posted 02-02-2010 11:03 AM               

Many of the less-experienced and less-astute collectors have trouble perceiving the subtle traits and characteristics of modern, sophisticated Armstrong forgeries, but few should have difficulty in seeing that the Armstrong forgeries shown below are obvious forgeries.

Shown here are three Armstrong forgeries taken from David Frohman's publication of 2000, entitled: "The Neil A. Armstrong IACC/DA Concise Autograph Study." At the time, they were presented as authentic. It is surprising, and regretable, that for 3-4 years, Frohman/Peachstate sold several hundred of these same type signatures.

Almost laughable by today's forgery standards, and candidates for Chris Spain's "Hall of Shame," these "Peachstate Armstrongs" illustrate well how improved and professional today's Armstrong forgeries have become. And how more experienced and competent "eyes" are needed to authenticate them.

posted 02-02-2010 01:46 PM               

There are still some unanswered questions out there about who actually created these forgeries and how David Frohman became their distributor. Interestingly, the "To David" example you post above is quite curious, as it appeared the vast majority of the so-called Peachstate forgeries were unpersonalized. If anyone claimed to have obtained the "To David" signature from Armstrong in person, that would surely appear to point a finger of guilt (or conspiracy) in the creation of these signatures.

posted 02-02-2010 04:47 PM               

No-one in this community should be afraid of (a) objective comment on items they have for sale, or (b) making balanced, unpersonal commentary on the sales of other members/dealers. This includes an expectation that those who are held out as experts (or who hold themselves out as experts) should also air their views. There is, however, no place for personal attacks or unwarranted judgments about people's motivations.

posted 02-02-2010 05:22 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by mjanovec:
If anyone claimed to have obtained the "To David" signature in person

---

posted 02-02-2010 06:53 PM               

I do know, however, that the "To David" example was utilized by David Frohman in his published Neil Armstrong autograph study and was presented as an example of an authentic Armstrong signature (along with unpersonalized examples of the same apparent forgery style).

posted 02-03-2010 09:27 AM               

He allowed questions about his forgeries and I was the one to ask him about his "To DAVID" and where it came from. His basic non-answer was that the 'To David' piece did not originate from the Haecker Hoard (where he claims that all his several hundred Armstrong forgeries came from), but was photocopied in passing over the years.

After his brief Q & A session, he excused himself, proclaimed the proceedings over and has not posted on cS, directly, since.

posted 02-05-2010 01:51 PM               

Because of questions and interest off-line, here is a Frohman/Peachstate advertisement showing two of his offerings in 1998. Peachstate often had full page ads in Autograph Collector Magazine and this detail came from the December 1998 issue.

With a heading including "Timeless Classics from the Space Specialists," were these two offerings. The Apollo 11 crew signed photo on the left was actually offered to me by mail from Frohman, with him urging me to trade for it because he has "clients lining up for it..." As provenance, he stated in an accompanying Sept. 1998 letter that, according to the source he got it from, the Armstrong was signed in Ohio c. 1989; the Collins in Florida in c. 1988; and the Aldrin in person in 1989.

The standard Peachstate Armstrong WSS on the right, having a price of $295, was a nice bargain, as Armstrong WSS's generally sold for more back then, especially unpersonalized like Peachstate specialized in. Peachstate's generally lower prices had a lot to do with them selling well.

posted 02-05-2010 02:39 PM               

I hope that Mr. Pearlman can control the defamation that is occurring on his website against Peachstate and others before it leads to bigger issues. While everyone has a right to their opinion it is quite another issue when those opinions become slander.

posted 02-05-2010 03:29 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by DSeuss5490:
Its only a select few that keep dragging this on and on, but this is really becoming a big problem. It has gone far beyond the helpful offering of "Opinions & Advice" and needs to be put under control my the moderator.

---

posted 02-05-2010 03:29 PM               

Regarding the copyright of an advertisement (and who holds that copyright), I suspect Bob's posting of the ad falls under fair usage.

I personally believe this topic is valid, as many newer collectors know little about the Peachstate saga...and since Peachstate Armstrongs still appear for sale periodically on eBay, it doesn't hurt to educate newer collectors on the history of these forgeries.

posted 02-05-2010 04:08 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by DSeuss5490:
I am assuming that you requested permission from "Autograph Collector" to duplicate that page from their magazine? You do understand that the contents of that magazine have a copyright?

---

...four factors (are) to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
   
2. The nature of the copyrighted work
   
3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
   
4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

Source: US Copyright Office

posted 02-05-2010 04:41 PM               

Autograph Collector Magazine would surely welcome any authoritative and concise investigation that unearths an injustice that besmirches their reputation and potentially that of the autograph collecting community as a whole.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DSeuss5490:
Its only a select few that keep dragging this on and on

---

posted 02-05-2010 05:13 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by DSeuss5490:
I am assuming that you requested permission from "Autograph Collector" to duplicate that page from their magazine?

---

To the larger point, as was pointed out, the law does permit "fair use" reproduction for the purpose of critique, comment or review.

quote:

---

I hope that Mr. Pearlman can control the defamation that is occurring on his website against Peachstate and others before it leads to bigger issues.

---

posted 02-05-2010 05:17 PM               

Frohman made a mistake, but has made good. It's been a long time since this happened. There is ample and easily available documentation about these and other forgeries for the novice collector should they seek to educate themselves -- most of it here on collectSPACE. New collectors should be aware, but certainly to brand Peachstate with forgery forevermore is unfair.

I was the purchaser of a couple of those famous Armstrongs years ago. However, I don't consider myself a victim. Rather, Peachstate made good, I have learned from the experience and have moved on without holding a grudge. As a matter of fact, it was the purchase of these very items that introduced me to space collecting and to the wonderful benefits of doing business with Peachstate. Since that time I have been able to acquire a collection worthy of any museum.

And only with the help of Peachstate have I been able to turn a simple pastime into a passion. I have spoken at schools and to a number of groups about the Apollo-era and collecting space memorabilia and have been able to share with them the many relics and knowledge I have acquired from Peachstate over the years.

posted 02-05-2010 10:03 PM               

In my mind, there are still unanswered questions about the Armstrong-Peachstate episode.

Throughout the late 1990s many were crediting Peachstate as the "leading Armstrong autograph authority" after the company had published an authoritative Armstrong study guide. But as it turned out, the "guide" contained now-certain Armstrong autograph forgery styles, including the famous, "To DAVID" inscription. Not only Armstrong, but also for crewmates Aldrin and Collins.

Yes, we all make mistakes, but if it was my firm involved in something like this instead of Peachstate, I would insist to quickly answer any and all questions put forward to fully resolve the situation. Hopefully, to everyone's complete satisfaction and understanding as to how such material was obtained.

After all, commercially selling and distributing autograph material from man's first lunar landing requires the upmost responsibility, as the "First Man" continues to increase in popularity, is in great demand, and with ever-increasing market values.

posted 02-05-2010 10:54 PM               

Rather, were I in the same position as David, I would have used my own website to publish all the information I knew about the forged autographs, such that I could take responsibility for publicizing the details rather than leaving it for others (and in the process, perhaps, introducing inaccuracies).

That's not meant as a criticism, by the way.

posted 02-06-2010 07:12 AM               

The Peachstate forgeries were really, really good ones -- a very fortunate set of circumstances, enabled by some very knowledgeable collectors on this set, allowed for the space collecting community to become aware of the problem and, perhaps, to limit the long-term damage.

posted 02-06-2010 08:59 AM               

As far as how many Peachstates were sold, we get a general idea from David Frohman himself. Taken from his November 2001 presentation here on cS, he states that they came from a collector named Ernest Haecker. No one on cS knew of collector Haecker and when his location was divulged, we learned that he was deceased and his family knew nothing of his collecting.

Frohman gave a total of 122 Armstrong signed 8x10 portraits and 57 Collins signed portraits acquired from Haecker, and has provided only unspecified and inexact amounts of other photos mostly signed by Armstrong and Collins. Frohman made use of the Apollo 11 photos signed by only Armstrong and Collins, as he is well known to have visited Buzz Aldrin on several occasions and probably to have these Apollo 11 photos signed and completed by Aldrin (On one trip to visit Aldrin, Frohman even took one of my photos to be signed). And never have any of the mission-inscribed Aldrin autographs on his Apollo 11 crew signed photos ever been judged anything but authentic.

So an estimate going by Frohman's inexact and unspecified numbers indicate that probably at least 200 photos signed by Armstrong and/or Collins were sold by Peachstate and were subject to the famous Peachstate Recall beginning in Feb. 2001.

posted 02-06-2010 09:57 PM               

Let's also remember it was Steve Zarelli who "cracked" the Frohman (or "Haeker") forgeries.

Steve, to me, is still the absolute "go to" guy on Neils.

posted 02-07-2010 11:18 AM               

Before moving on to other forgeries that plague and have plagued our hobby, one more thing needs to be addressed:

Some praise and admire Frohman for admitting a mistake and graciously granting refunds. But those who praise him for that fail to consider or realize that Frohman didn't just volunteer on his own that what he had been selling for about 3 years was bogus.

His admission and announcement of refunds only resulted after outside pressure was exerted on him, including: mounting concern and questions from knowledgeable collectors; the famous Zarelli "Flag Test"; and even a response from Neil Armstrong himself! And only then, after all that, did he do what had to be done.

Perhaps the credit, praise and admiration for ending Peachstate's 3-year run has been somewhat misdirected, and should go instead to others who were perceptive, concerned and alert enough to bring down the curtain on all this.

posted 02-07-2010 02:04 PM               

Let me correct an earlier post of mine, as you pointed out, there were no bogus Aldrin reports from any of the Peachstate offerings. They only concerned Armstrong and Collins, now that I recall in looking back.

posted 02-08-2010 07:33 AM               

He stated that Haecker was a customer of his and that he received four parcels from Haecker containing all the signed photos that he soon busily began selling. The 1st parcel was said to be received between Dec. 7-9, 1997 and Haecker passed away in April '98.

That's about all the info on Haecker that Frohman provided here.

posted 02-09-2010 10:21 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bob M:
Frohman provided little info about Ernest Haecker

---

I should point out that the death index has been known to make mistakes. If one does an Intelius search of Ernest R. (his middle initial) Haecker, it does show a residence in Pennsylvania (where the death index claimed he died) and would be 61 today if alive. The problem with Intelius, is often when an individual dies, the individual is still listed as being alive. So, the death index could possibly contain erroneous information in his birth year.