Are signature series worth getting and should artists charge more for CGC book?

[1Cool]

NO ONE is saying that people don't have the right to charge what they want and let the market decide.

 

But it is clear that some people (including many people here seemingly and many creators) have the misconception that the CGC SS sig AUTOMATICALLY adds value above and beyond the slabbing costs. Obviously, as we've seen now, that is generally untrue except in the case of some keys and a decent number of comics that grade 9.8 and higher (the older the better), or some select creators. But while certainly there are many instances where profit occurs, there are far more books that end up in someone's collection or are sold for loss or break-even.

 

RMA is saying that IF people are charging more for CGC based on that wrong assumption of automatic windfalls, they are making a BUSINESS DECISION BASED ON FALSE ASSUMPTIONS, which I think most of us generally prefer not to do, even though we certainly do have the right to do so.

 

I don't think he's saying more than that. He's not saying that there aren't profits to be made on CGC SS, all SS are great, or that all SS suck, or that creators don't deserve money.

 

P.S. If I was a creator, I might just charge CGC people more because they seemingly have more money to spend....(*note to all creators out there: Please do not assume this about me. I do not have more money to spend)

I don't think they're presuming anything. I have a feeling they simply don't like the people who show up with 39 copies of the same comic to get signed with a witness. They may or may not think you're making money, they may or may not be wrong, they most likely don't care either way and are trying to price you out of their line so they can spend more time with people whose company they find more pleasant. I strongly suspect that is the reason they do it.

 

So, you're making judgments about the worthiness, the "pleasantness", of a person in the eyes of a creator, based solely on the amount of copies of a single book he has...?

 

That's an interesting way to look at it.

No, I'm really making the judgement based on about seven years on these boards, where the discussion of creators and the respect/dignity they deserve has come up on more than one occasion. including this thread, with comments like "Guess which one I commissioned for a sketch later?" type statements are made. These people aren't there to beg for your commissions. You're not Trump, and your $100 isn't going to make or break anyone. It would be worth $100 for me to tell someone like that to go screw off rather than accept their chump change for my art.

 

That's a conclusion you arrive at based on somebody's words posted on a message board. The creator in front of them is almost guaranteed not to A. have red those words, and if they have, B. know who said it amongst the hundreds or thousands of people they see in a typical con.

 

 

They're 100% guaranteed to be face to face with someone who has little respect for them as an artist or a human being, someone who thinks because they bought the comic they are owed some courtesy by the creator. I'd imagine someone making jerk comments about creators on a message board can be a jerk in person too.

Sounds like you may have some unresolved artist anger issues.

[revat]

I thought rma was just saying some creators are making a business decision based on an inaccurate assumption. He hopes that some people will enlighten them to more accurate information. He thinks this may lead some creators changing their mind on the issue.

 

I don't think his intent is to insult anyone, just debunk an increasingly popular misconception which is giving a lot of people the wrong idea of people who want cgc as.

[DJones]

Are signature series worth getting and should artists charge more for CGC book?

 

 

YES and NO..'nuff said

[dupont2005]

I thought rma was just saying some creators are making a business decision based on an inaccurate assumption. He hopes that some people will enlighten them to more accurate information. He thinks this may lead some creators changing their mind on the issue.

 

I don't think his intent is to insult anyone, just debunk an increasingly popular misconception which is giving a lot of people the wrong idea of people who want cgc as.

I'm sure many creators know more about the industry than many here would assume, since they work in it and everything. I'm willing to bet 99% of any creator charging for witnessed sigs is aware of what yellow label slabs bearing their sigs are going for and have the mental capabilities of figuring out if it's a premium or not, and how much of a premium it is. Which is why I don't think they're operating under a false assumption of anything. If someone charges $1000 for a signature, I think that's his nice way of saying he doesn't want you in his line.

[dupont2005]

Ok. I'm not sure how any of that relates to the discussion, because no one said anyone owed anyone anything, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

It's an attitude I've seen expressed on these very boards regarding this very subject in the past. I believe it to be the attitude that soured creators to people who want free CGC witnessed sigs.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I thought rma was just saying some creators are making a business decision based on an inaccurate assumption. He hopes that some people will enlighten them to more accurate information. He thinks this may lead some creators changing their mind on the issue.

 

I don't think his intent is to insult anyone, just debunk an increasingly popular misconception which is giving a lot of people the wrong idea of people who want cgc as.

I'm sure many creators know more about the industry than many here would assume, since they work in it and everything. I'm willing to bet 99% of any creator charging for witnessed sigs is aware of what yellow label slabs bearing their sigs are going for and have the mental capabilities of figuring out if it's a premium or not, and how much of a premium it is. Which is why I don't think they're operating under a false assumption of anything. If someone charges $1000 for a signature, I think that's his nice way of saying he doesn't want you in his line.

 

You would be wrong.

 

CGC may seem like a big deal because this is the CGC board...but there are creators who still have never even heard of it. CGC is still a very, very niche market.

 

And no, the ones aware may see a number or three, but they neither have the time, nor the interest, to do an in depth study on what "premium" their sigs may or may not have.

 

Liefeld is more aware than most, but he's also younger than most, and knows the impact New Mutants #87 and #98 have.

 

I guarantee you, George Perez and Marv Wolfman neither know, nor care, that Teen Titans #44 is a major key, while #43 and #45 are not.

 

Len Wein knows that Hulk #181 is "worth money." He knows that HOS #92 is, too. But he wouldn't be able to quote prices for you, because creators don't CARE about this stuff. Creators are rarely collectors.

 

And if they aren't under any false assumptions....how tacky is that? "You, person with the books that I created who wants to get them signed, are beneath me, and so I will charge you an exorbitant fee so I don't have to deal with you." We're not talking about charging individuals different prices, after all.

 

No...most creators don't have that attitude. They're just annoyed at the idea that people may be "profiting" from their signatures.

[dupont2005]

A creator who had never even heard of CGC probably isn't charging premiums for witnessed sigs.

[RockMyAmadeus]

A creator who had never even heard of CGC probably isn't charging premiums for witnessed sigs.

 

Not the point.

[dupont2005]

Sure it is.

 

The whole discussion is regarding artists who charge exorbitant amounts for signatures. One theory is they mistakenly believe their signature is worth that much because they know nothing of the industry they work in professionally. I disagree. I think they're aware they're overcharging, and are doing so to make their lines smaller. I also believe the overwhelming majority of them would gladly do a personalized and unwitnessed sig for less, or even free.

 

I also don't believe it's wrong of them to assume the person who needs the sig witnessed and verified as authentic by an outside agency isn't doing it because they're a fan. They're doing it so they can resell it. Especially if they brought a stack of the same exact issue in. I also don't think it's unreasonable for a creator who has an endless line of people bringing in multiples of the same exact issue to get signed to get tired of it.

 

Also, I would be SHOCKED if anyone who regularly works the convention scene is unaware of what CGC is. Especially an artist, who signs and sketches the covers of comics all day. You may be able to name off a small handful of 80 year old Golden Age names who aren't completely there, but the industry is pretty large, and there are a great number of creators at any convention, and many of them are as young as Liefeld or younger. I'm sure they noticed that booth that's at every convention they attend that has representatives watching them sign everything. I'm sure they've seen slabs on walls.

 

If I were a creator, I'd personalize every sig, without warning, just to watch the meltdowns.

[shadroch]

As George was the guy who pointed out to me two years ago that it was funny that Titans 44 was suddenly heating up, I'd guess he knows a thing or two about the market for his books.

[MagnusX]

As George was the guy who pointed out to me two years ago that it was funny that Titans 44 was suddenly heating up, I'd guess he knows a thing or two about the market for his books.

 

[font:Book Antiqua]I wonder about the future for this book,

Yes D ck Grayson become Nightwing.

 

But in the new 52 he moves past his Nightwing identity,

and no one is carrying the mantle anymore...

 

Still a semi key issue...

[/font]

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Sure it is.

 

You're just arguing to argue, not come to understanding.

 

The whole discussion is regarding artists who charge exorbitant amounts for signatures.

 

No. The whole discussion is regarding artists who charge different prices based solely on where the book is going after it's signed.

 

One theory is they mistakenly believe their signature is worth that much because they know nothing of the industry they work in professionally.

 

No one has said anything like that at all.

 

I disagree. I think they're aware they're overcharging, and are doing so to make their lines smaller.

 

Have you ever been to a convention? I don't know; I'm asking because people who go to conventions wouldn't say anything like that. Creators who go to conventions aren't in the habit of driving their fans away.

 

I also believe the overwhelming majority of them would gladly do a personalized and unwitnessed sig for less, or even free.

 

Based on what? Len Wein charges for every signature. So does John Totleben. So does Jim Lee. So does J. Scott Campbell. So does JRJR. So does Rob Liefeld.

 

You say these things because of your own personal feelings about the whole process, which you clearly, obviously don't like and have disdain for.

 

I also don't believe it's wrong of them to assume the person who needs the sig witnessed and verified as authentic by an outside agency isn't doing it because they're a fan. They're doing it so they can resell it.

 

That's not always true. I've posted several books of my own that aren't for "reselling."

 

Especially if they brought a stack of the same exact issue in.

 

That's not always true.

 

I also don't think it's unreasonable for a creator who has an endless line of people bringing in multiples of the same exact issue to get signed to get tired of it.

 

Do you know how many copies of New Mutants #98 and #87 Rob Liefeld has signed? He doesn't seem tired of it.

 

Also, I would be SHOCKED if anyone who regularly works the convention scene is unaware of what CGC is.

 

And yet, there are. Again...do you go to conventions? CGC is one tiny, tiny niche of the comics market.

 

Especially an artist, who signs and sketches the covers of comics all day. You may be able to name off a small handful of 80 year old Golden Age names who aren't completely there, but the industry is pretty large, and there are a great number of creators at any convention, and many of them are as young as Liefeld or younger. I'm sure they noticed that booth that's at every convention they attend that has representatives watching them sign everything. I'm sure they've seen slabs on walls.

 

Why would they? CGC is one booth. Bigger conventions have hundreds of them. CGC witnesses don't stand there and announce "I'm from CGC. I'm here to help." And no, witnesses don't stand there watching everything they sign. They stand there watching for the people who have the books needing witnessing, and then they go back to the booth. There are (pulling a number out of my rear) 10 times the number of people who AREN'T there to get their books slabbed in the signing lines.

 

I don't think you're very familiar with the process.

 

If I were a creator, I'd personalize every sig, without warning, just to watch the meltdowns.

 

Yeah, I think that pretty much sums up where you're really coming from.

 

That you advocate destroying other people's property for thrills?

 

[dupont2005]

 

Have you ever been to a convention? I don't know; I'm asking because people who go to conventions wouldn't say anything like that. Creators who go to conventions aren't in the habit of driving their fans away.

Exactly. And what would drive the fans away? Excessively long lines, lines occupied by people who aren't fans, but looking to turn a profit to subsidize their convention experience. Get them out of the line, fewer fans are turned away.

[dupont2005]

Yeah, I think that pretty much sums up where you're really coming from.

 

That you advocate destroying other people's property for thrills?

 

That you think a personalized signature from a creator is the destruction of property shows where you're coming from, and exactly why I'm siding with those creators jacking up the prices of their autographs.

[RockMyAmadeus]

As George was the guy who pointed out to me two years ago that it was funny that Titans 44 was suddenly heating up, I'd guess he knows a thing or two about the market for his books.

 

Fair enough. MARV told me at Yorba Linda in January that he was seeing a lot of copies of DC Presents #26 for him to sign, and asked me if that was because the book was becoming valuable.

 

Besides...Titans #44 was "heating up" quite a bit sooner than 2 years ago, which just proves the point. Except for the mega keys, creators, especially older creators, don't follow the back issue market for their books very closely.

 

When Marv and George began creating comics in the early 70's, the "back issue market" was, what, 1,000-2,000 people nationwide? Maybe? There were, maybe, 25-50 "comic book stores" nationwide? There wasn't really such a thing as a "back issue market" for the creators TO follow.

 

Creators create. Following the back issue market may be interesting for some, but it's not very common. Let's not get bogged down in "well, Robert Kirkman knows how much Walking Dead #19 sells for!"

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Yeah, I think that pretty much sums up where you're really coming from.

 

That you advocate destroying other people's property for thrills?

 

That you think a personalized signature from a creator is the destruction of property shows where you're coming from, and exactly why I'm siding with those creators jacking up the prices of their autographs.

 

Let's quote what you said:

 

If I were a creator, I'd personalize every sig, without warning, just to watch the meltdowns.

 

YOU said you would "personalize", "without warning", just to "watch the meltdowns." YOU were the one who stated that you would do something negative, that would CAUSE "meltdowns."

 

*I* don't think it's destruction...if that's what the owner of the book wants.

 

If it's NOT what the owner of the book wants, and a creator goes ahead and does it anyways, it IS destruction of someone else's property. If I ask you for your signature, it doesn't mean I want anything except your signature. You can ASK if you can sketch or write something else if you want to, but you ask FIRST, because it doesn't belong to you.

 

This isn't rocket science.

 

You're being very dishonest in this discussion, Dupont. You don't give a flat damn about the SS program, obviously.

[dupont2005]

If I handed my copy of Love And Rockets #1 to one of the Hernandez Bros and they decided to draw all over the cover I wouldn't be upset, it's original art from a creator I admire, and the thing would never be for sale anyway once I got to meet them and the signed comic was a memento of that meeting.

 

I'm of the opinion that an artist cannot destroy his art by signing it.

 

You're the one being dishonest here, by denying the fact that the only reason to get it witnessed and not personalized is because it's not a keepsake, but a commodity. You're not asking for an autograph, you're asking for them to add value to your commodity. Even if your plan isn't to list it on eBay right that second, the plan is to add it to your pile of commodities, and not your pile of keepsakes.

[RockMyAmadeus]

If I handed my copy of Love And Rockets #1 to one of the Hernandez Bros and they decided to draw all over the cover I wouldn't be upset, it's original art from a creator I admire, and the thing would never be for sale anyway once I got to meet them and the signed comic was a memento of that meeting.

 

I'm of the opinion that an artist cannot destroy his art by signing it.

 

Great for you. That's wonderful.

 

But other people don't feel the same way, and they have just as much right to their opinion about how anyone, even creators, treats THEIR PROPERTY as you do about yours.

 

You don't respect that, obviously.

[dupont2005]

Look at the comments in this very thread about people disappointed that Stan Lee signed too many comics so when he DIES they won't profit as much as if he had denied fans mementos of their meeting.

 

Well, these creators who choose to charge excessive fees for their sigs won't be doing that, so you can all jump for joy when they die.

[dupont2005]

If I handed my copy of Love And Rockets #1 to one of the Hernandez Bros and they decided to draw all over the cover I wouldn't be upset, it's original art from a creator I admire, and the thing would never be for sale anyway once I got to meet them and the signed comic was a memento of that meeting.

 

I'm of the opinion that an artist cannot destroy his art by signing it.

 

Great for you. That's wonderful.

 

But other people don't feel the same way, and they have just as much right to their opinion about how anyone, even creators, treats THEIR PROPERTY as you do about yours.

 

You don't respect that, obviously.

If you're worried about someone messing up your comic with marker, don't hand your comic and a marker to someone.