Triple century bat memorabilia

Remove this Banner Ad

I would assume the Bradman foundation had him sign his name a few hundred times before he died for exactly this purpose. Nowhere does it claim that he actually signed the bat himself.

It's a nice piece of memorabilia but $3000 does seem a lot. You are probably mostly paying for Bradman's signature anyway.
 
lusheslewis said:
I would assume the Bradman foundation had him sign his name a few hundred times before he died for exactly this purpose. Nowhere does it claim that he actually signed the bat himself.

It's a nice piece of memorabilia but $3000 does seem a lot. You are probably mostly paying for Bradman's signature anyway.
Click to expand...
"Personally signed" pretty much implies he signed the bat himself.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

lusheslewis said:
I would assume the Bradman foundation had him sign his name a few hundred times before he died for exactly this purpose. Nowhere does it claim that he actually signed the bat himself.

It's a nice piece of memorabilia but $3000 does seem a lot. You are probably mostly paying for Bradman's signature anyway.
Click to expand...
By saying "Personally signed by each of the six triple centurions", I'd say that goes pretty close to claiming that.
 
You could also buy this bit of crap, remarkably like the other one, except it's only signed by 5 of the Centurions, excluding Clarke.

Bradman's 'signature' also adorns this bat too.

But check out the price... a bargain at only $2000

TRIPLE_CENT_NEW_004.jpg


http://taylormadeevents.net.au/shop/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=673
 
ManWithNoName said:
"Personally signed" pretty much implies he signed the bat himself.
Click to expand...

I missed that bit, I only read up to "WWOS is pleased to release a superbly framed bat including the personal signature of all six triple centurions, including Don Bradman’s personal signature acquired from the Bradman Foundation".

Saying it's personally signed is a bit shonky but I guess if they are referring to the piece as a whole and not the bat specifically they can probably get away with it.

Then again it has obviously been rushed onto the market ("the only to do so on Australian soil" :roll eyes: ) so maybe they will clarify it.

At the end of the day if you bought this having thought the bat was actually signed by him then I have little sympathy for you.
 
Just getting slightly off the topic, I have never heard Ian Chappell endorse one of these pieces of memorabilia. Nor has he ever done one of those abhorrent TV promos for a Channel 9 program. He must have a contractual agreement that he doesn't have to engage in this absurd behaviour.
 
If that's a bit rich for you then you can buy this set of collectables all beautifully framed and mounted and signed by Bradman.

Buy it now for just $450.00

Screenshot2012-01-06at83414PM.png
 
The concept of 'signed by' is quite a different thing to 'bearing the authorised reproduction of Bradman's signature'.

Which is what they said on the voice over on the telecast today.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

lusheslewis said:
"Their listing states that the bat is 'personally signed by each of the six triple centurions'"

Really?

Maybe you should scroll down the page....
Click to expand...

Like here (right click to view):

Screenshot2012-01-06at84412PM.png



They've got their bases covered on both fronts here, still...
 
Jordan... said:
Are you employed by Channel 9?
Click to expand...

Strangely enough, no. But I have had plenty of professional experience with these types of products/claims before.
 
worbod said:
Just getting slightly off the topic, I have never heard Ian Chappell endorse one of these pieces of memorabilia. Nor has he ever done one of those abhorrent TV promos for a Channel 9 program. He must have a contractual agreement that he doesn't have to engage in this absurd behaviour.
Click to expand...

That's true, even Richie gets roped in to promoting their lame tv shows which is ridiculous as you know Richie wouldn't watch any of that crap.

Have never seen Ian Chappell take part in any of the wearing pink for Jane McGrath day either. All the other commentators get into it but he stays out of it all.
 
Plugger35 said:
That's true, even Richie gets roped in to promoting their lame tv shows which is ridiculous as you know Richie wouldn't watch any of that crap.

Have never seen Ian Chappell take part in any of the wearing pink for Jane McGrath day either. All the other commentators get into it but he stays out of it all.
Click to expand...
Chappell is a w***er.
 
BarneyBent said:
How do we know that Bradman didn't just sign a few thousand bats before he died?
Click to expand...
Because I emailed the merchandise site and they said Bradman's signature had been provided to them by the Bradman Foundation and had been "integrated" onto the bat face.

So their statement that the bat has been "personally signed" by all six players in question is simply false.
 
My personal belief is that you can't 'create' memorabilia. An object is memorable because it was involved in a significant moment (whether sport, history, whatever).

For example, if Bradman's actual bat he used in his 334 was available, that would be a fantastic piece. Whether he signed it or not makes no difference to me (it makes a huge difference in the re-sale market, I know). Bradman wasn't great because he could sign his name - he was great because he could play cricket better than anybody, and this bat was one of the tools he used. A 'reproduction' is not the same thing - not even worth considering. And the whole concept of a celebrity signature being a valuable item is a fascinating bit of cultural weirdness - it makes no sense at all.

How much Tendulkar '100 100s' crap do you reckon they have piled up in the Chinese warehouses right now?
 
worbod said:
Just getting slightly off the topic, I have never heard Ian Chappell endorse one of these pieces of memorabilia. Nor has he ever done one of those abhorrent TV promos for a Channel 9 program. He must have a contractual agreement that he doesn't have to engage in this absurd behaviour.
Click to expand...

I think Chappell has a contractual agreement that he never has to acknowledge the existence of Tony Greig, so that probably covers it.
 
lusheslewis said:
I would assume the Bradman foundation had him sign his name a few hundred times before he died for exactly this purpose. Nowhere does it claim that he actually signed the bat himself.

It's a nice piece of memorabilia but $3000 does seem a lot. You are probably mostly paying for Bradman's signature anyway.
Click to expand...

Roy & HG were of the view that for the last few years of his life Sir Don was locked in a shed against his will and forced to sign enough bats to last for eternity.
 
western royboy said:
Roy & HG were of the view that for the last few years of his life Sir Don was locked in a shed against his will and forced to sign enough bats to last for eternity.
Click to expand...
When select release "geniune" signed cards the signature is actually done on a piece of contact, then placed on the face of the card. Did the Don sign 1000 pieces of contact?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dogs105
List of current Australian players, 25 or under, with FC bat average >40 and/or bowl average < 35
Replies
6
Views
592
dogs105
dogs105
Jascave
  • Poll
Who would be the best cricket team of the 20th Century?
Replies
12
Views
556
footyfan1978
footyfan1978
ourgameplandoesntwork
Best “international” batsmen of recent decades
Replies
9
Views
588
Cursed Cat
Cursed Cat
R
Norman O'Neill: Battling Great Expectations
Replies
2
Views
410
PhatBoy
PhatBoy
PhatBoy
Which country’s batsmen are the easiest on the eye?
Replies
15
Views
659
PhatBoy
PhatBoy

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top