• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Tonfulle-84 Stan Lee forgeries on eBay
5 5

Started by James J Johnson,

369 posts in this topic

James J Johnson

James J Johnson

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Ride the Tiger said:

Not sure where to post this so I'll dump it in here. Saw this book for sale locally in FB classifieds. Its advertised as a Stan Lee signature but it has a blue label. Upon further examination I see CGC noted a Stan Lee written in marker. Would have been a great book to be in the SS but now no one will ever know. Does the sig look legit?

 

Screenshot_20190402-172214_Facebook.jpg

This is OK, a ca. 2015/16 signature most likely.. Unwitnessed, so CGC will not verify it authentic. That's not what CGC does. CGC is in the signature verification business, that is, like a notary would. They verify that a CGC rep witnessed the signature.  CGC is not in the autograph authentication business. They do not authenticate unwitnessed signatures, hence, even if the autograph on the cover is authentic, as in my opinion the Lee signed DD 1 above is, they'll note "Stan Lee written on cover" because they did not witness it. .

Edited by James J Johnson
Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
On 4/2/2019 at 8:54 PM, James J Johnson said:

This is OK, a ca. 2015/16 signature most likely.. Unwitnessed, so CGC will not verify it authentic. That's not what CGC does. CGC is in the signature verification business, that is, like a notary would. They verify that a CGC rep witnessed the signature.  CGC is not in the autograph authentication business. They do not authenticate unwitnessed signatures, hence, even if the autograph on the cover is authentic, as in my opinion the Lee signed DD 1 above is, they'll note "Stan Lee written on cover" because they did not witness it. .

I wonder what the Qualified grade would have been?hm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
James J Johnson

James J Johnson

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, THE_BEYONDER said:

I wonder what the Qualified grade would have been?hm

Re: DD 1 Qual vs Univ. grade.  I don't see it being much different in condition either way. The 3.5 is very indicative and reflective of the existing flaws responsible for dropping this into the 3.5/4.0 range whether green or blue. The name written on the cover isn't the same type of qualifier as binder holes might be on an otherwise perfect book graded qualified 9.0 (the binder holes being the qualifier), though because of the holes would translate out to a lot of missing pieces, maybe a 2.0 if blue labeled. The DD has the creases and wear typical of books in the 3.5/4.0 range, name on the cover or not (which let's not forget, is a genuine signature). So with that in mind, this should sell for far more than the average blue label 3.5 and IMO is worth closer to what a yellow label 3.5 would bring than a blue label 3.5; say 75% or so of the way up between the two. It's a Lee signed DD 1, and that signature is genuine, though it is not CGC's job to authenticate it, nor would they, even if all the graders recognized it to be authentic.

Edited by James J Johnson
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bird

Bird

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, DavidTheDavid said:

Wouldn’t this be wire fraud? How much has this person sold? If the allegations are true, wouldn’t certain authorities want to know?

Not only do they not want to know, they likely do not care. Comics, despite highly values, have no cache and law enforcement/prosecutors just don't care more often than not. There are exceptions of course but look at the attitudes of the law of Harley's recent theft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
James J Johnson

James J Johnson

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Real Elijah Snow said:

How does this guy still have 100% feedback??

Because he's forging autographs of the deceased, who can't be questioned by authorities, "Mr. Lee, can you please tell us if you signed this, sir?". Thus it leaves the question of authenticity to opinion, which will vary from authenticator to authenticator. The signatures on the books of the living artists and creators are genuine, an expense he incurred, their purpose to shill the forgeries. He's stupid, but not pinhead stupid. He can't figure out how to forge a halfway convincing Lee or Kirby, but he was able to figure that much out, devious, but untalented. Nothing new. Autograph collectible sellers have been using that strategy for 100 years. Like a jeweler making a setting of real smaller diamonds surrounding a large diamond that's glass, misrepresented as a diamond, like his Kirby and Lee forgeries.

Edited by James J Johnson
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ADAMANTIUM

ADAMANTIUM

Posted
Posted (edited)

@James J Johnson

Looks like @Vietnam67 called the bet on page 9 but no one agreed:foryou:

edit and page 10 of the following thread is where it's asked about the bet for reference...

 

 

 

Edited by ADAMANTIUM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
5 5
Go to topic listing