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

[1Cool]

 

 

 

Same with Tanning Salons. "Oh SHHHH, this girl is ultra hot. Like professional bikini model hot. I cannot believe how hot this girl is, how lucky am I that she came to my tanning salon,and we're all alone, and I GET TO CHARGE HER MORE BECAUSE I THINK SHE'S PROBABLY A MODEL? Awesome!!" Because she too is a facist fat cat.

 

Need more examples? I should be working, but I can do this all day.

 

 

I think you need to re-think your tanning salon strategy, just sayin.

 

Look, she clearly makes money off her looks (I can make this assumption because I've never spoken to her and know nothing about her), and the service I'm providing makes her look better. Therefore I'm pretty much the entire reason she's a successful bikini model. Giselle makes 30M per year as a supermodel, surely this hottie makes at least $1M annually, it makes sense to charge this stranger $10 more. If she doesn't want to pay it, fine. The last thing I want as a tanning salon owner is professional bikini models coming in all the time expecting to pay the same price as everyone else even though I'm providing them the exact same service. I tan for my fans, for middle age men in mid-life crisis, for mediocre (not high-end) strippers to get subpar implants, and not for bikini model fat cats.

 

Stupid models - always expecting the lowly tanning bed owners to give away their tans for free.

[RockMyAmadeus]

why wouldn't these guys have some awareness? if you worked at marvel or DC you could pretty much take home bags of your books. NTT was a wall book, relatively speaking, selling for decent money before NTT 44 came out, so perez would have known some of his books were worth something. (and sure, it was $20 or whatever, but that was decent money in 1985, how much was he getting paid per page back then?)

 

Titans #44 wasn't worth anything until the launch of Nightwing's 1996 regular series, more than a decade after it came out. Then, it floated back down to being a dollar book, until about 2008-2009 or so. I bubbed up a bit with the 2003 Titans relaunch, but not significantly, and floated around the $5-$10 range until the 2010s.

 

By the time Titans #44 came out, the Titans had already lost a considerable bit of luster. Not to say they weren't selling, but the bloom was definitely off the rose. Sales for #50 averaged 182k copies, no longer challenging X-Men for the best selling title in the market (comparable X-Men were selling 378k on average.)

 

 

Titans never challenged the X-men in sales. It was the best selling DC book, but never anywhere near X-Men. By the time Tales of the Titans 50 came out,

the Titans had two titles, the Baxter book and the original. At some point, the Tales of the Titans book became a reprint of the baxter series.

 

X-Men sold 259k copies, on average, throughout 1981, and 313k copies, on average, throughout 1982. This is up from 191k average sales in 1980, when NTT debuted.

 

There are no published sales data for NTT until 1985. That data shows that average sales for 1985 books were 182k copies (at a time when Batman was averaging 75k sales.)

 

That was, of course, several years after NTT hysteria drove a 50 cent book to $15 within a few months (the equivalent of a modern regular release book going to $90 or $120 in a few months.)

 

So, if we know that average sales for X-Men throughout 1981 was 259k copies....and 1982 was 313k copies...and long AFTER the Titans hysteria, the title was STILL a best seller, averaging 182k copies sold in 1985...

 

Then it's not too much of a stretch to believe, in 1981-82, that it rivaled the X-Men in sales, since 259k average sold isn't *that* much, compared to what was coming.

 

...which is what has been reported for decades:

 

http://www.comicscube.com/2012/11/the-new-teen-titansuncanny-x-men.html

 

http://www.newsarama.com/3867-friday-flashback-uncanny-x-men-and-the-new-teen-titans.html

 

http://dcinthe80s.tumblr.com/post/47641487375/new-teen-titans-ad-featured-in-this-ad-are-two

 

So, if you have any sales data which refutes that, please do share.

 

This, however, is a fascinating gem from MARVEL about DC's purported sales in 1985:

 

http://dc1980s.blogspot.com/2013/04/1985-dc-comics-sales-data.html

 

 

 

 

[revat]

Just sayin, if it were me, I want as much talent coming in as can fit through the door. Price to hotness ratio is inversely proportional

 

I'm a man of principles.

 

I won't have anyone making extra money off of me. Even if they already pay my asking fee, I want more if they're going to make more. Not only that, I judge how much money I think you'll make without any additional information, and judge accordingly. That's how I roll, and I think everyone should roll that way.

 

I don't care if it costs me reputation, money in the long run, or bikini models, my way of thinking is clearly right and there's zero room for exceptions.

 

Anytime someone sells something for significantly more (and I decide what significant is arbitrarily) than they paid for it (even if they do something else to market it or make it more valuable), they have screwed their original seller. Anytime anyone receives a service which helps them maybe make money or enjoy life too much, they have screwed over their service provider and should not feel its unfair to have paid that service provider more he's charging everyone else.

 

[revat]

 

 

 

Same with Tanning Salons. "Oh SHHHH, this girl is ultra hot. Like professional bikini model hot. I cannot believe how hot this girl is, how lucky am I that she came to my tanning salon,and we're all alone, and I GET TO CHARGE HER MORE BECAUSE I THINK SHE'S PROBABLY A MODEL? Awesome!!" Because she too is a facist fat cat.

 

Need more examples? I should be working, but I can do this all day.

 

 

I think you need to re-think your tanning salon strategy, just sayin.

 

Look, she clearly makes money off her looks (I can make this assumption because I've never spoken to her and know nothing about her), and the service I'm providing makes her look better. Therefore I'm pretty much the entire reason she's a successful bikini model. Giselle makes 30M per year as a supermodel, surely this hottie makes at least $1M annually, it makes sense to charge this stranger $10 more. If she doesn't want to pay it, fine. The last thing I want as a tanning salon owner is professional bikini models coming in all the time expecting to pay the same price as everyone else even though I'm providing them the exact same service. I tan for my fans, for middle age men in mid-life crisis, for mediocre (not high-end) strippers to get subpar implants, and not for bikini model fat cats.

 

Stupid models - always expecting the lowly tanning bed owners to give away their tans for free.

 

I see what you did there

[RockMyAmadeus]

The Judas Contract , which ToT 44 was a part of was named comic story of the year by CBG and won many other fandom awards. Most people who know a thing or two consider the Judas Contract the high point of the Titans run. Lost lustre?

 

Did you see the New Teen Titans #39 that I posted earlier...?

 

Not said with snark, just wondering. I just wonder what you define as "knowing a thing or two."

 

 

In any event, yes, creatively, the Judas Contract was, indeed, the high point of the entire run, CLEARLY a labor of love for both Marv and George, as they had spent a couple of years setting it up.

 

But I'm talking about sales high points, not creative high points.

 

And consider...if, in 1985, when NTT Baxter had been out for a while, the "old title", Tales of the Teen Titans, STILL sold an average of 182k copies...that's for issues #50-60 or so, and the reprints started with #59. So, yes, I would imagine that sales for 1984 were quite a bit higher....

 

...but the high water mark for NTT sales was 1981-1982.

[shadroch]

Except the reason a 50 cent book became a $15 book is that it was severely undersold. Titans #1 was not a hit when it came out, nor for the first several months. No self-respecting Marvel zombie would buy such a book. It wasn't until late in the first year that folks realized what was going on and went looking for the back issues. Had shops ordered tons of them, and had them available to sell, the prices wouldn't have gone nuts.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

 

 

Same with Tanning Salons. "Oh SHHHH, this girl is ultra hot. Like professional bikini model hot. I cannot believe how hot this girl is, how lucky am I that she came to my tanning salon,and we're all alone, and I GET TO CHARGE HER MORE BECAUSE I THINK SHE'S PROBABLY A MODEL? Awesome!!" Because she too is a facist fat cat.

 

Need more examples? I should be working, but I can do this all day.

 

 

I think you need to re-think your tanning salon strategy, just sayin.

 

Look, she clearly makes money off her looks (I can make this assumption because I've never spoken to her and know nothing about her), and the service I'm providing makes her look better. Therefore I'm pretty much the entire reason she's a successful bikini model. Giselle makes 30M per year as a supermodel, surely this hottie makes at least $1M annually, it makes sense to charge this stranger $10 more. If she doesn't want to pay it, fine. The last thing I want as a tanning salon owner is professional bikini models coming in all the time expecting to pay the same price as everyone else even though I'm providing them the exact same service. I tan for my fans, for middle age men in mid-life crisis, for mediocre (not high-end) strippers to get subpar implants, and not for bikini model fat cats.

 

Stupid models - always expecting the lowly tanning bed owners to give away their tans for free.

 

Expecting?

 

They're downright DEMANDING!

[shadroch]

why wouldn't these guys have some awareness? if you worked at marvel or DC you could pretty much take home bags of your books. NTT was a wall book, relatively speaking, selling for decent money before NTT 44 came out, so perez would have known some of his books were worth something. (and sure, it was $20 or whatever, but that was decent money in 1985, how much was he getting paid per page back then?)

 

Titans #44 wasn't worth anything until the launch of Nightwing's 1996 regular series, more than a decade after it came out. Then, it floated back down to being a dollar book, until about 2008-2009 or so. I bubbed up a bit with the 2003 Titans relaunch, but not significantly, and floated around the $5-$10 range until the 2010s.

 

By the time Titans #44 came out, the Titans had already lost a considerable bit of luster. Not to say they weren't selling, but the bloom was definitely off the rose. Sales for #50 averaged 182k copies, no longer challenging X-Men for the best selling title in the market (comparable X-Men were selling 378k on average.)

 

 

Titans never challenged the X-men in sales. It was the best selling DC book, but never anywhere near X-Men. By the time Tales of the Titans 50 came out,

the Titans had two titles, the Baxter book and the original. At some point, the Tales of the Titans book became a reprint of the baxter series.

 

X-Men sold 259k copies, on average, throughout 1981, and 313k copies, on average, throughout 1982. This is up from 191k average sales in 1980, when NTT debuted.

 

There are no published sales data for NTT until 1985. That data shows that average sales for 1985 books were 182k copies (at a time when Batman was averaging 75k sales.)

 

That was, of course, several years after NTT hysteria drove a 50 cent book to $15 within a few months (the equivalent of a modern regular release book going to $90 or $120 in a few months.)

 

So, if we know that average sales for X-Men throughout 1981 was 259k copies....and 1982 was 313k copies...and long AFTER the Titans hysteria, the title was STILL a best seller, averaging 182k copies sold in 1985...

 

Then it's not too much of a stretch to believe, in 1981-82, that it rivaled the X-Men in sales, since 259k average sold isn't *that* much, compared to what was coming.

 

...which is what has been reported for decades:

 

http://www.comicscube.com/2012/11/the-new-teen-titansuncanny-x-men.html

 

http://www.newsarama.com/3867-friday-flashback-uncanny-x-men-and-the-new-teen-titans.html

 

http://dcinthe80s.tumblr.com/post/47641487375/new-teen-titans-ad-featured-in-this-ad-are-two

 

So, if you have any sales data which refutes that, please do share.

 

This, however, is a fascinating gem from MARVEL about DC's purported sales in 1985:

 

http://dc1980s.blogspot.com/2013/04/1985-dc-comics-sales-data.html

 

 

 

 

 

What is in there to refute? A throwaway line from a blog that says NTT challenged X-Men for sales supremacy?

Is that what you call evidence?

[RockMyAmadeus]

Except the reason a 50 cent book became a $15 book is that it was severely undersold.

 

Ugh. Come on, Shad, you're not using your common sense.

 

The reason a 50 cent book became a $15 book is because it became popular.

 

There were several books released at the same time period...Moon Knight #1, for example, which came out the same month....that did NOT become $15 books, even when you consider them proportionately with their respective print runs.

 

There were other books that were "severely undersold" (whatever that means), that didn't become $15 books.

 

In 1982, the hottest new back issue on the market was NTT #1. And it didn't get that way because it was "severely undersold." After all...Firestorm #1, released in 1978, is almost guaranteed to have had lower numbers than NTT #1, but it wasn't $15.

 

George Perez was quite the fan favorite by the time NTT #1 came out, so it's not as if this was a nobody book that nobody ordered.

 

The equation is supply AND demand. Demand isn't just created because something has a "low print run." There has to be *something more*, or people will lose interest. If the work doesn't have intrinsic value as a work of entertainment and art, no one will care.

 

Titans #1 was not a hit when it came out, nor for the first several months. No self-respecting Marvel zombie would buy such a book.

 

While I don't doubt that there were quite a few "Marvel zombies" who would eschew such a piece of trash from DC, Perez had JUST come off an extremely successful, multi-year run on Avengers. There were more than a handful who would be willing to check out NTT because of that.

 

It wasn't until late in the first year that folks realized what was going on and went looking for the back issues. Had shops ordered tons of them, and had them available to sell, the prices wouldn't have gone nuts.

 

Right...because people were in love with the SERIES. And, because NTT #1 wasn't an exceptionally HIGH printed book (it certainly wasn't an exceptionally LOW printed book, either), it soared to $15, when other back issues of the era were, at most, $1 or $2.

 

By the way...Hulk #181 in 1982 OPG = $16. NTT #1 = $15.

 

Pretty amazing.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

why wouldn't these guys have some awareness? if you worked at marvel or DC you could pretty much take home bags of your books. NTT was a wall book, relatively speaking, selling for decent money before NTT 44 came out, so perez would have known some of his books were worth something. (and sure, it was $20 or whatever, but that was decent money in 1985, how much was he getting paid per page back then?)

 

Titans #44 wasn't worth anything until the launch of Nightwing's 1996 regular series, more than a decade after it came out. Then, it floated back down to being a dollar book, until about 2008-2009 or so. I bubbed up a bit with the 2003 Titans relaunch, but not significantly, and floated around the $5-$10 range until the 2010s.

 

By the time Titans #44 came out, the Titans had already lost a considerable bit of luster. Not to say they weren't selling, but the bloom was definitely off the rose. Sales for #50 averaged 182k copies, no longer challenging X-Men for the best selling title in the market (comparable X-Men were selling 378k on average.)

 

 

Titans never challenged the X-men in sales. It was the best selling DC book, but never anywhere near X-Men. By the time Tales of the Titans 50 came out,

the Titans had two titles, the Baxter book and the original. At some point, the Tales of the Titans book became a reprint of the baxter series.

 

X-Men sold 259k copies, on average, throughout 1981, and 313k copies, on average, throughout 1982. This is up from 191k average sales in 1980, when NTT debuted.

 

There are no published sales data for NTT until 1985. That data shows that average sales for 1985 books were 182k copies (at a time when Batman was averaging 75k sales.)

 

That was, of course, several years after NTT hysteria drove a 50 cent book to $15 within a few months (the equivalent of a modern regular release book going to $90 or $120 in a few months.)

 

So, if we know that average sales for X-Men throughout 1981 was 259k copies....and 1982 was 313k copies...and long AFTER the Titans hysteria, the title was STILL a best seller, averaging 182k copies sold in 1985...

 

Then it's not too much of a stretch to believe, in 1981-82, that it rivaled the X-Men in sales, since 259k average sold isn't *that* much, compared to what was coming.

 

...which is what has been reported for decades:

 

http://www.comicscube.com/2012/11/the-new-teen-titansuncanny-x-men.html

 

http://www.newsarama.com/3867-friday-flashback-uncanny-x-men-and-the-new-teen-titans.html

 

http://dcinthe80s.tumblr.com/post/47641487375/new-teen-titans-ad-featured-in-this-ad-are-two

 

So, if you have any sales data which refutes that, please do share.

 

This, however, is a fascinating gem from MARVEL about DC's purported sales in 1985:

 

http://dc1980s.blogspot.com/2013/04/1985-dc-comics-sales-data.html

 

 

 

 

 

What is in there to refute? A throwaway line from a blog that says NTT challenged X-Men for sales supremacy?

Is that what you call evidence?

 

By all means, then, produce your data that shows that to be false. Don't just say it...prove it. If it's true, it should be easy to prove, and I will gladly embrace new information that expands my knowledge.

 

PS. That's not a "throwaway line from a blog." That's SEVERAL blogs, which say the same thing. And yes, that's what I call evidence. I have made the effort to produce some, but you have produced none, while asking me if "that is what I call evidence."

 

 

If I cared that much, I would dig out my Overstreet Update market reports from 1982-83, and see what they said.

 

The 1982 OPG says "The New Teen Titans, followed closely by the Miller Daredevils, are the current hot titles, and the prices on these books are going up rapidly. Good story line and unique art style caught the eyes of collectors on these books."

 

This was written in Late 81-early 82.

 

How do you expect to have a reasonable conversation, Shad, when you disdain evidence that supports the contention, while refusing to provide even a single shred of evidence yourself?

 

Is that reasonable? Is that sound discourse for the goal of mutual understanding and enlightenment? Or, is it someone who sorta knows, but doesn't really know, what he's talking about, but is willing to argue anyways?

 

Is that very fair of you?

[Lazyboy]

Just sayin, if it were me, I want as much talent coming in as can fit through the door. Price to hotness ratio is inversely proportional

 

I'm a man of principles.

 

I won't have anyone making extra money off of me. Even if they already pay my asking fee, I want more if they're going to make more. Not only that, I judge how much money I think you'll make without any additional information, and judge accordingly. That's how I roll, and I think everyone should roll that way.

 

I don't care if it costs me reputation, money in the long run, or bikini models, my way of thinking is clearly right and there's zero room for exceptions.

 

Anytime someone sells something for significantly more (and I decide what significant is arbitrarily) than they paid for it (even if they do something else to market it or make it more valuable), they have screwed their original seller. Anytime anyone receives a service which helps them maybe make money or enjoy life too much, they have screwed over their service provider and should not feel its unfair to have paid that service provider more he's charging everyone else.

 

If a promoter told them "I don't want you to talk with fans or sign anything, just hand out $20 bills from a briefcase I'm going to provide." how many creators do you think would attend that show?

 

Maybe some creators like to meet their fans, but don't like people who see them only as a way to add value to their items.

 

Maybe some creators don't like the idea of CGC in general or people turning their work into - essentially - two-dimensional objects, or "trading cards" and take what steps they can to discourage it or at least get something out of participating in that practice.

 

Maybe some creators just see an additional revenue stream from people who are clearly willing to put extra money into their books for whatever reason.

 

Maybe some creators don't really care and just take the bad with the good.

 

[KPR Comics]

I truly was talking about tanning salons, no metaphors.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Just sayin, if it were me, I want as much talent coming in as can fit through the door. Price to hotness ratio is inversely proportional

 

I'm a man of principles.

 

I won't have anyone making extra money off of me. Even if they already pay my asking fee, I want more if they're going to make more. Not only that, I judge how much money I think you'll make without any additional information, and judge accordingly. That's how I roll, and I think everyone should roll that way.

 

I don't care if it costs me reputation, money in the long run, or bikini models, my way of thinking is clearly right and there's zero room for exceptions.

 

Anytime someone sells something for significantly more (and I decide what significant is arbitrarily) than they paid for it (even if they do something else to market it or make it more valuable), they have screwed their original seller. Anytime anyone receives a service which helps them maybe make money or enjoy life too much, they have screwed over their service provider and should not feel its unfair to have paid that service provider more he's charging everyone else.

 

If a promoter told them "I don't want you to talk with fans or sign anything, just hand out $20 bills from a briefcase I'm going to provide." how many creators do you think would attend that show?

 

I suspect they'd say no, except for the morbidly curious. Since, of course, what you're implying hasn't ever happened, I guess we'll never know.

 

Maybe some creators like to meet their fans, but don't like people who see them only as a way to add value to their items.

 

Who does?

 

But isn't there a necessary assumption there, that the one can't be, or isn't, the other? And, how is a creator supposed to tell merely by looking at a person which is a fan, and which is a "person who see them only as a way to add value to their items"? We've already addressed the "multiple copies of the same book" fallacy.

 

What if someone is both a fan and a person who views sigs as a way to add value to their items?

 

Maybe some creators don't like the idea of CGC in general or people turning their work into - essentially - two-dimensional objects, or "trading cards" and take what steps they can to discourage it or at least get something out of participating in that practice.

 

Right. It's not enough to support the creator by buying his or her work. The creator must also tell the consumer how they are to enjoy his work, in a manner the creator deems acceptable, and assuming, in the process, that the consumer didn't already enjoy the work as the creator intended, which is why they're creating these "trading cards" in the first place. And, if the consumer uses the creator's work in a manner the creator deems unacceptable, they should be charged a surcharge to discourage such practice.

 

So much for the decoupage shoes.

 

Maybe creators should have statements printed on their books that say, like in the olden days of newsstand distribution "This periodical may not be sold except to legitimate fans of my/our work, and is sold subject to the conditions that it not be sold or distributed to anyone with the intent to have it signed and submitted under the CGC Signature Series program."

 

 

That might work.

 

Maybe some creators just see an additional revenue stream from people who are clearly willing to put extra money into their books for whatever reason.

 

Right. "It's not FAIR!!" what somebody chooses to do with their property, so it's important to make sure I charge them an additional surcharge on top of everything else, just to make sure they're not getting as much money as they might make (never you mind if the sigs add nothing in value. That's none of their concern), and the creator has to get "his cut" of what he perceives is "being made."

 

 

Seems reasonable.

 

Maybe some creators don't really care and just take the bad with the good.

 

Could be.

 

Because everyone knows, there is no such thing as a "real fan" getting their books "non-personalized" to keep for themselves, with no intention of reselling it. That's a myth, a fictional creature, a fairy tale.

 

So, yes, it's important, on top of the already significant cost to get it done, to make sure we stick it to those people who only look at us as a means to add value to their items by adding our own surcharge on top.

 

(To Blob: SS costs $10 more per book over the regular tier price.)

 

And that's not even counting CGC, facilitator fees, witness fees, shipping fees, etc. The market absorbs it because the market wants it, but God help all these people who are killing the market by death from a thousand little cuts.

 

No, everyone can afford to "make a little less" to "spread the wealth", because, after all, that's all anyone is doing...making commodities to sell.

 

After all....no "real fan" has anything to do with the Sig Series program....

 

....right?

 

 

 

 

[revat]

Just sayin, if it were me, I want as much talent coming in as can fit through the door. Price to hotness ratio is inversely proportional

 

I'm a man of principles.

 

I won't have anyone making extra money off of me. Even if they already pay my asking fee, I want more if they're going to make more. Not only that, I judge how much money I think you'll make without any additional information, and judge accordingly. That's how I roll, and I think everyone should roll that way.

 

I don't care if it costs me reputation, money in the long run, or bikini models, my way of thinking is clearly right and there's zero room for exceptions.

 

Anytime someone sells something for significantly more (and I decide what significant is arbitrarily) than they paid for it (even if they do something else to market it or make it more valuable), they have screwed their original seller. Anytime anyone receives a service which helps them maybe make money or enjoy life too much, they have screwed over their service provider and should not feel its unfair to have paid that service provider more he's charging everyone else.

 

If a promoter told them "I don't want you to talk with fans or sign anything, just hand out $20 bills from a briefcase I'm going to provide." how many creators do you think would attend that show?

 

Maybe some creators like to meet their fans, but don't like people who see them only as a way to add value to their items.

 

Maybe some creators don't like the idea of CGC in general or people turning their work into - essentially - two-dimensional objects, or "trading cards" and take what steps they can to discourage it or at least get something out of participating in that practice.

 

Maybe some creators just see an additional revenue stream from people who are clearly willing to put extra money into their books for whatever reason.

 

Maybe some creators don't really care and just take the bad with the good.

 

I agree with every point you made.

 

But I think the point RMA is trying to make is that there is a misconception among some creators that all people who are getting CGC SS are somehow 'lesser fans' or 'non-fans' who are simply out to make a extra buck at the expense of a creator.

 

Anyone who really follows CGC SS knows that there are far more books that go directly into someone's collection for more than two years or are sold for a loss or break even in the first two years than there are of books that are sold for even a marginal profit or more in the first two years (or ever).

 

Which is not to say there are not plenty of instances where people do make significant money based on the sig. There are plenty. But that happens mostly for very key/rare comics, or for very high graded comics, or for very rare creators. And there are plenty of people who ATTEMPT to sell CGC SS comics at ridiculous prices on ebay, who further muddy the waters to someone who is not too savvy about what constitutes an actual sale. Creators hear second hand that a CGC SS 9.8 comic they signed is 'selling' for $3K on ebay and they get all riled up, but the true value is $400, which is $100 higher than its unsigned value, $300, which after fees is a $50 profit, which the person had to RISK the grade by getting it signed, FRONT the money, wait 4 months to get the comic back, then market, sell, and ship in order to make that extra $50 profit. And that's IF it kept the grade.

 

NO ONE is saying people shouldn't charge what they want, but some people think that with more complete information some creators might change their minds. Of course some may not, and that's fine too. But it SEEMS like some creators are basing their pricing structure based on false assumptions. No one is saying THIS HAS TO CHANGE, or that creators are horrible people for charging, or that everything should be free. It just doesn't seem like it makes sense to stereotype all CGC SS collectors automatically as profit-seekers and charge them more than the average fan for doing exactly the same thing. The people making the most profits from CGC SS are CGC and the facilitators (no disrespect, y'all are getting paid for work that you do, which you should), but its the actual collectors who are incurring the costs. Which is fine, but I would think if more creators had this properly explained to them, they might change their mind. They might not, but they might.

 

The 'trading card' argument is a legitimate one, as many people feel that way, but one that I always thought was odd. So you're a COMIC BOOK creator, and you can't understand why a COMIC BOOK COLLECTOR would value the grade of a comic, want to preserve that grade? Have you ever met a comic book collector? Is it that outrageous to you that people care about the condition of a comic? It bothers you that someone liked your comic soooo much that he wanted to preserve it, and/or sell it to ANOTHER FAN OF YOURS who wanted it more? Also, have you ever thought that many of these collectors probably end up buying more than one of your comic, one to read, and one to slab? Why wouldn't you advocate that? And that same collector is such a big fan of yours, that they would PAY to have YOUR SIGNATURE on a comic. Even if they are reselling it, wouldn't you as a creator be HAPPY someone was willing to pay that much for a comic you worked on? Do they think there's no end user? Someone who wants that comic will get it ultimately, they're not all just sold back and forth to dealers for increasingly high prices then ultimately sacrificed to the many-faced god in exchange for ability be a many-faced assassin. The fact that people value your signature and like your work is great for your future work prospects. At least that's how I see it. And I'm actually a pessimist.

[seanfingh]

 

After all....no "real fan" has anything to do with the Sig Series program....

 

....right?

 

 

 

 

The consensus on Bleeding Cool during the Sadfan event was that true fans only want sigs that they obtained themselves from the source. And that anyone who was not there getting them themselves was a POS.

 

I find this really weird, since correspondence autograph seeking has been going on for a long time. But a lot of people have very strongly held opinions on the level of someone else's fandom.

[RockMyAmadeus]

And I'm actually a pessimist.

 

Agreed.

 

[the blob]

why wouldn't these guys have some awareness? if you worked at marvel or DC you could pretty much take home bags of your books. NTT was a wall book, relatively speaking, selling for decent money before NTT 44 came out, so perez would have known some of his books were worth something. (and sure, it was $20 or whatever, but that was decent money in 1985, how much was he getting paid per page back then?)

 

Titans #44 wasn't worth anything until the launch of Nightwing's 1996 regular series, more than a decade after it came out. Then, it floated back down to being a dollar book, until about 2008-2009 or so. I bubbed up a bit with the 2003 Titans relaunch, but not significantly, and floated around the $5-$10 range until the 2010s.

 

By the time Titans #44 came out, the Titans had already lost a considerable bit of luster. Not to say they weren't selling, but the bloom was definitely off the rose. Sales for #50 averaged 182k copies, no longer challenging X-Men for the best selling title in the market (comparable X-Men were selling 378k on average.)

 

i think Shad's post was about Perez saying somewhat recently he was surprised NTT 44 had picked up. I know it wasn't such a big deal when it came out. if anything folks might have been interested at some point in the last 25 years because of deathstroke and that would be to get it in a $2 box in mint.

 

i'm just saying that perez was no doubt aware during the 1980s when his NTT stuff got hot

 

i remember NTT still being pretty hot at least into the issues in the 30s, which I guess was 1983/4 or so?

[Lazyboy]

Maybe some creators don't like the idea of CGC in general or people turning their work into - essentially - two-dimensional objects, or "trading cards" and take what steps they can to discourage it or at least get something out of participating in that practice.

 

Right. It's not enough to support the creator by buying his or her work. The creator must also tell the consumer how they are to enjoy his work, in a manner the creator deems acceptable, and assuming, in the process, that the consumer didn't already enjoy the work as the creator intended, which is why they're creating these "trading cards" in the first place. And, if the consumer uses the creator's work in a manner the creator deems unacceptable, they should be charged a surcharge to discourage such practice.

 

So much for the decoupage shoes.

 

Maybe creators should have statements printed on their books that say, like in the olden days of newsstand distribution "This periodical may not be sold except to legitimate fans of my/our work, and is sold subject to the conditions that it not be sold or distributed to anyone with the intent to have it signed and submitted under the CGC Signature Series program."

 

 

That might work.

 

 

No, but if a collector wants to burn a creator's work, the creator doesn't have to hand them a match.

[the blob]

(To Blob: SS costs $10 more per book over the regular tier price.)

 

Maybe someone should kvetch to CGC too? Yes, SS costs them more money to administer, but it also increases volume of slabbing.

 

Frankly I don't think $10 for SS signings vs. $5 or $3 is too bad, but $40-50 vs. $5 or $3 is a bit unseemly.

[revat]

Maybe some creators don't like the idea of CGC in general or people turning their work into - essentially - two-dimensional objects, or "trading cards" and take what steps they can to discourage it or at least get something out of participating in that practice.

 

Right. It's not enough to support the creator by buying his or her work. The creator must also tell the consumer how they are to enjoy his work, in a manner the creator deems acceptable, and assuming, in the process, that the consumer didn't already enjoy the work as the creator intended, which is why they're creating these "trading cards" in the first place. And, if the consumer uses the creator's work in a manner the creator deems unacceptable, they should be charged a surcharge to discourage such practice.

 

So much for the decoupage shoes.

 

Maybe creators should have statements printed on their books that say, like in the olden days of newsstand distribution "This periodical may not be sold except to legitimate fans of my/our work, and is sold subject to the conditions that it not be sold or distributed to anyone with the intent to have it signed and submitted under the CGC Signature Series program."

 

 

That might work.

 

 

No, but if a collector wants to burn a creator's work, the creator doesn't have to hand them a match.

 

What if the creator retired from art and sold matches for a living?