We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks. 

My Master of Reality signed by Geezer Butler

Tags: Butler, Geezer, Graph

Views: 1525

Attachments: No photo uploads here

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Hi Nicky, how can you tell he is "signing your album"? That "proof" photo shows nothing at all?

the photo is worthless of him signing something

Concur with others that you can't tell what he's signing.

I think it's a good signature though.

I ran this seller though the search here - at least one member here says this seller swiped his own proof photographs to boost sellers sales. I don't know this signature, but I can't stand it when folks use these photos - they speak directly to integrity IMO.

Yeah i hate that too. Drives me crazy when I see sellers using stolen proof pics.

It looks like a legit sig

but as the other's have stated, that photo is meaningless unless you aquired these items yourself

If you purchased it, then why did you buy now and ask questions later? 

Do the photo and LP match up in age, because that's a newer LP pressing

The photo and record appear to be contemporary signed in Seattle on Feb 6, 2016. 

Followed a hunch - seller is indeed using "Nicky's photo" for 2 additional Butlers live on eBay now. Signatures aside, I just don't like this practice or what it implies about sellers customers. One reason I do not like this can be seen in the title Nicky gave to the JPEG posted - "Geezer Butler singing my album".

The photo doesn't "suck" - he is misrepresenting it. Why is he using the same exact photo to sell other different LP's?

Thank you Tim very much

Then why call it "Proof" at all when it proves nothing? Why not say "the photo shows when I met him" or "one of the times I met him"? It can be misleading - as here (Nick's JPEG title). I am speaking to the practice of using inappropriate terms (proof!) and images (not showing anything) to sell autographs, not whether Lance is "an Honest Person!!"

While I agree that the practice is silly, I'm not sure if it's worth getting hung up on the terminology. I don't think the terms, or their proper usage, has been defined explicitly enough for that.

When I see "proof" in the title, I mostly expect it to be a shorthand term for something else, usually not amounting to anything more than window dressing, a little something to give your listing some extra flair.

More explicit expressions like "exact proof" should of course be accompanied by exactly that, and nothing less.

RSS

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service