actual lol 

Warhol’s work is great.

Irrespective of whether he worked for Warhol or not, these are signed by Ali. And the only time he acknowledged his birth name. That kinda counts in ma book!

Met the guy, and can attest to this being genuine...

Kaufman vs Ali

Thanks Rodgro - well said !

Also for those doubting why Muhammad Ali would sign 'aka Cassius Clay', please do some research and you will see many examples of the double signature !  These were brought direct from Kaufmann's Estate so full provenance available. 

Here are some photos who appreciate Kaufmann's work :

Steve kaufman was an amazing artist - incredible person, def great value long term. Lots of big celebs own his art. He’s had huge accomplishments


Steve Kaufman was an amazing artist - incredible person - That may be and is most likely true. If YOU think he was an amazing artist and incredible person then terrific. I am delighted that you love his work. To each his own and what I or anybody else thinks of his works doesn't mean squat AS LONG AS YOU LOVE IT AND THINK IT'S AMAZING, SO CONGRATS.

def great value long term. - Really? Based on what information as your statement is patently absurd. You can go onto liveauctioneers.com and look at the sales results from his works being sold at auction. THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF THEM selling for $100 to $500 USD when they were originally released for thousands of dollars. In fact, a good number of pieces have been "passed on," which means either NO ONE wanted them or no one wanted to bid the lowest estimated value of the piece. Don't kid yourself if you genuinely think Kaufman works are "def great value long term," because there are thousands of immediate examples as to why that is simply not true.

Lots of big celebs own his art.  I don't even know how to reply to that statement. You might want to have written, "Lots of big celebrities WERE GIVEN his art." I know artists who have made entire CV's up because they've sent their works to different celebrities and then put their names down on their CV's as their work being owned by....." Most celebrities don't return work they're sent for free (why should they) they either throw it away or give it to some assistant, family member, put it in storage or re-gift it to charities, but if it has not been returned, the artists write in their resumes....... "In the collection of....." I don't know how old you are or if you are even remotely involved in the art business, but if you made that statement about someone's work being validated because its "owned by a lot of celebrities," any art professional would laugh in your face.

But hey, I'm delighted you love Kaufman's works and that's all that should matter FOR YOU, but don't try to justify the "value" of his works based on the "reasons" you gave because it's simply not true.

This became more common at the end and he even signed some gloves for OA with just Cassius Clay. Rock solid provenance as OA was owned by his manager. I have had many in the past but sold them all now. Check out Online Authentics they are one of the most legit Ali autograph sellers.

I'm afraid that you are correct. I was told that his family would organise signing days when they could see he was more able to sign more saleable autographs. Closer to the end they chose to make the autographs larger and larger for better legibility. A sad end for arguably the greatest sportsman ever. He took a stand for what he truly believed in. 

I'm glad you "get it."

This seller can sell whatever he wants, but don't deliberately mislead people when you're doing it. And whether you're astute enough to see it, there's a huge difference between being "inspired" by other artists and using that inspiration in your works...... and just plain ripping them off like Kaufman did.

The bottom line is that when someone is hyping work and its "potential, long term value" and a bogus artist "title" they should be called out on it.

The image is a bit weak. If you like MA and Kaufman then great but selling them as sure fire investment pieces is just hyperbole.

You sound so much like your Dad there, Eric.

Yes, Rodgro....yes, my repeated statements DO make me "superior." There, do with it as you wish and I hope it's made your day. And if you read the posting...(I know that reading is challenge for you so I'll use easy words) it said: apprentice and successor. Hey may have been an "apprentice" (which means absolutely nothing except he was working there) but he certainly was NOT a "successor." Period. (Yes, once again proving my "superiority.")

What's more interesting now is the fact that the line that generated my initial comment and frankly, the sole reason for making my comment in the first place; that because he was an apprentice that these works had "long term value" seems to curiously have been deleted from the seller's original post. (You'll see other posters mention the line that was originally in there as well.)

Hmmmmmm....touched a nerve? Or was it that I hit the nail on the head?

People can like whoever's work they want to like, but stop the rampant BS about EVERYTHING in the artworld having "long term value" especially when it's derivative crap like Kaufman's.

I feel great, thanks. Hopefully, when you grow up, you'll understand the concept of sarcasm...but please, continue to deflect from the original topic of this thread. The seller seemed to have understood my point because he/she removed the comment that originated the discourse (ooohh big word, I feel superior). But perhaps that's lost...on you. Cya.