Jim Starlin hates CGC! 3 3

[Turtle]

20 hours ago, Chuck Gower said:

CGC shouldve had a representative at EVERY show over the last few years, who's sole purpose was to talk to creators and to educate them on what CGC and SS is and is about...

This has the potential to grow WAY beyond a PR memo being sent out or an apology.. the misinformation has a way to grow and grow...

Positive PR is a proactive endeavor, fixing Bad PR is always an uphill climb...

This!  As soon as people noticed more and more creators were charging for signatures citing public sales of CGC SS books as justification, CGC should have stepped in and done this.  It's been suggested several times over the last few years. 

[Prince Namor]

2 minutes ago, oakman29 said:

The truth of the matter is the individual who is having his books signed failed to pay for the signature, not CGC. CGC is just there to witness the signing. The disconnect came between Starlin (who should have gotten the money before signing) and the person who owned the books.

Starlin is really to blame for his own mistake.

He specifically said he WAS NOT mad about the guy not paying, people accidentally walk away without paying all the time - he was mad because CGC wouldn't help him - and was only concerned when he decided he didn't want to sign anymore books with them. 

All CGC had to do was tell him they'd contact the guy for him and let him know to go back by there and pay him. 

That's it. 

Does CGC have an obligation to do that? Nope. 

And they didn't. And he took it as, they don't give c-rap about me, so why should I give a c-rap about them?

Other creators had been bad mouthing CGC for years to him and it just didn't make a difference to him. And then CGC just confirmed what he'd been told - they don't give a c-rap about the creators - they're just in it for the money grab - to make money off of YOU and the fans. 

Regardless of if that is true or not, CGC made it seem that way, by overlooking a simple customer service issue. 

It's not about money. It's not about who owes who. It's about a lack of respect for the people we wouldn't have this hobby without - the creators. 

Marvel forgets them. DC forgets them. The fans forget them. They get overlooked and now CGC basically says, "Look old man, sorry you didn't get your money. Who are you again? We're here doing something important for comics - slabbing signatures! What? You don't want to be a part of THAT??? You're mistaken! This is what it's all about in comics!"

Major face palm  

 

[I like pie]

7 hours ago, A-DONIS said:

I firmly believe that CGC and Mr. Starlin will work things out.  Everyone just be patient......

I tend to agree. Sounds like an emotional over-reaction. I didn't like how he shunned people who collect slabbed books at the end of his last statement.

[SteppinRazor]

2 hours ago, illinfinite said:

I was there at the convention.

First time going to one, first time dealing with CGC, and first time seeking out signatures.

The two ladies at the booth were awesome, looked like they were slammed and they did their best to get the line moving.  However, they only had one witness there.  You were lucky to even talk to him about witnessing a signature, let alone having him wait in line with you.  Is a three person booth usually how CGC sets up shop at a convention?  I don't blame the people there, they seemed severely understaffed, even for a small convention like this one.  When working high stress like that, there's bound to be something missed and now we have an upset artist on top of the people who couldn't the witness and were basically told they wouldn't qualify for the signature series.

For me, I basically had 4 hours to get my signatures, submit to cgc, and get to work. 

At first I was worried the artists would hate me for bringing a CGC witness by, but seeing how things were, I was worried I wouldn't get anything witnessed.  So I just submitted what I was originally wanting to submit, and if I couldn't get any signatures witnessed.. hey at least I got them signed. =)

Luckily I got the witness to come by for one artist.  But getting Starlin's was gonna be tough, he took a break, and I lost the witness for the time being.  When Starlin came back (nice guy btw!), I couldn't find the witness and with time running out I just decided to get my books signed by Starlin.  Even more lucky that the guy behind me had a CGC witness (who wasn't working the booth) and he verified the signing for me.

With the amount we pay, I wish the promoters, CGC, and the artists could work something out so everybody benefits.  Saw too many people come up to the CGC booth after getting their books signed asking if they would still qualify for SS.  

I wonder why the witnesses don't post up by the creators all day, wearing a cgc t-shirt.

Edited May 15, 2017 by SteppinRazor

[Broke as a Joke]

What's the point of having a witness if they don't even witness the signing of said books?  Might as well just collect all signed books at the end of the con from artist tables and then figure out the money then.  

[mschmidt]

22 minutes ago, SteppinRazor said:

I wonder why the witnesses don't post up by the creators all day, wearing a cgc t-shirt.

Because larger comic book shows have 100s of creators present.

If CGC knows that a specific creator will garner lots of CGC submissions, they'll usually station at witness by their booth during signing times - Rob Liefeld, for instance, has had a CGC witness next to his booth for the last couple of shows I've seen him at.

[Prince Namor]

22 minutes ago, I like pie said:

I tend to agree. Sounds like an emotional over-reaction. I didn't like how he shunned people who collect slabbed books at the end of his last statement.

It may seem different here, amongst the other CGC collectors, but slabbing is a miniscule part of the hobby. 

[jcjames]

48 minutes ago, Broke as a Joke said:

What's the point of having a witness if they don't even witness the signing of said books?  Might as well just collect all signed books at the end of the con from artist tables and then figure out the money then.  

I've experienced even worse than that - how about the fans bringing a stack of books from the artist's table, walking about 50 ft books in hand around a corner, then waiting in line with them to hand them to the "witness" who was at another table far away to prepare the submission paperwork? For certain signers and facilitators, it was an absolute zoo. If I had a gopro I would have videoed how ripe for fraud the process was.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

What I do with my property after it is signed is no one's business but my own.

That this even needs to be said shows how screwed up the system has gotten.

Charging a special  fee based on where my property ends up is greed based on ignorance.

I have been saying this for years, and you people with actual influence had better get a handle on this, or your geese are cooked.

[jcjames]

2 hours ago, FineCollector said:

I think everyone is misunderstanding Starlin's frustration with CGC.  Without a witness, he signs the books, gives them back, and it's done.  Simple.  Because CGC mandates that the witness be present, he has to hold onto the guy's stuff or risk looking like a jerk when the witness disappears.  He's out time and money when the process fails, and they won't help him make it right?  I'd tell them to blow it out their hole too.

IMO, Starlin misunderstood CGC's role and even misunderstood what HE the artist was doing with regards to CGC-SS witnessing. This is why, if you're a fan and you don't have a CGC witness with you, you either side step and let the people behind you go in front of you while you wait for the CGC witness to return or you just get the signatures unwitnessed. It was not Starlin's job to hold the books until CGC came back - the fact that he was doing that for the fan was a very nice gesture, but that's where the trouble started IMO. Would he do that for all fans from then on? I doubt he'd want that head-ache of record-keeping. 

Charging extra for a SS-signature is fine, that's capitalism and let the market decide, but don't get all upset when you the artist lose track of your customer and then want CGC to make it all better. They had nothing to do with it.

For the most part, the CGC witnesses have been very unobtrusive (with one exception, an ex-CGC witness actually slipped one of his own books under my books for the artist to make a quick sketch on while he was working as a witness for my book signings) and are working for the fan, not the artist.

Having said that - a short-handed overworked CGC staff could have probably handled Starlin's confusion and helped him, but they were probably stretched very thin. Lesson of the day: CGC bring adequate staff to big cons!

 

 

Edited May 15, 2017 by jcjames

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 minutes ago, jcjames said:

Charging extra for a SS-signature is fine

No.

It is greed based on ignorance.

[Logan510]

13 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

What I do with my property after it is signed is no one's business but my own.

That this even needs to be said shows how screwed up the system has gotten.

Charging a special  fee based on where my property ends up is greed based on ignorance.

I have been saying this for years, and you people with actual influence had better get a handle on this, or your geese are cooked.

And it is none of your business if he wants to start charging and why. If you don't like it, don't get them signed by him. You can make your living off of other creators who will sign.

You would do well to remember that.

[Logan510]

2 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

No.

It is greed based on ignorance.

Pretty ballsy thing for someone to say who makes his living off selling SS books. 

[SteppinRazor]

1 hour ago, mschmidt said:

Because larger comic book shows have 100s of creators present.

If CGC knows that a specific creator will garner lots of CGC submissions, they'll usually station at witness by their booth during signing times - Rob Liefeld, for instance, has had a CGC witness next to his booth for the last couple of shows I've seen him at.

Good to know.  I didn't mean a witness for each creator, more like just hang around creator alley or whatnot

[jcjames]

Just now, RockMyAmadeus said:

No.

It is greed based on ignorance.

It's capitalism. Value-added and let the market decide. I won't get a Stan Lee signature ever again because he charges too much, CGC or not it's too much. Is that greed? No, it's market-capitalism.

Like what you said, what a person does with THEIR book after it's signed is THEIR business. However, what an artist charges for THEIR signature is also THEIR business, or whether they want to sign it all. It's their business.

[RockMyAmadeus]

13 minutes ago, jcjames said:

It's capitalism. Value-added and let the market decide. I won't get a Stan Lee signature ever again because he charges too much, CGC or not it's too much. Is that greed? No, it's market-capitalism.

Like what you said, what a person does with THEIR book after it's signed is THEIR business. However, what an artist charges for THEIR signature is also THEIR business, or whether they want to sign it all. It's their business.

No, it is not capitalism, and has nothing to do with capitalism. Capitalism requires informed decisions by mutually interested parties.

This is greed based on ignorance. It has nothing to do with "charging too much." It has to do with charging a special  fee, based on the (almost entirely erroneous) perception of the signer about the value and disposition of the item being signed.

Stan Lee (actually, Max) doesn't charge a special fee based on the disposition of the item being signed. He simply charges what he (actually, Max) thinks his signature is worth to him, and people either choose to pay it or they do not. THAT is capitalism.

Your second point is not pertinent. No one disagrees with you that creators are free to sign or not sign as they wish, or charge whatever they wish. It is a red herring used by others to muddy the argument, and not relevant to this particular issue.

Do not misunderstand: the issue is charging a special  fee based on where the item may ultimately end up. Not signing in general. Not charging for signatures. Charging a different price based on the almost entirely erroneous perception about what may happen to the item afterwards.

Edited May 15, 2017 by RockMyAmadeus

[deadleg]

[Turtle]

20 minutes ago, jcjames said:

For the most part, the CGC witnesses have been very unobtrusive (with one exception, an ex-CGC witness actually slipped one of his own books under my books for the artist to make a quick sketch on while he was working as a witness for my book signings) and are working for the fan, not the artist.

Is the bolded part the reason he became an ex-CGC witness?  I ask because this is breaking the rules...a witness is not allowed to witness their own books for Sig Series. 

And if it wasn't something for Sig Series, it at the very least lacks professionalism if he didn't ask you first and merely slipped his book into the stack.

Edited May 15, 2017 by Turtle

[jcjames]

21 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

No, it is not capitalism, and has nothing to do with capitalism. Capitalism requires informed decisions by mutually interested parties.

This is greed based on ignorance. It has nothing to do with "charging too much." It has to do with charging a special  fee, based on the (almost entirely erroneous) perception of the signer about the value and disposition of the item being signed.

Stan Lee (actually, Max) doesn't charge a special fee based on the disposition of the item being signed. He simply charges what he (actually, Max) thinks his signature is worth to him, and people either choose to pay it or they do not. THAT is capitalism.

Your second point is not pertinent. No one disagrees with you that creators are free to sign or not sign as they wish, or charge whatever they wish. It is a red herring used by others to muddy the argument, and not relevant to this particular issue.

Do not misunderstand: the issue is charging a special  fee based on where the item may ultimately end up. Not signing in general. Not charging for signatures. Charging a different price based on the almost entirely erroneous perception about what may happen to the item afterwards.

This is what I posted in the last discussion regarding artists charging extra for SS-signatures and I still stand by it:

I call them "greedy" only as half-poke, half-truth.

If an artist charges $5 for an unwitnessed signature and $20 for a CGC-witnessed signature, I see it as A) artist trying to limit people selling his signature for profit of which he gets none, and/or B) artist figuring his 1.5 seconds of time to scribble his name is actually worth more to people who slab books regardless of what they do with those slabs.

Bottomline, an artist is trying to squeeze as much money from people in his line as possible to maximize HIS profits. Which I have no problem with. Some folks call Capitalists like that who try to maximize their profits as being "greedy", especially used when talking about flippers, but not so much when talking about artists themselves. I see no difference. And that's okay. 

Artists don't "HAVE" to charge for sigs just because some of those sigs end up on ebay, but they can, and so they will.

 

 

ETA: It's an "value-added". An unverified signature adds virtually no value to a comic, but a CGC-witnessed signature DOES add significant value (relative to unverified signature) to the comic. So since the artist is adding significant value to your book (regardless of what you intend to do with it) then he may figure he should charge more for adding that extra value to your book. 

 

Edited May 15, 2017 by jcjames
clarify my "added value" remark.

[1Cool]

I love the fact that Starlin had to be talked into charging for sigs by other artist.  He didn't seem to care for years and a bunch of guys wanted him to start charging to justify their own charging for signatures.