posted 03-22-2008 04:50 PM               

Decisions, decisions, decisions...

posted 03-22-2008 10:59 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrewcli:
Decisions, decisions, decisions...

---

Overall, this is one of the best Regency's space auctions.

posted 03-26-2008 03:09 PM               

Sorry they got in, please do not let them detract from the overwhelming majority of good stuff.

posted 03-26-2008 05:33 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan Lipkin:
Catalog is now online at www.regencysuperior.com will be up on eBay in a few days.

---

Does anyone at Regency-Superior currently have the responsibility to review the autograph submissions with regards to authenticity? I see numerous examples of autographs in the catalog that either appear to be atypical, at best, or appear to be forgeries, at worst. While I also see many examples that appear to be perfectly authentic, I am a bit worried by what appears to be a growing trend of "buyer beware" auctions. I can understand one or two well-done forgeries occasionally slipping through the cracks, but some of the apparent forgeries I'm seeing in the latest catalog appear to be very crudely done (such as Lot 2180). In other instances, well known autopen patterns appear to be represented as authentic autographs (such as Lot 2138).

I have been quite supportive of the Regency-Superior auctions in the past and have purchased items for myself at some of the previous auctions. But sadly, I think the quality of the item review is lacking with this current auction. My recommendation to Regency-Superior, if they wish to remain credible seller in this marketplace, is that they employ an authenticator who is knowledgeable in astronaut autographs.

posted 03-27-2008 10:13 AM               

First of all, let me take responsibility for any inclusion of autopens or dubious autographs in the sale. With deadlines all over the place here, and very late receipt of consignments it was impossible to have all items checked before the catalog went to print.

We will, of course remove items from sale as they are proved to be mis-described or not genuine.

We have already pulled Lot # 2058, 2138 and 2180.

There are others we are checking on at the moment.

We accept the need for autograph authentification before the next catalog goes to print. Does anyone have any suggestions at to whom we can trust to evaluate autographs in our next sale? We will try to get them all checked beforehand next time.

For this auction, rest assured, we will deal with any questions as they arise.

If you judge any lots to be a problem, please email me off-list at: alipkin@regencysuperior.com

I will be attending the Smithsonian Conference in Washington, DC for the next few days so my responses may be a bit delayed until I get back, but I will respond to all.

Thank you all for your patience & loyalty.

posted 03-27-2008 02:04 PM               

Riser forgeries will either be noted and sold as such or withdrawn within the next few days.

posted 03-27-2008 02:12 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan Lipkin:
We accept the need for autograph authentification before the next catalog goes to print. Does anyone have any suggestions at to whom we can trust to evaluate autographs in our next sale? We will try to get them all checked beforehand next time.

---

posted 03-27-2008 05:02 PM               

By coincidence the Goldberg auction featured an identical advertising acrylic, also incorrectly described. They also changed the listing within hours of my letting them know. I was able to e-mail them both NOT because I am an expert when it comes to flown items, but because I recognized the photo from this interesting cS thread.

posted 03-27-2008 05:42 PM               

Other lots referred to; #2321 of Armstrong I would certainly pass on, #2322 -- Nope, one of the known forgeries, #2336-38 a German forgery as with the next two lots, #2340 another bogus attempt of the Apollo 11 crew.

posted 03-27-2008 07:04 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by stsmithva:
...and within hours it had been pulled.

---

posted 03-27-2008 08:03 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
While I am glad to read of such a quick turnaround, I have to question why the lot was pulled in its entirety?

---

posted 03-27-2008 08:56 PM               

Perhaps it should be noted that there are numerous Apollo 12 crew signed photos and covers. While most appear to be genuine, it shouldn't go unnoticed (with the death of Pete Conrad) that German forgeries may be a real or concerned possibility here. Hopefully many of the crew-signed lots were obtained during commercial signings as all 3 crewmembers were known to participate, many times all together, in numerous signings throughout the 1990s.

Lot #2402X does depict an autopen of Gibson, #2438 could be a possible German forgery, #2468 and #2470 are crew forgeries, another possible German-related forgery for #2490 as the Mattingly isn't vintage-era, #2512 just not too crazy about despite rough autograph appearances that were later common with this particular crew (mostly Cernan), #2532X depicts a Gordon autopen, #2537X highlights an autopen of Pogue, #2568X-2570 could be possible Leonov/Kubasov forgeries as I just don't care for them of what I can see, #2591X illustrates autopens of Engle and Truly, #2597X is crew autopens of STS-75, #2615--don't like the Young, one of the shown STS-33 crew-signed covers features a Musgrave autopen, #2676--Crew autopens of STS-51B with the only exception of Lind, #2679 needs a better look at the Garn, #2989 is a Bean autopen, #3012X is a Schirra autopen, #3010--be careful of this "early" Young, #3016X is an Ap-15 crew autopen with "In appreciation of your support --,"

posted 03-27-2008 10:07 PM               

I'll add 2324, 2325, 2335 & 2339. Lot 2343 is a German fake IMO. I would personally take a pass on 2320.

Just my opinion of course, but I am not sure 2340 is bad. I would like to get a better look at it.

posted 03-27-2008 10:14 PM               

With the Apollo 12 crew signed lunar photos, I would give them thumbs up. I don't think they could be German forgeries, rather they more than likely were consigned by that mega collector in Houston.

posted 03-28-2008 08:55 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken Havekotte:
I am not too crazy about both signatures (#2333 & 2325)...

---

posted 03-28-2008 09:59 AM               

Alan, if you're reading this, are you also appraising value on items even if they're not being submitted for auction? I didn't call ahead to attend as requested but am still thinking about attending (No appt is necessary). Was wondering if any other locals are going?

It's gonna be a mob scene downtown tomorrow with a marathon, Cherry Blossoms, and Nationals new stadium opener against the Orioles. Looks like a Metro-riding day! Thank you.

posted 03-28-2008 10:51 AM               

Lot 2136 - poor-looking Grissom signature
Lot 2137 - don't care all that much for either signature
Lot 2148 - very poorly done Ed White

posted 03-28-2008 11:23 AM               

The depicted Soyuz T-6 cover ex lot 2852 and lot 2878 are not flown.

posted 03-28-2008 11:41 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scott:
IMO Lot 2333 looks like either an unknown autopen pattern or a forgery based on a known autopen pattern...

---

Covers are notorious for slippage under the AP machine, something can result in some very strange distortions of a pattern as the paper moves about.

It looks to me like all the loops of the signature match those of pattern 1, as does the opening downstroke of the "C" of Collins.

posted 03-28-2008 04:10 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken Havekotte:
The GT-4 crew signed cover is not authentic in my opinion, not just with the White, but the McDivitt as well. Thanks for pointing those out.

---

posted 03-29-2008 07:29 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by stsmithva:
I was about to write something similar, since I e-mailed Mr. Lipkin about lot 2058, described as Shepard's actual flown Randall knife, and within hours it had been pulled.

---

As the consignor, it's a pity that my consignment listing was not read by the auction house. It CLEARLY stated "NOT FLOWN".

I am very disappointed that my items have been included amid so many forgeries and fakes AND that I hear about one of my items being pulled through this board, rather than via personal email. It would not have been hard to change the description as Goldberg have done with a similar item.

I am far for being a large consignor as I have no aspirations to being a dealer, but those of you who have dealt with me will know that I pride myself in the authenticity of what I sell. This is demonstrated by the fact that none of my signed consignments are identified as dubious. I just wish other sellers and auction houses took the same care...

posted 03-29-2008 11:24 AM               

If I were a consignor or bidder with Regency, I would voice my displeasure loud and clear. It's not enough to pull just items in question and say you're sorry, you should consider postponing the entire auction and have every item reviewed.

And blaming the high number of questionable items in the catalog on "deadlines" makes me wonder where Regency's priorities are. Regency and the other auction houses need to take the lead in helping to fight forgeries. Putting everything they receive in their catalog and then saying they're sorry after the fact isn't good enough.

Even though there are some nice items in this auction that look authentic and are things I've been looking for I'm not going to bid on them out of principle. I'll keep my bids and money to Heritage and RR.

posted 03-29-2008 06:19 PM               

Come on Regency, your auctions are usually first class... You need to get your act together otherwise you will lose consignors/bidders and that surely will not be good for business?

As for pulling an item from the auction and the consignor finding out about it on cS BEFORE the consignor had been contacted.... that just seems unethical and unprofessional IMHO.

posted 04-02-2008 05:50 PM               

We will be working for the next few days on the autographs and will remove items in that category as well.

When the knife item came up, I was leaving for the Washington conference and neglected to contact the consignor. My fault and I apologize to him. With his permission, I will run it again described properly in October, otherwise He will get it back, his choice.

I do appreciate th input from this list and will take your admonitions to heart. In slight defense, I will state that we try to have as broad a selection of space material as possible in our sales with much of interest for as many collectors as possible. Occasionally the breadth overwhelms us. We will do better in the future. Keep looking here for further withdrawals & corrections.

posted 04-03-2008 09:01 AM               

Your presence in this forum and comments are appreciated.

Best Regards,

posted 04-03-2008 02:45 PM               

Also the following will have corrections added to their descriptions: 2852 and 2878 NOT FLOWN.

The following will be noted as containing autopens: 2532, 2591, 2597, 2676, 2989, 3012, 3016.

Now for some other items; several items were mentioned as questionalble or bad. I spoke with the consignor of some of them and here are the results:

Lot #2321 Armstrong signature was an in-person signature obtained at the Doug Sanders Golf Tournement in Texas in the early 1990s. Lot #2340 was obtained at the same time with the Aldrin being added later at a public signing and the Collins added at a Kim Poor signing. Both of these are 100% genuine.

Lot #2324, from the same consignor is also an excellent example of Armstrong's signature, but the source can not be recalled.

Lots #2568, 2569, 2570 were also consigned by this well-known Texas collector. He purchased the Slayton signed covers at Superior years ago in a large lot, the Leonov and Kubasov signatures were acquired with the assistance of Ivan Kolotov of the Gagarin Museum who was in Texas and spent a good deal of time with this collector.

While we can all agree that some items deserve to have been pulled from this auction, it would be to the benefit of the hobby as a whole if we didn't knee-jerk believe that every slightly atypical Armstrong is not real. It puts fear in the novice that everything is bad and we can lose future collectors who might become too wary to collect. I know that this has happened in the sports collecting area, we do not want it to occur in space.

One more thing: there are a great many signed Apollo 12 items in this sale (as there have been before). Many are from this mega-collector in Houston. He has receipts for the autographs of all three members of that crew, who signed for him many times. These are NOT forgeries by any stretch, just seeing them in quantity maight make you think otherwise, but that is not the case.

Please let me know if there are any other lots you would like me to check OFF LIST so we do not tarnish good items in the sale. If you still disagree or would like to discuss any items on list afterward that is fine. I do not seek to limit debate, but to be fair to the majority of our consignors.

posted 04-06-2008 05:55 PM               

You are to be commended on your handling of these lots.