate your item ??

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on December 19, 2012 at 4:22pm

sure I can say "sour grapes". I can say a lot of things.  but it doesn't apply here.  I just looked at that album you are talking about for the first time. while I would not have rendered a strong opinion on it either way, I will say there are a lot of things that are non-typical about it.  But I have seen a lot of McCartney signatures that fall into that category.  Again, I dont see what you gained or learned by putting this up and asking for opinions.  I am missing something here.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anthony Bautista on December 19, 2012 at 4:31pm

Exactly . Why would a person who has worked for Kiis Fm , and was head of whatever at Captiol Records care about anyones opinion . Even if it was Caizzo , Roger , Psa , Jsa , Traks. Or whoever it is . I would assume they would have money and have no need for authentication on a album they saw signed. Wouldnt there credentials speak more than any opinion rendered.

Thats why I think this guy is full of it . He isnt who he says he is . He probably gave a name to Crykin of someone who did work at Capitol and Kiis .

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gary Harvey on December 19, 2012 at 4:42pm

More good points Anthony

Remember anyone can join with an email address

This looks like as I stated earlier...someone wanting to cause an argument

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gary Harvey on December 19, 2012 at 4:38pm

Nice one Terrier !

I got into this because of the angle of the signature, Im still not 100% sure its real and from then on all kinds of stories are coming to light...

Its amazing that if you got something yourself...why would you need to ask for Authentification ?

His line should have been that........ heres my example

What do you guys think

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on December 19, 2012 at 4:47pm

what bothered more than anything about the signature is the spacing in Paul.  wide spacing between the u and l is very typical.  what is in this example is not.

• ▶ Reply

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