Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Full Time Flipper on September 7, 2014 at 10:22pm

to my untrained eye i cant see a difference between the two are we saying one is fake one is correct

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lewis Reynolds on September 8, 2014 at 1:19am

Yes, the Susan one is real and is in a copy of 'In his Own Write' I believe.

With the second one the faker has used the real one to 'copy' the style and writing etc.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mikex on September 4, 2014 at 1:37pm

I don't like the John lennon. Never seen a signed self portrait like this. He usually sketches these with glasses.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by stu deitcher on September 7, 2014 at 8:25pm

The authentication of Beatles Autographs (single and together) is a very murky area, at least to me.  As previously stated, "if Tracks (or Frank) say that a set isn't genuine then it is dead," raises many questions.  Collectors are NOT experts but we all have opinions.  We as collectors hope that the opinions of these experts are much better than ours.  Are they always right?  No one is 100% in anything.  What happens when a genuine item is called fake by an expert (see above)?  The owner of that (real) item would be correct to be furious.  What is the next step?  Where are the checks and balances at the highest levels?  We really need to have some kind of appeals system for an autograph deemed questionable by the highest regarded opinions.  Does any body have thoughts on this concept?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mr. Miyagi on September 12, 2014 at 7:53am

I agree with you... An appeals system is needed. I don't believe it is right that one persons opinion should matter soo much that it makes a item legit or fake end of story. No one one is 100 percent correct and that could kill an actual legit item.thats Just my opinion though..

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heath emery on September 12, 2014 at 9:27am

I like this post. I agree sometimes the experts make mistakes. Sometimes you have an authentic signature that gets rejected other times a fake has been accepted. Its hard ,say if you got an in person autograph and it looks pretty funky or different from their usual writing style this could very well be grounds for rejection. Even though it was a genuine example. The way I see it try not to buy questionable items. That being said you have a better chance of protecting your investment. If an autograph is real but it looks like it has issues then when you go to sell it it is gonna scare some people away from it. Try to get one that says authentic no question asked!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by stu deitcher on September 12, 2014 at 3:20pm

It always makes perfect sense to buy the item with no questions.  The real problem comes up when a witnessed item is deemed "inauthentic."  Who does the person with all the righteous indignation in the world go to?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heath emery on September 10, 2014 at 4:54pm

The first lennon looks to slow as if it was drawn on the paper. The paper itself doesn't look of the time period. The ink also looks too new. It doesn't have the correct vintage vibe.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heath emery on September 12, 2014 at 9:32am

Another thing is your always looking for a deal. Money is tight these days The problem is you usually get what you pay for.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heath emery on September 10, 2014 at 4:55pm

The second one screams Neil aspinal.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tommy Byron on September 19, 2014 at 7:18am

Both appear fake.

The first appears to be 'signed' in the 70's......

But Lennon pretty much wasn't putting 'kisses" (xxx) under his sig at that point.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike H on September 19, 2014 at 3:50pm

The long loops of the G in George signature makes me think that may be a Neil Aspinall set. The very long top of the J in John in that full set pic is also typical Aspinall.

• ▶ Reply

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