Jim Starlin hates CGC! 3 3

[ADAMANTIUM]

32 minutes ago, revat said:

how many people in the world make a living off of CGC SS? (or enough to make a living, they might otherwise be wealthy).  15 people? less?  Some facilitators do, but they're generally not counting on sales of books they own to generate huge amounts of their profits. I think only rich, beachbum, and maybe dscott, celestial, and celestial a little less sell a lot of CGC SS books they own as facilitators.  I know RMA has a bunch of CGC SS, and probably sells a decent amount, but I don't think he's making a living, I'm sure JOEY does fine selling his own books since he a great presser, but I don't think he's counting on sales of his own books to support him.  NOt that others don't make some real money doing so, but issue is not whether it CAN BE PROFITABLE (it certainly can be), but whether one should automatically ASSUME ITS UNIVERSALLY PROFITABLE to the point where you should make economic decisions assuming that, which it most certainly is not.

I agree  I was just explaining logistics. I think that the probability of making it rich off of SS is slim to none. I respect those who choose too though. I also think, as I've seen the price of Stan Lee go up twice since I got mine done last year, that more often than not it is cheaper to buy SS already done off of ebay or some such.

People like AH that think that SS is somehow a cash cow are kidding themselves or thusly ignorant of the market. I have two right now raw that I'd like Stan to sign ASM 98 and FF 50 but it is much cheaper to pay for them on Ebay. The price of Stan, last I heard was $150 add on the $55 CGC fees, and you've got a $200+ cost comic for a minor key.

The market fluctuates and for any artist to want money for there time in signatures is not out of bounds, but becoming an analyst and making judgements accordingly, I agree is not ideal!

[joeypost]

1 hour ago, revat said:

how many people in the world make a living off of CGC SS? (or enough to make a living, they might otherwise be wealthy).  15 people? less?  Some facilitators do, but they're generally not counting on sales of books they own to generate huge amounts of their profits. I think only rich, beachbum, and maybe dscott, celestial, and celestial a little less sell a lot of CGC SS books they own as facilitators.  I know RMA has a bunch of CGC SS, and probably sells a decent amount, but I don't think he's making a living, I'm sure JOEY does fine selling his own books since he a great presser, but I don't think he's counting on sales of his own books to support him.  NOt that others don't make some real money doing so, but issue is not whether it CAN BE PROFITABLE (it certainly can be), but whether one should automatically ASSUME ITS UNIVERSALLY PROFITABLE to the point where you should make economic decisions assuming that, which it most certainly is not.

You would be surprised. SS facilitators make money on taking books for customers, from the grading if they have all the books graded under their account and money off of their own books. I know because I did it early on before all the change sin the SS program. Contrary to popular belief, it is not easy money and is a lot of work, but once you get a following you can make a living off of it.

[ADAMANTIUM]

But it has to be large volume, eh?

Edited May 16, 2017 by ADAMANTIUM

[ADAMANTIUM]

In all seriousness that would have to be a lot of books  and a lot of work  

I can respect that!! and in fact grateful for it !!

[wombat]

I'm actually impressed this thread is still here. I thought it would have gone poof. I do find it funny certain people who run a business and set their own pricing have issues with how others in business set their own pricing. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

5 hours ago, Chuck Gower said:

Just trying and showing they care about the creators knowing what is going on, would've gone a long way towards curbing some of the misunderstanding. 

Some of the higher profile names, were educated, usually through a third party, because... there was money to be made, but... in the convention setting, it's been seen time and time again, artists who have a lack of understanding about who all these people are running around and 'witnessing' and what not...

Mark Waid was in Indy last year for a show and two friends of mine from the store stood in line and as the first handed him his pristine copy of a comic, Waid just sort of gradually signed it and moved on, but as the second put his Flash #80 in front of him, beat up and tattered, Waid lit up.

"Now THIS is a comic someone LOVED! You must've read this a 100 times and shared it and cherished it..."

Yep. He had, and Waid dug it. 

THAT is how many creators see things. We make 'creations' for you to enjoy. Not obsess. 

But what Waid doesn't know is that the copy of, in my case, Gotham By Gaslight that I DID read and enjoy "100 times" is at home, and I want the signed pristine copy to go with it...because I bought multiple copies of the book, and supported his work moreso than those who only bought one...

And maybe he should know that.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

5 hours ago, F For Fake said:

Gotcha. 

For what it's worth, I'm not trying to stir the pot. I don't like SS, so I don't buy SS. But if I did, I wouldn't complain about paying more money to creators for signing SS books. I have no problem with it at all, and I see the logic behind it 100%.  That's the end of the story for me, and I won't be persuaded that I'm wrong for thinking this way, anymore than anyone is ever going to convince RMA that he's wrong about anything ever. And I say that as someone who generally enjoys his posts and is happy he's posting. 

Let's stay away from the personal commentary about others, yes? I think that's a reasonable request. To answer your claim, however, that's a phony narrative, created by people who are offended that anyone would challenge them on the internet. It's not true, never has been true, and is, itself, a rather offensive charge to make. Show me the evidence, the proof, and I will gladly and happily change my mind about anything.

In any event...if you're not part of the SS program, as you admit you're not, then I understand why you think your position is "logical." However, charging a premium because of what I happen to be doing with my property is not logical at all. It's real, actual greed, based on a flawed perception. No one...and I mean no one...would tolerate such a thing in the real world, yet, comic fans tolerate it because: addicts. Can you imagine walking into a car dealership, and having the dealer ask you what you intend to do with the car you're about to buy, and then charging you a different price based on your answer? Can you imagine walking into a realtor, and them asking you what you intend to do with the house you're about to buy, and then charging you a different price? Can you imagine calling a plumber, and he asks you what you intend to do with the plumbing after they've fixed it, and then charging you a different price? Can you imagine, if you will, walking into a comic book shop, and the retailer asking you what you intend to do with the comics you're about to buy, and then charging you different price?

I can't. It's irrational. It's moderately offensive. It shouldn't be tolerated. But: addicts, so it is.

Think about it: repairs to a home often add far more value to it than the cost of the repairs themselves. Same exact scenario. Yet how many plumbers, drywallers, painters, roofers, and other handymen get, or even demand, a "cut" of that additional "profit" you "made off them" when you sell YOUR home?

Answer: not a single one.

Nor should they. It's none of their business what I do with MY property that they did work on. They don't own it, they don't maintain it, they don't have any stake in it.

Same with comic creators. If comic creators want their cut, there are MORE than enough people who would GLADLY help them sign and submit their OWN property, have them CGC'd, and they can take all the profit they can manage. And, indeed, some creators do just that.

This subject, unfortunately, is very near and dear to me, so after sitting on the sidelines for quite some time, I felt it necessary to say something, if for no other reason than this is costing CGC business, and, in that regard at least, it's an important thing to discuss here.

[RockMyAmadeus]

5 hours ago, F For Fake said:

But saying that condition alone is the sole reason why a SS book sells at a premium, when "Signature" is right there in the term, is insane.

That's true. It would be insane to say that.

But no one's said that. At all. Ever.

Condition is, far and away, the most important factor in determining the value of any book...but it's not the only one. It is, however, the distinction that creators, and facilitators to a large extent, don't understand, and aren't making clear, respectively.

It's bad form to make things up, and then respond to it as if anyone has actually made that argument you just invented.

5 hours ago, F For Fake said:

At the very least you have to admit that it's both the condition and the signature working together, or else there's no reason why a SS 9.8 would sell for more than a blue 9.8.

Of course. Again, no one's said anything to the contrary. But "9.8" isn't the only grade that exists.

[kav]

1 minute ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

 

5 hours ago, F For Fake said:

But saying that condition alone is the sole reason why a SS book sells at a premium, when "Signature" is right there in the term, is insane.

That's true. It would be insane to say that.

But no one's said that. At all. Ever.

 

How do you know no one's ever said that?  Speaking authoritatively about something impossible to know is bad form.

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, wombat said:

I'm actually impressed this thread is still here. I thought it would have gone poof. I do find it funny certain people who run a business and set their own pricing have issues with how others in business set their own pricing. 

Those people who "set their own pricing" aren't charging a higher price to some, based on what those some may or may not do with the item once it's sold.

That's the issue. That's always been the issue. It's not about "setting one's own pricing." It's about the fundamental economics and misunderstanding of those fundamentals, as explained above. I do find it funny how otherwise intelligent people don't, or won't, understand that.

I don't ask someone who makes an offer on an item of mine what they intend to do with it, and then say "oh, well, if you intend to burn it on a funeral pyre for your favorite Norse demi-god, then I'll have to charge you $50 more for it." Such an attempt would be, rightfully, scorned by any potential buyer. Once it's sold, it's none of my business what they do with it...even if they turn around and sell it for a profit.

If I dared...and I don't...I would tell every creator that asks "is this for CGC/grading?" that, respectfully, it's none of their business what I do with my property, and it's really rather rude to ask. But I don't dare say anything remotely like that, because: addict. And I have been in the SS program for 9 years last week, and have never had a peep of a complaint about me from any creator, ever, anywhere.

I set my price. I consider offers. A buyer either agrees, or does not. No one is charged a premium because I'm afraid they "might be profiting off of my work."

CGC is actively losing business because of these creator policies.

[wombat]

8 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Those people who "set their own pricing" aren't charging a higher price to some, based on what those some may or may not do with the item once it's sold.

That's the issue. That's always been the issue. It's not about "setting one's own pricing." It's about the fundamental economics and misunderstanding of those fundamentals, as explained above. I do find it funny how otherwise intelligent people don't, or won't, understand that.

I don't ask someone who makes an offer on an item of mine what they intend to do with it, and then say "oh, well, if you intend to burn it on a funeral pyre for your favorite Norse demi-god, then I'll have to charge you $50 more for it." Such an attempt would be, rightfully, scorned by any potential buyer. Once it's sold, it's none of my business what they do with it...even if they turn around and sell it for a profit.

If I dared...and I don't...I would tell every creator that asks "is this for CGC/grading?" that, respectfully, it's none of their business what I do with my property, and it's really rather rude to ask. But I don't dare say anything remotely like that, because: addict. And I have been in the SS program for 9 years last week, and have never had a peep of a complaint about me from any creator, ever, anywhere.

I set my price. I consider offers. A buyer either agrees, or does not. No one is charged a premium because I'm afraid they "might be profiting off of my work."

CGC is actively losing business because of these creator policies.

That's your issue. Someone selling something can charge based on anything they like. You have a blue shirt on? That's $10 more. Green shirt? $20 premium. Don't like it? Don't buy it. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

7 minutes ago, wombat said:

That's your issue. Someone selling something can charge based on anything they like. You have a blue shirt on? That's $10 more. Green shirt? $20 premium. Don't like it? Don't buy it. 

That's irrational, as you well know. Most creators...well, the majority of creators...aren't irrational, and would never knowingly adopt such a policy, at the risk of alienating people who wear blue and green shirts, also as you well know.

"Don't like it, don't buy it" isn't the issue, also as you well know.

[Drbearsec]

On 5/13/2017 at 8:44 PM, kav said:

Sig forgers around the world love this and wish more creators would follow suit!

Maybe... but then why can't a COA be enough to validate the signatures?  

[Drbearsec]

On 5/13/2017 at 9:00 PM, SteppinRazor said:

Sometimes, a business exists because it's filling a vacuum, sometimes it exists to meet demand, and sometimes it creates new revenue streams by putting a price on something that didn't have a price before.  Creators signing books and being photographed with fans used to be free too.  Refusing to participate in something because you find it ridiculous is great, but it seems like something different to announce your refusal as opposed to just not doing it.

Yeah.  I have several books signed by Chris Claremont and Jim Lee from 27 years ago.... multiple books and all signed for free.  Times did change

[kav]

3 minutes ago, Drbearsec said:

Maybe... but then why can't a COA be enough to validate the signatures?  

Unfortunately COAs are so rampant with fraud most collectors see as COA as 'this was absolutely forged'.

[Drbearsec]

4 minutes ago, kav said:

Unfortunately COAs are so rampant with fraud most collectors see as COA as 'this was absolutely forged'.

Maybe so...I'm just saying that signatures can be authenticated.  I mean maybe CGC needs a seperate option to validate signatures but not have the same label as the witnessed series.  The current policy only drives people with already signed books to their competitors.  

[Prince Namor]

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

But what Waid doesn't know is that the copy of, in my case, Gotham By Gaslight that I DID read and enjoy "100 times" is at home, and I want the signed pristine copy to go with it...because I bought multiple copies of the book, and supported his work moreso than those who only bought one...

And maybe he should know that.

 

I honestly don't think they care or would care... I think they still see it as some kind of OCD weirdness... I wonder if there are any creators who are also slab collectors...

[kav]

3 minutes ago, Drbearsec said:

Maybe so...I'm just saying that signatures can be authenticated.  I mean maybe CGC needs a seperate option to validate signatures but not have the same label as the witnessed series.  The current policy only drives people with already signed books to their competitors.  

they can only be authenticated to a percent of certainty never 100 barring other evidence.  Like I am 90% sure this is authentic.

[Broke as a Joke]

So techically Jim Starlin could be handed some books to sign, leaves to go use the bathroom while handing them off to his little nephew behind the booth who signs them in chicken scratch that looks just like Jims sig.  Then cgc "witness" comes by and picks up the books.  Artist probably doesn't notice or care and off to slabbing they go.  If Cgc isn't taking care to placate these guys, I really have to question the process.

[mschmidt]

1 minute ago, Drbearsec said:

Maybe so...I'm just saying that signatures can be authenticated.  I mean maybe CGC needs a seperate option to validate signatures but not have the same label as the witnessed series.  The current policy only drives people with already signed books to their competitors.  

There is zero upside to CGC suddenly verifying signatures after the fact; all it does is dilute the Signature Series brand and create uncertainty as to whether a book has a valid signature or not. With the SS program it's completely black & white - if it's in a yellow label slab, you're guaranteed it's an authentic signature.

The "verification" service the other company offers is a glorified COA where nothing is guaranteed - I wouldn't trust it any more than I trust a signature on a raw book.