|
Author
|
Topic: 330107733815: Apollo 11 signatures
|
Rick Mulheirn
Member Posts: 4167
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 04-09-2007 02:56 PM
   
Check out this eBay item. 330107733815 Provenance looks iron clad. My knowledge of Armstrong signatures is not the greatest but if this lot is a fake... I'll eat Scott Cornish's hat! (Given the good cause the proceeds from the sale are being put to I have contacted the seller and suggested they put a reserve on it.) |
Scott
Member Posts: 3307
From: Houston, TX
Registered: May 2001
|
posted 04-09-2007 03:54 PM
OK, um, Robert and I are sorta losing our minds right now, you know? The inscription and Armstrong autograph look (from what can be seen, in my opinion) to be completely in his hand and... the letter looks genuinely signed and... I don't really wanna say what else I'm thinking... |
Ken Havekotte
Member Posts: 2914
From: Merritt Island, Florida, Brevard
Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 04-09-2007 03:56 PM
Sorry to say, but from my opinion, the signatures on the litho of Aldrin and Collins are not authentic. Both of those appear to be in the same hand. The Armstrong I would have to see close-up or get a better scan. Interesting, the Armstrong autograph on the cut-letter is authentic, however, just about all of the letter's content isn't included as part of the lot. The Armstrong signature at the bottom, while genuine, could be from a completely different letter content and not even related to the topic referred to. If I can recall, without checking the eBay lot again, there wasn't even a name and/or address displayed in the Armstrong letter. Why has most of the letter's written content been deleted and/or not included with the entire letter? Hmmmm - Looks funny to me, huh? |
James Brown
Member Posts: 1287
From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted 04-09-2007 03:58 PM
Oooo... Not even close. |
Scott
Member Posts: 3307
From: Houston, TX
Registered: May 2001
|
posted 04-09-2007 04:01 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Havekotte:
Sorry to say, but from my opinion, the signatures on the litho of Aldrin and Collins are not authentic. Both of those appear to be in the same hand...
Ken, the TLS appears to be offered in its entirety - one of the auction's other pictures just shows a closeup of the letterhead and signature. I also believe the Collins and Aldrin are not authentic. But who signed them? You don't suppose... nah... |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42988
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-09-2007 04:21 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Scott:
I also believe the Collins and Aldrin are not authentic. But who signed them? You don't suppose... nah...
They sure do appear to be signed using the same pen as the Armstrong... and some of the letters in the Aldrin and Collins have similarities to the inscription, only Aldrin-ized and Collins-ized... but am I going to be the one who suggests what we're thinking? No siree! |
Rick Mulheirn
Member Posts: 4167
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 04-09-2007 04:23 PM
Sorry guys... I admit I am no Armstrong expert but what am I missing here? quote:
Originally posted by Ken Havekotte:
Interesting, the Armstrong autograph on the cut-letter is authentic, however, just about all of the letter's content isn't included as part of the lot.
Ken, the "cut" details of the letter are close-ups to show the detail of the signature. The entire letter is included in the lot. The company name on the NASA headed paper matches that on the letter sent to Armstrong with the decanters.And the address for the firm would almost certainly have been displayed on the bottom of the decanters also... if not the obligatory customs labels that would have been on the packaging. The company letter, Armstrong letter and inscription all tie in... Please guys, I am eager to be shown the error of my ways, It is from such thoughtful insights that I and everybody else learns how to spot a fraud. But this looks good to me. |
spaced out
Member Posts: 3110
From: Paris, France
Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 04-09-2007 04:33 PM
The Armstrong signatures are not in doubt Rick but the Collins and Aldrin are bad forgeries.First guess would be that the Collins and Aldrin were added later to boost the value but the trouble is all the letter and ISP together prove that the crew-signed litho was really sent from NASA. So... the forgeries were done at NASA either before or after Neil signed and inscribed the piece. The amusing idea is that given the matching pen, signature angle, and to some extent style, it was actually Neil that knocked-off the extra signatures for whatever reason. Now what value would you place on four Neil Armstrong signatures (albeit two of them in someone else's names)?  |
Ken Havekotte
Member Posts: 2914
From: Merritt Island, Florida, Brevard
Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 04-09-2007 04:37 PM
I stand corrected on the Armstrong letter, but haven't seen a copy of the letter in full. Did Armstrong mention in the letter that a crew-signed photo was included? If he did, that would be most interesting, but I still don't like the Aldrin and Collins. |
Lunar rock nut
Member Posts: 911
From: Oklahoma city, Oklahoma U.S.A.
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-09-2007 04:41 PM
Neil did all of them! (There I said it.)The angle of his and Buzz's look almost exact. |
Rick Mulheirn
Member Posts: 4167
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 04-09-2007 04:42 PM
Why is everybody being so coy about it? Come on guys, say what you are all thinking. Armstrong signed all three signatures! There, I said it.I very much doubt the Aldrin and Collins were added at a later date. They appear to have all been signed using the same pen. I suspect such a suggestion, whilst intriguing and fascinating, will bring in to question many a supposedly "crew" signed Apollo 11 photo/litho. Personally, I find this revelation exciting though I suspect not new to some on this site. I have no interest in crew signed photos so have no vested interest to safeguard. |
Rick Mulheirn
Member Posts: 4167
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 04-09-2007 04:47 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Havekotte:
Did Armstrong mention in the letter that a crew-signed photo was included?
Yes, the Armstrong letter specifically refers to the enclosed litho being signed by Collins and Aldrin also.Anybody would think it was me selling the darn thing. It is nothing to do with me. |
dennisl
Member Posts: 59
From:
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 04-09-2007 04:48 PM
Wow! Just when I thought I had seen everything I could possibly see in this hobby. I saw this on eBay and thought — no it couldn't be. Then I come on here to check and see others are thinking the same thing. Who would have thought? You know, he did not do that bad of a job (I have seen much worse). |
Rick Mulheirn
Member Posts: 4167
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 04-09-2007 04:52 PM
I get the feeling we have unearthed something quite significant here. |
Rick Mulheirn
Member Posts: 4167
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 04-09-2007 04:58 PM
quote:
Originally posted by spaced out:
...the trouble is all the letter and ISP together prove that the crew-signed litho was really sent from NASA.
The letter, signed by Armstrong, states that the litho with the inscription was signed by all three crewmen. What else are we to read in to the letter? |
mjanovec
Member Posts: 3811
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted 04-09-2007 05:02 PM
This brings new meaning to the term "Neil Armstrong forgery." Although, we do know he has forged Mickey Mouse's signature in the past!(For what its worth, it's not unheard of for Beatles items to be signed by one member of the group, with the same Beatle then forging signatures of the other three.) |
bruce
Member Posts: 916
From: Fort Mill, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 04-09-2007 07:42 PM
If indeed Armstrong did provide all three signatures, this would lend some credence to my theory concerning an autographed Apollo 11 photo I received from Neil Armstrong circa 1988. Originally, I sent the unsigned photo to Mike Collins and it came back with an autopen signature. I then sent it to Buzz Aldrin, whereupon it came back with a "stamped" signature. Lastly, I sent it to Armstrong and it came back with a personalized inscription, signature AND an additional "To Bruce" over Buzz's stamped signature! The "To Bruce" over Buzz's signature and the same "To Bruce" over Neil's signature were amazingly similar, although Neil's was in blue Sharpie and Buzz's was black. BTW, I submitted my photo to Scott a couple of years ago when he was conducting the Armstrong signature study. He confirmed that the Armstrong was legit, the Aldrin was a stamped signature and the Collins was an auto-pen, although no mention of the Buzz "To Bruce" was mentioned. Interesting... |
Scott
Member Posts: 3307
From: Houston, TX
Registered: May 2001
|
posted 04-09-2007 08:16 PM
Bruce, yes I recall your photo well and just looked at it again after reading your post. The "To Bruce" over Aldrin's signature really puzzles me. If it had been placed there at the time of the Aldrin stamp, then it would obviously be a secretarial personalization. But if it appeared only after you received the photo back from Armstrong, I have no reasonable explanation for it. I don't know why Armstrong would have written that there. For what its worth, it looks dissimilar (in my opinion) from the personalization over Armstrong's autograph and I somewhat doubt that Armstrong wrote the "To Bruce" over the Aldrin stamp. But I doubt it less today than I did yesterday... |
bruce
Member Posts: 916
From: Fort Mill, SC, USA
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 04-09-2007 09:19 PM
Scott, thanks for weighing in on that. I could be wrong as far as the sequencing of what was signed when, but, I remember being puzzled when the photo came back from Armstrong and not remembering the "To Bruce" over the Aldrin signature before. You're right in that it could be a secretarial inscription, even though the inscription itself and the stamped signature are an odd combination of two writing styles meant to be represented together. It's an interesting piece nonetheless. I'm glad our hobby has guys like you looking after things! |
Lunar rock nut
Member Posts: 911
From: Oklahoma city, Oklahoma U.S.A.
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-17-2007 01:10 PM
Is the winner a cS member? It did fetch a healthy $3920. |
413 is in
Member Posts: 628
From: Alexandria, VA USA
Registered: May 2006
|
posted 04-17-2007 01:50 PM
I'm proud to say that I was Bidder 1 with a top bid of $9.99. I guess I missed the mark.  |
mjanovec
Member Posts: 3811
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted 04-17-2007 01:51 PM
The final price doesn't seem out of line for what the lot was worth. $4k for an Armstrong TLS and Armstrong personalized litho (both is less-than-mint condition) isn't all that bad. Granted, I'm not sure what the value is for Armstrong-forged signatures of Collins and Aldrin...it certainly makes this item a rarer entity, even if it's still not worth the same as a litho genuinely signed by all three.I just hope the buyer realized what he was buying. |
Lunar rock nut
Member Posts: 911
From: Oklahoma city, Oklahoma U.S.A.
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-17-2007 02:36 PM
Michael Orenstein said it best a couple of years ago when I was attempting to get an appraisal from him on an item I have. He said since there was never anything sold like it, there was nothing to go by. It would be up to what collectors would be willing to pay to establish a base. It would appear it is worth $3920.It would be interesting if someone could get the buyer to have Scott C. or someone to look at it and verify it is all in Neils hand writing. I am sure many inquiring minds here would like to know. |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42988
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-17-2007 02:57 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Lunar rock nut:
It would appear it is worth $3920.
Except, that's not the case with this auction. As Mark pointed out, there was more than one item offered by this sale, for which known values exist. You must first deduct the value of the TLS, and then, perhaps, you are left with the value of the signed photo. Even so, one example does not define a trend... quote:
It would be interesting if someone could get the buyer to have Scott C. or someone to look at it and verify it is all in Neil's hand writing.
With all due respect to Scott and all others in his situation, in this case, the only person who could comment for whom the opinion would remove any doubt would be Mr. Armstrong himself. |
Scott
Member Posts: 3307
From: Houston, TX
Registered: May 2001
|
posted 04-17-2007 03:25 PM
Robert is correct. The personalization and Armstrong signature are able to be authenticated, but the Collins and Aldrin "signatures" could only really be determined (by someone aside from Armstrong himself) to not be in Collins' and Aldrin's hands. As Robert says, the only person who could truly say whether Armstrong wrote the Collins and Aldrin signatures is Armstrong himself. Right now there is no confirmation that he wrote them, though there is circumstantial evidence to that effect.As far as value, this item is no doubt very rare and may possibly be unique. A comparable item to this one as far as rarity (and insight into his personality/sense of humor) would be the famous recently signed photo of Armstrong with Mickey Mouse, signed "Mickey". Some people might not want an item like that, but others sure would. I know I would. |
gliderpilotuk
Member Posts: 3398
From: London, UK
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-17-2007 05:02 PM
I'm not at all convinced by the theory that Neil Armstrong "produced" the other two. The formation of the "Aldrin" word is actually quite good - I know I couldn't replicate such a good copy with respect to letter formation and relative sizes.Contextually it looks like a good theory but for how long do you think he practiced to get the Aldrin looking so good? |
advertisement