1991 Xmas vinyl: Bootleged or not?

[LostRebel]

With all these 1991 Xmas vinyl auctions around...
Is this vinyl also bootleged like Ten Bball vinyl, or there are more than 1500 original copies circulating?

Lets use this thread to compare our copies and spot any possible differences (if there are any).

- Picture sleeve, labels view and detailed label scan can be found here:
http://www.pjcollectors.com/detail.asp?id=354

(my copy has no differences with this one, except the white spot that is visible on SideA, above "1990" (on the right). Is this spot printed on the label, or it's the scanner that needs cleaning? )

- Etching (this is from my copy, please compare with yours)
Side A: ZS7 4354A-IA
Side B: ZS7 4354B-IA
Clearly visible, letters and numbers with edges (if someone can take a good scan, please post it here)

p.s.: Currently there is one seller (the one Froggie indicated) with many Xmas vinyls already in his history as a seller. If you do a little more searching, you will find for example a specific seller having sold 6 copies between March-April 2010 (using the same description and picture) for about $75 - $100. And if you keep digging, there are more. (I don't think I'm allowed to post identities here... this thread will end up "CSI" or "Numb3rs" )
I am no S*ny - Ep*c police, or eb*y's Scotland yard. Just curious about the total amount of this vinyl and (of course) since I didn't received mine directly from the 10 club, if I have a legit copy or a fake.

[norman-grunge]

Good start Theo. I have checked my copy again as these are my pics on PJC. My scanner was clean and there is a white spot above "1990" on the right. Anybody esle with this spot?

My etchings are the same. The look also very clear and sharp.

I am not sure about fake copies. Maybe it's a good point too that the front sleeve is a longer than the back sleeve (white border in the scan).

I couldn't tell any other hint how to recognize a fake or legit copy. Let's hope there are only legit copies.

[theserialthrilla]

no spot above my 1990


regarding the above comment about if copies we own are fake and might not know .. ive had mine 7 years or more so im guessing its real as they didnt seem that common then..the last few years we seem to see one a week or more.but that also goes for angels and rudolph

[do.the.evolution]

also no white spot,
apart from that no diffreences

[Mango]

Not the easiest thing in the world to photo but here goes!

[Marc]

With all these 1991 Xmas vinyl auctions around...
Is this vinyl also bootleged like Ten Bball vinyl, or there are more than 1500 original copies circulating?

- Etching (this is from my copy, please compare with yours)
Side A: Z57 4354A-IA
Side B: Z57 4354B-IA
Clearly visible, letters and numbers with edges (if someone can take a good scan, please post it here)

The etching numbers start with ZS7, not Z57. This is consistent with the catalog number. But the mistake is an easy one to make.

I don't believe there are any fake 1991 Xmas vinyls out there. I just think there are some people who would rather have the $$ they can sell it for than have the record.

[LostRebel]

Thanks for that Mark. I updated the first post with the "ZS7" correction.

I agree that many people prefer selling this in order to have a few extra $$$...
and I also know that many people prefer having more than one copy of an item in their collection (and one day decide to sell them all)...
But many sellers selling more than five 1991 Xmas copies each, is a bit strange. Especially when these copies are all in mint condition (and we are talking about a 20 years old 7").
Especially from users that their feedback doesn't show any other "Pearl Jam activity".

Suddenly 1991 Xmas was all around the famous auction site (like it happened with the Bball PD). Let's say there are no fakes around... here are a few more questions:
- Are there really 1500 copies around (like it is written in the pjcollectors.com listing?
- If not, how many do you believe there were pressed?

My opinion is that Sony/Epic back in 1991 didn't press a new band's Xmas single in soooo many copies, so many that until today we see so many mint copies around.
I don't know if this number is really 1500 (hey the Benny box is limited to 2000, plus a 100 more for charity, try to compare the two releases).
But this was a very limited release for sure. And all these auctions with mint copies of a 20 years old 7" (remember many sellers auctioning more than 5 copies each month!) really doesn't make sense.


Any other member checked its copy for any differences? Any other with or without the "white spot" ? (it seems that this is the only difference found at the moment)

[karpin]

no white spot

[Froggie]

Hey guys,

Just to update, I have been in touch with the seller in question.

He provied an explanation as to how he has multiple copies.

I went ahead and purchased a copy from him. I am very happy with it. It is mint.

The copies he has have been in a box and have not been touched since 1991.

[dugangsxr]

Mine has no white dot.

[Frank Gibson]

i bought it almost6-7 years ago ...don't know where to find the white spot

do you think is that a good information about is legit?

[Mango]

Just reading another wonderful TFT article here http://www.twofeetthick.com/2004/12/fan ... christmas/ on the 91 single and according to them "Approximately 1500 singles were manufactured but it is known that approximately 200 have not circulated." What do they mean by approximately 200 have not circulated? It may be a stupid question but dammit its Christmas!

EDIT

I got a reply on FB: Thanks Mark ... that was one of our first from 2004! I think that comment is dated. We told the story in Jan on Sirius that a friend had a box of them, and most if not all have been liberated

[dimejinky99]

Perhaps unrelated lads, but a few years ago I got handed a double handful of PJ/10c "manual for free living" handbooks from a friend. About twenty of them. This was two years after that issue was sent out to ten club members. He had a friend that worked for Sony and knew I like PJ so gave than to me. These things are produced multiply if not in mass numbers but still. No reason to think they aren't genuine although skepticism is always understandable.