Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on July 27, 2016 at 7:20pm

Don,

Elvis signed the autograph you just posted on the felt lining of a guitar case that had just been won by the ladies it's personalized to. It was necessarily signed more carefully and slowly than easily 99% of Elvis autographs.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Don Webster on July 27, 2016 at 8:04pm

Hi Steve

You are correct. The point of adding the latest autograph to this thread was to illustrate yet another example of Elvis signing his name unconnected. Dan has told us early on in this thread that it almost NEVER happened for the fans once Elvis had signed with RCA in 1956 unless it was for a legal document for example. 

And the fact that two of the three autographs I've posted are in marker pen apparently has really thrown Dan for a loop!!!

Over the past week or so I have posted these 3 examples (see below) of late 1960's -- early 1970's Elvis autographs...the time period Dan has pointed to. All 3 documented by either Graceland or R.E. and R.C.  All "disconnected"...i.e. the first and last names signed separately and 2 of them signed in marker pen!

All were very very easy to locate...no need to "scour the internet".  Dan states that I am "on a mission". Not really....but if he means always knowing there are two sides to every story then maybe I am. I'm just trying to provide an even keel and some balance to posts that make blanket statements that condemn and demean perfectly good Elvis autographs. No need for that here...

Rapid...knee jerk reactions -- responses are almost never right...

Thanks to you both...

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• DC-260-78B14E3953_Page_3.jpg, 267 KB
• elvisjune141972milwaukeewis.jpg, 42 KB
• elvisnov1967.jpg, 270 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on July 27, 2016 at 8:40pm

Don,

It's still rare, which is pretty close to almost never. Please don't act like a jerk. Don't ridicule members who are being helpful.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Don Webster on July 27, 2016 at 9:02pm

Hi Steve,

 I have no issue with Dan trying to be helpful in his own way. What I cannot accept without discussion is his calling these autographs fake. That is what he has done. "A Paul Lichter fake" is the quote on the first one. Dan basically called out R.E. and said he would be stunned and shocked if the first Elvis autograph posted was real. If you take the time to reread Dan's comments he asked if I had contacted Rich Consola. I had already done so.  Bottom line -- both  Mr. Consola and Mr. Epperson pronounced the "Flamingo" autograph as genuine.

Dan then proceeded to declare a second Elvis autograph I posted as a fake as well. That is until he saw the auction lot from Graceland. Then I think he changed his mind. The third autograph speaks for itself.

Dan is welcome to his opinions and if the information I have provided doesn't alter them then so be it...I could care less...I invited discussion as you can in my thread header and I got it...that's o.k. by me...

Steve I believe members reading these threads deserve the best information possible. I hope you do too. I can't add much more than that.  

And lastly I am asking you for an apology for using the word jerk directed towards me. I would never use that word or any word similar towards you or any member of this board. I also ask that you please edit that word from your post... 

Permalink Reply by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on July 27, 2016 at 9:23pm

Don,

You asked for members' opinions on the autograph you posted. Dan gave you his opinion. You posted others. He gave his opinions. That's what people do here.

Dan did nothing wrong in any way. He's welcome to disagree with every authenticator in the world as long as he's being sincere.

If you only want opinions you agree with, then don't post autographs here. Trying to demean Dan was jerky behavior, so I stand by my comment.

Permalink Reply by Adam Halloran on July 28, 2016 at 4:55am

Don, I couldn't say whether the autograph is authentic itself. It does look slow to me.

The envelope definitely looks period. The only thing I would say, don't just take her story at face value alone. We all know people sometimes fib or forget details.

What if she gave it to someone to give to Elvis to sign? Maybe she didn't actually witness the signing herself? I am not saying that is exactly the case in this scenario, just that the story can't always be trusted even if it is a reliable source. Details get lost overtime.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Don Webster on July 28, 2016 at 7:02am

Hi Adam...excellent post !!!

You suggest not to take her story at face value alone.

I haven't. I posted it here looking for feedback...

I contacted Roger Epperson and Rich Consola...who was suggested to me on this thread. Plus I used my own judgment. I've also shown it elsewhere with a positive response.

As I've pointed out already on this thread Mr. Epperson and Mr. Consola both approved the signature as genuine. I think I am correct in saying that Mr. Epperson is held in very high regard here by most. Their feedback  jives with my own personal feeling having been a long time fan and collector...I won't tell you how many years but I saw Blue Hawaii at the theatre when it first came out!! (1962).

Now some folks don't like the autograph and some folks like to tell you they've been collecting for 30 years etc etc blah blah...but you now know I've been at it a lot longer than that...and that and a dollar gets you a cup of rice...lol...

Thanks for your contribution...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JAKE JONES on July 28, 2016 at 7:26am

If Roger Epperson says authentic,  that`s great, i would have thought otherwise but he`s the expert .. Happy for ya!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Don Webster on July 28, 2016 at 7:36am

Thanks Jake....don't forget Mr. Rich Consola too !! Rich was actually a recommended contact on this one! (page2).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Upside on July 28, 2016 at 7:44am

Don,

Just to be clear you actually submitted the signature to be authenticated by both men in person, and obtain their written opinion?

I would have assumed that since both men get paid for that service, that the signature would have to be presented to them for their evaluation.  If not so be it.

I still would disagree with both men respectfully as the signature is clearly "drawn" and is far too similar in traits to forgeries that surfaced in the early 1990's in the States as opposed to what we know about Elvis's signing habits when encountering a fan from 1956 forward.

Take an opinion for what its worth but once again being derogatory/ sarcastic to another person because they disagree is unprofessional.

This thread IMO has run its course, and I wish you nothing but the best.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Don Webster on July 28, 2016 at 8:32am

Dan when you posted the following on page 2 of this thread I set about to assist...You wrote the following...

"I would like to see if anyone here can post true authentic examples of Elvis's signature from the late 1960's that match the one in question"...

I came up with a couple of examples and then on page 4 you wrote the following...

"there is no need for you to keep scouring the internet to find the rare signatures in which Elvis did provide an in person autograph in that format" 

Remains so very confusing to me...

Thanks for taking part in the thread...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Upside on July 28, 2016 at 8:42am

Re-posting previous thread since you did not address my question, and you said you were confused.

Don,

Just to be clear you actually submitted the signature to be authenticated by both men in person, and obtain their written opinion?

Taking out of context lines from a post, once again does not authenticate your signature, nor does it confuse the intent of my posts.  You are being very selective in how you are quoting in an attempt to give the appearance that I am contradicting myself, of which I am not.

This is a game usually played by those who have a motive, and I have no motives.  I simply do not agree with the evaluations, assuming that a proper examination was completed by Roger, and Rich.

We will agree to simply disagree. 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• Next ›
• Page