Hi,

 

 

Anybody Got An Idea Which Could Be The Rarer One?

 

JM Listed The PG Label ... Only One Went In The Last Years

 

 

 

Thanks In Advance

Zanetti

PG label looks a bit 80s to me. Definitely Gloreco is the original and PG a later bootleg pressing.

Edited February 4, 201510 yr by dimples

Yup, font on PG copy doesn't look right at all.....

Wuu - Didn´t know that there is a bootleg - thax guys

But why JM shows it in his Million Dollar soul Book ? 

Paul Gerrani - producer on label PG.Maybe he did this as a private release........

  On 04/02/2015 at 11:46, KevH said:

Paul Gerrani - producer on label PG.Maybe he did this as a private release........

 

It is obviously a deliverate mistake. Real producer is Paul Ciranni as on Gloreco. Paul Gerranni is a fake. Everything on PG is wrong if you compare both labels.

PG looks like a 70s pressing and it does turn up occasionally around Detroit, but I can't figure out why the pressing was done - a rock n roll revival collectible?

 

this wasn't played in England until the 80's right?

Once Again ... Why Does JM Show It In His Book - Always thought It Contains Only RARE ORIGINAL Stuff ?

JM is human and he does make mistakes sometimes. Even big as this.

  On 04/02/2015 at 12:08, dimples said:

It is obviously a deliverate mistake. Real producer is Paul Ciranni as on Gloreco. Paul Gerranni is a fake. Everything on PG is wrong if you compare both labels.

 

Ah.! 

The Gloreco has an RCA matrix stamp in the dead wax. If any one has a copy of the Pg to confirm its the same stamper.

To answer the original question I think that the later pressing is rarer. There have been loads of the Gloreco sold over the past 3 years - I'm just surprised that it still commands a high price. Still a brilliant record though but I'm waiting till the  price falls.

  On 04/02/2015 at 18:00, gointoagogo said:

To answer the original question I think that the later pressing is rarer. 

That S what I think Aswell ... But Didn´t Know That The PG copy Is A Boot

There's a mention of it by Keith Rylatt at the end of this recent Motown Junkies thread. Presumably he doesn't think it a boot.

 

https://motownjunkies.co.uk/2009/10/11/47/

  On 04/02/2015 at 18:00, gointoagogo said:

To answer the original question I think that the later pressing is rarer. There have been loads of the Gloreco sold over the past 3 years - I'm just surprised that it still commands a high price. Still a brilliant record though but I'm waiting till the  price falls.

The price has fallen considerably with one going for not much more than £200 yesterday. Brad Hales turned up a sizeable quantity a couple of years ago with the first auctioning for about $750. A PG copy sold for a goodly sum a few months ago suggesting this might be an alternative issue. Until the Gloreco hoard came to light, this was the scarcer version: now the PG is relatively scarcer but the doubts surrounding it are justified until someone can verify its origin. I would like to hear John's view of the PG release as there is a story behind it.

I would't touch a PG copy with a bargepole.

I was around when the Gloreco record was released. I used to drive to Detroit 2 Saturdays a month, to look for records.  I saw the Gloreco record several times.  In all my years of flipping through millions of 45s from 1963 to 1972 (Gloreco was 1963), I NEVER saw the PG record.  The type font implies that the PG record was pressed in the late '70s.  So, I suspect that it is a boot, or a late '70s repressing by the owner of the master. The mis-spelling makes me lean towards it being a boot.

Edited February 5, 201510 yr by RobbK

  On 05/02/2015 at 06:41, RobbK said:

I was around when the Gloreco record was released. I used to drive to Detroit 2 Saturdays a month, to look for records.  I saw the Gloreco record several times.  In all my years of flipping through millions of 45s from 1963 to 1972 (Gloreco was 1963), I NEVER saw the PG record.  The type font implies that the PG record was pressed in the late '80s.  So, I suspect that it is a boot, or a late '70s repressing by the owner of the master. The mis-spelling makes me lean towards it being a boot.

      Top! Thx Rob