Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by KarlKeaton on February 10, 2016 at 5:09am

I think that they are good despite George being a bit 'cramped'.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gio on February 10, 2016 at 2:03pm

Thanks, Karl. I just thought it was strange that the seller said a signature was rubbed off, that the British Auction house he purchased it from had no provenance for it, and that it was listed at such a low price. What do you think the value of the item is. It is missing the Ringo because he supposedly left the Dorchester hotel in London where they all had gathered.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on February 10, 2016 at 3:39pm

In my opinion, this isn't authentic and I've seen other examples from the same forger.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gio on February 10, 2016 at 4:09pm

Appreciate your opinion. Here are 2 similar Autographs. The lennon and Mccartney look pretty close to it but the Harrison Looks off. The paper looks to new and ink looks too fresh.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on February 10, 2016 at 6:39pm

I think Ballroom is right.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gio on February 10, 2016 at 7:36pm

Yes, I am leaning towards Ballroom's opinion and analysis. I do thank everyone for sharing their perspectives.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gio on February 10, 2016 at 4:10pm

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gio on February 10, 2016 at 4:10pm

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BallroomDays67 on February 10, 2016 at 4:35pm

This is one of the examples that I was referring to that I believe is from the same forger. I don't like any of the signatures, but there's an obvious problem with the Ringo.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gio on February 10, 2016 at 4:40pm

I agree with you; the Ringo looks horrible and the Paul looks to be done by the same person who did the autograph in question that we are discussing in this thread.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gio on February 10, 2016 at 4:11pm

• ▶ Reply