Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Pete Bendu on December 17, 2014 at 8:40pm

Not one I would ever buy.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on December 18, 2014 at 4:43am

not authentic imo

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rock G III on December 18, 2014 at 6:06am

arent blue sharpies a rare thing mid 70s? 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LymanBostock Fan on December 18, 2014 at 6:40am

Thanks for the opinions, guys.  I'm actually not at all surprised by the responses.  First, blue sharpies were around by the mid 1970s, so there is no issue there.

Now, its time for me to tell the story behind this signed photo.  I purchased it on E-bay back in 2010 from a seller who was individually selling signed postcard photos from the 1970s.  He had about 50 individual photos, mostly no-names.  All were priced the same, even the Munson at the same very low price.  It was clear to me the seller bought them as a lot from somewhere and was just trying to turn them over.

Now, based on that, I believe the signature to be real.   It is a bit atypical for Munson, but has enough characteristics, along with how I got it, to make me believe it was real.  This was not a forger selling this thing.  Now, it is possible someone forged it before selling it to the seller, but it certainly wasn't to make money.  Given the tape on the picture, etc., it just doesn't make sense that it was forged to make money.

Of course, the problem now is I have what I believe is a real signed Munson photo which I can't get pass PSA/DNA or JSA.  (I've tried.)  I guess the good news is that I didn't pay much for the photo.

On a separate note, are you all away of the Munson forgeries put out there by an Ohio dealer? They were mainly forged in the early 2000s, but many have surfaced and passed PSA/DNA, including one 1979 Munson signed Topps, which has fairly recently been offered in the 18,000 range or so.   I can share many samples of this style of forgery with you, if you haven't seen them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Null on December 18, 2014 at 6:50am

Why ask for opinions when you aren't going to listen to the answers? It's junk. Both PSA/DNA and JSA failed it, as well as some members here who are quite knowledgeable on Thurman. If you want to believe it's real go for it. You can believe Santa is coming next week too. 

The tape was probably there long before the forgery. The photo looks way older than the ink, someone probably had that photo taped up somewhere and at some point someone scribbled an "autograph" on it to turn a $1 photo into a priceless piece. Forgers will do ANYTHING to make money and make stuff "appear" as being old/worn/battered.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LymanBostock Fan on December 18, 2014 at 7:50am

Ryan,

Your comments are about the dummest I've ever heard in my life.  You've never asked anyone for an opinion on something to gather information, take all the information and then use your own brain to make a decision?

As far as Thurman Munson's autograph, believe me, I know more about them than you ever will.  How many Munson's have you gotten in person in your life?  Probably zero.  You probably weren't even born yet when Munson died in August 1979.   I personally got three in person in the late 1970s.

Your "analysis" is irrational.  Again, read the story on how I got it.  There was no reason for the E-bay seller I bought it from to sell this at the same Buy it now minimal price as Carlos May, Tom Shopay, and Merv Rettenmund signed postcard photos.  If he was going to forge it, he would have listed it for a much higher price.  Why would he spend time and effort to sell this for $20?

If you have nothing constructive to add to a post, please respectfully, say nothing and keep off my posts.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Null on December 18, 2014 at 7:54am

Oh how I love the irony when someone spells "dumb" wrong...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LymanBostock Fan on December 18, 2014 at 8:34am

I was going to give you a pass on your run on sentence "The photo looks way older than the ink, someone probably had that photo taped up somewhere and at some point someone scribbled an "autograph" on it to turn a $1 photo into a priceless piece.", but I agree with you, it is ironic that you overlook your own failings, while only pointing out others.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by terrier8HOF on December 19, 2014 at 1:32pm

could you please post the Munson's you got in person? I would love to see them and add them to my files.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick Meyer on December 18, 2014 at 7:42am

Based on the story you just told is why you believe its real? That is funny.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LymanBostock Fan on December 18, 2014 at 8:28am

Rick,

I believe its real partly based on how I obtained the signature and partly because the photo is an early 1970s Yankees photo and because the signature resembles early 1970 Munson signatures to a good extent.  (Notice that if it is a forgery, the forger would have had to be a Munson expert, as the style of signature is early 1970s Munson and not mid-late 1970s.)  The "u" in Munson starts low, vs. his later style "u"'s, as he signed in the mid-late 1970s.  The end of his signature has a small "kick", very common to Munson signatures, although typically they are a bit more pronounced.  The signature is well formed, unless the much more rushed and shortened versions of the late 1970s.  The thing that looks oddest about this Munson signature is the formation of the "M" itself, which I think is why most people think it is fake.

As far as PSA/DNA rejecting it, those guys really have made so many mistakes on Munson signatures, that I don't pay much attention to their opinion on Munsons.   The best example again of this are the common Munson forgeries from the Ohio dealer, which they have "authenticated" dozens.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rock G III on December 18, 2014 at 3:22pm

Yes sharpies where in fact around. Now read what I wrote BLUE sharpies. They were introduced in 1979 from what i recall reading during my research a while ago. A short time before Mr Munson passed. So all the nonsense about "early" muson signatures is completely MOOT as the pen came out in 79. 

And over time those inks get very light since they did not perfect it. Yours on the other hand must have been locked in a dark safe since it was supposedly signed. A short time after the BLUE sharpie came out.  It shows no signs of a fading like most I seen from that era..

http://www.timetoast.com/timelines/the-history-of-the-sharpie

Dont take my word for it...

http://www.sharpie.com/enAU/SharpieInfo/Pages/History.aspx

So what are we basing this "blue sharipes are around mid 70s" on? 

• ▶ Reply

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