John & the weirdest, date stamp copies ?

[Paul Shirley]

Just wondering if it’s all the copies that have that date stamp  are counterfeit?  or were some of them legitimate?  Every copy I have ever seen with it on was fake 

Edited Monday at 22:26 by Paul Shirley

[Mal C]

They are all fake.

[Paul Shirley]

55 minutes ago, Mal C said:

They are all fake.

Reason I brought this up is that I keep seeing a legend ( not my choice of description)  Playing that copy has been for many years along with others.  I always thought it was a boot but started to doubt myself , I myself am on my 2nd original seems er? Legends   No longer have to play original records 

Edited yesterday at 00:47 by Paul Shirley

[Rictic66]

There’s also a look alike boot without the date stamp - according to JM’s book there is an original with a clear date stamp as well as one without and a boot with an unclear date stamp so to be sure it’s better to check the matrix details which are slightly different.
You’re probably aware of this. PT

Edited 22 hours ago by Rictic66

[Trev Thomas]

just hold it up to the light, if you can see through it, its a boot, also boots have really glossy labels whereas the original label is matt

[Ady Potts]

On 24/02/2025 at 23:51, Mal C said:

They are all fake.

Are you sure about that?

I was stood next to Soul Sam when he played his some years back at club Caliente Peterborough, his had a date stamp on it. Also the sound was very crisp & loud, unlike the early look a like boot. With that early boot the labels were very good, but like Trev has said they have a gloss to the paper. But when you play them side by side the sound difference is very noticeable. 'They' put a date stamp on some of the early boots, not all. I would guess then what happened is the early boots started making big money so they booted the boot, the newer ones having the date stamp.

Edited 4 hours ago by Ady Potts
changed a to date

[Chalky]

31 minutes ago, Ady Potts said:

Are you sure about that?

I was stood next to Soul Sam when he played his some years back at club Caliente Peterborough, his had a date stamp on it. Also the sound was very crisp & loud, unlike the early look a like boot. With that early boot the labels were very good, but like Trev has said they have a gloss to the paper. But when you play them side by side the sound difference is very noticeable. 'They' put a date stamp on some of the early boots, not all. I would guess then what happened is the early boots started making big money so they booted the boot, the newer ones having the date stamp.

The date stamped boot is from the same batch as those not stamped. They simply stamped a date on some, have 25 in my head but not sure. I can ask the lad who did them. Be about 1990 when they were done. 

[Ady Potts]

7 minutes ago, Chalky said:

The date stamped boot is from the same batch as those not stamped. They simply stamped a date on some, have 25 in my head but not sure. I can ask the lad who did them. Be about 1990 when they were done. 

Yes mate. Then there's the (more recent) boot of the boot with a wider runout, as in this photo...

[Rictic66]

Here is earlier boot without date stamp and it’s not see through or brown vinyl but it is quite shiny label. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Rictic66

[Solidsoul]

Fantastic doublesider of a record, but how did they think it would sell using a name like John and the Weirdest!

Maybe they thought, it's so far out, it's in!

Maybe they should of stuck with Johnny Hendley as the name

Edited 33 minutes ago by Solidsoul

[Jessie Pinkman]

8 minutes ago, Solidsoul said:

Fantastic doublesider of a record, but how did they think it would sell using a name like John and the Weirdest!

Maybe they thought, it's so far out, it's in!

Maybe they should of stuck with Johnny Hendley as the name

or Spider Turner & the Webs. 

[Chalky]

3 hours ago, Ady Potts said:

Yes mate. Then there's the (more recent) boot of the boot with a wider runout, as in this photo...

Very wide and too yellow as well or is that 5he camera!