Gehrig gpc

[canjond]

Knowing what we now know, I'm going out on a limb here and saying the auto may be authentic. There are aspects of the writing I really like. That said, I would greatly value the opinions of others who have posted and would factor those in if I was considering purchasing.

[yanks12025]

Can someone explain to why they would stamp it twice within 45 minutes?

[canjond]

Originally Posted by yanks12025

Can someone explain to why they would stamp it twice within 45 minutes?

My guess would be the beginning and end of the processing.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by canjond

My guess would be the beginning and end of the processing.

Close.

One of the first steps is canceling. These days they have a machine called a facer/canceller that senses the flourescent ink on the stamp and turns all the mail the right way up then cancels. somewhere in excess of 10,000 pieces an hour.

Back then it was done by hand and sometimes something would get in the machine backwards. Usually they found them during the next step- sorting. Then they'd either cancel it by hand or put it back in the pile to be run through again.

Steve B

[canjond]

Ben - it's a sweet postcard for sure assuming it is authentic (and again, I'm in the authentic camp). However, I thought David was of the opinion it's no good, even postmark aside. I believe above he felt that there were unambiguous signs of the writing being forged?

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by canjond

Ben - it's a sweet postcard for sure assuming it is authentic (and again, I'm in the authentic camp). However, I thought David was of the opinion it's no good, even postmark aside. I believe above he felt that there were unambiguous signs of the writing being forged?

Jon, when I first saw the pc, I thought it was good, but wanted to see the reverse. When I saw the "reverse," it "proved that the card had to be a forgery. There is one characteristic of the signature that appears quite rarely in a genuine signature, but it does appear occasionally. Since--based on the reverse--it "had" to be a forgery, I convinced myself that that one "anomaly" was enough.

It isn't enough. I believe the card is good.

[thekingofclout]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Jon, when I first saw the pc, I thought it was good, but wanted to see the reverse. When I saw the "reverse," it "proved that the card had to be a forgery. There is one characteristic of the signature that appears quite rarely in a genuine signature, but it does appear occasionally. Since--based on the reverse--it "had" to be a forgery, I convinced myself that that one "anomaly" was enough.

It isn't enough. I believe the card is good.

like

[canjond]

Originally Posted by David Atkatz

Jon, when I first saw the pc, I thought it was good, but wanted to see the reverse. When I saw the "reverse," it "proved that the card had to be a forgery. There is one characteristic of the signature that appears quite rarely in a genuine signature, but it does appear occasionally. Since--based on the reverse--it "had" to be a forgery, I convinced myself that that one "anomaly" was enough.

It isn't enough. I believe the card is good.

Thanks for the clarification David.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by canjond

Knowing what we now know, I'm going out on a limb here and saying the auto may be authentic. There are aspects of the writing I really like. That said, I would greatly value the opinions of others who have posted and would factor those in if I was considering purchasing.

Jon,

My gut was it was good. Because of this, I was interested and had the guy send me scans of the back. I was then confused. I sent it to Mr. David Atkatz on here for his opinion. He initially thought it was good too until I confused him and send him the back. It is pretty tough(near impossible) not to second guess yourself when the back was thought to be fact. So... I thought I would post it on here thinking it was odd. I cannot believe I didn't catch something as simple as a large crease... haha. Anyway, I have had another highly respected member(autograph expert) here PM me and tell me he thought it was good as well. Based on the feedback I have received in PM and comparing to other exemplars(a 1937 gpc on ebay for example), it appears to be authentic. I apologize again for the confusion.

Ben

[CW]

IF that item is truly authentic then I would love to own it, also having the first name Charles. Cool piece (if real)!

[thekingofclout]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

I apologize again for the confusion.

Ben

Troublemaker.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

Jon,

My gut was it was good. Because of this, I was interested and had the guy send me scans of the back. I was then confused. I sent it to Mr. David Atkatz on here for his opinion. He initially thought it was good too until I confused him and send him the back. It is pretty tough(near impossible) not to second guess yourself when the back was thought to be fact. So... I thought I would post it on here thinking it was odd. I cannot believe I didn't catch something as simple as a large crease... haha. Anyway, I have had another highly respected member(autograph expert) here PM me and tell me he thought it was good as well. Based on the feedback I have received in PM and comparing to other exemplars(a 1937 gpc on ebay for example), it appears to be authentic. I apologize again for the confusion.

Ben

I was the one who contacted Ben a few days ago and opined that the Gehrig was authentic.

Although I appreciate Ben calling me an expert, I am certainly not an expert.

My first thought when I looked at that Gehrig was that it is absolutely authentic. I always trust my first look (instinct) at an autograph, and I liked that Gehrig immediately.

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

My first thought when I looked at that Gehrig was that it is absolutely authentic. I always trust my first look (instinct) at an autograph, and I liked that Gehrig immediately.

While I admire your confidence, I would never "always" do anything. Except doubt my first impression until I've "proved" my opinion to my satisfaction. Which may still be incorrect, btw.

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Deertick

While I admire your confidence, I would never "always" do anything. Except doubt my first impression until I've "proved" my opinion to my satisfaction. Which may still be incorrect, btw.

I trust my "eye" more than anything else.

[Forever Young]

Originally Posted by thetruthisoutthere

I was the one who contacted Ben a few days ago and opined that the Gehrig was authentic.

Although I appreciate Ben calling me an expert, I am certainly not an expert.

My first thought when I looked at that Gehrig was that it is absolutely authentic. I always trust my first look (instinct) at an autograph, and I liked that Gehrig immediately.

Chris, do you still believe the signature to be athentic?

Ben

[thetruthisoutthere]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

Chris, do you still believe the signature to be athentic?

Ben

Yes I do, Ben.

[Forever Young]

Thank you all for your comments and help on this. I want to especially thank David and Chris for their time and expertise. Sorry again for the confusion. Jimmy, you are correct.. I am a trouble maker.

ps: Thank you Jon for catching my uploaded photo mistake and making me look like a fool! HAHA

[canjond]

Great piece Ben. Hope you get it (if you haven't already).

[gnaz01]

Originally Posted by canjond

Knowing what we now know, I'm going out on a limb here and saying the auto may be authentic. There are aspects of the writing I really like. That said, I would greatly value the opinions of others who have posted and would factor those in if I was considering purchasing.

Me too Jon, I am thinking it is good as well.