Treatment of unwitnessed signed comics 1 1

[revat]

1 hour ago, StephenWA said:

On ‎6‎/‎28‎/‎2019 at 9:27 AM, revat said:

it will depend on the size of the signature, the grade of the book (without the signature), and there might be some other lesser factors.

Generally, the bigger the sig, the higher the grade without considering the sig, the BIGGER the impact on the grade.

Hello revat,

Thank you for taking the time to reply. I will be submitting a batch of 25 for grading this week. Three of these have unwitnessed signatures on the covers.

How would I indicate to CGC that I would prefer a BLUE label at lower grade (as you have described) than the GREEN label? There was  no place to indicate this on the on-line submission form that I could see.

Kind regards

Stephen

I think the best thing for you to would be to contact CGC directly and ask them the best way to do it. Good luck.

[MarkFaust]

What if the artist confirms it's his signature?

[RockMyAmadeus]

18 hours ago, MarkFaust said:

What if the artist confirms it's his signature?

It must be witnessed by someone authorized to do so by CGC, OR signed by the creator and sent directly to CGC...and you can't just send them an already signed book, have them "confirm" it's theirs, and have the creator send it in.

Violate those rules, and someone will find themselves expelled from the SS program...and rightfully so.

[Ochentayocho]

I'm new. I'll give you that. But I keep reading all these comments telling me to think about it logically--taken to end results, we know that logic is not always the best guide. If you're eating the last meal in the world and you will not share, logic dictates someone either shares or someone dies. Logic doesn't seem so appealing when someone is harmed by the outcome. Please hear me out.

By taking the stance that a comic should be downgraded in quality if it has an unverified signature, CGC is basically creating a market where publishers feel pressured to pay them to verify sigs or else pre-signed issues become worth less than if they had no signatures at all. Seems like an unfair competitive advantage to me. Sure, a business has the right to survive. I wonder how quick the staunchest defenders would be to defend such choices if their collections were the ones suddenly devalued by one business's decision(s) in the name of self-interest.

I've been civil and offered valid commentary. Please approve what I've said because dissent is crucial for growth.

[revat]

11 hours ago, Ochentayocho said:

I'm new. I'll give you that. But I keep reading all these comments telling me to think about it logically--taken to end results, we know that logic is not always the best guide. If you're eating the last meal in the world and you will not share, logic dictates someone either shares or someone dies. Logic doesn't seem so appealing when someone is harmed by the outcome. Please hear me out.

By taking the stance that a comic should be downgraded in quality if it has an unverified signature, CGC is basically creating a market where publishers feel pressured to pay them to verify sigs or else pre-signed issues become worth less than if they had no signatures at all. Seems like an unfair competitive advantage to me. Sure, a business has the right to survive. I wonder how quick the staunchest defenders would be to defend such choices if their collections were the ones suddenly devalued by one business's decision(s) in the name of self-interest.

I've been civil and offered valid commentary. Please approve what I've said because dissent is crucial for growth.

Not a bad question or point of discussion, but also a question that CGC understandably would have no interest or benefit in answering publicly.  If you're looking for more discussion about signatures and the related policies of CGC SS, I recommend checking out the Signature Room subforum.

[MarkFaust]

On ‎7‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 7:49 PM, RockMyAmadeus said:

It must be witnessed by someone authorized to do so by CGC, OR signed by the creator and sent directly to CGC...and you can't just send them an already signed book, have them "confirm" it's theirs, and have the creator send it in.

Violate those rules, and someone will find themselves expelled from the SS program...and rightfully so.

Soooo.. ... a CGC facilitator can tell an artist that it's not his signature even though the artist tells the facilitator that it certainly is? I mean, ....who would know better who's signature it IS than the guy HIMSELF??????

[RockMyAmadeus]

4 hours ago, MarkFaust said:

On 7/4/2019 at 5:49 PM, RockMyAmadeus said:

It must be witnessed by someone authorized to do so by CGC, OR signed by the creator and sent directly to CGC...and you can't just send them an already signed book, have them "confirm" it's theirs, and have the creator send it in.

Violate those rules, and someone will find themselves expelled from the SS program...and rightfully so.

Soooo.. ... a CGC facilitator can tell an artist that it's not his signature even though the artist tells the facilitator that it certainly is? I mean, ....who would know better who's signature it IS than the guy HIMSELF??????

No. That's not the issue. It has nothing whatsoever to do with signature authentication and who knows what signature is his.

The signature must be witnessed by someone authorized to do so by CGC, or signed by the creator and sent directly to CGC by that creator. If one of those two things doesn't happen, the book doesn't qualify for the Signature Series program.

 

[Jasten]

On 10/18/2019 at 7:03 AM, MarkFaust said:

Soooo.. ... a CGC facilitator can tell an artist that it's not his signature even though the artist tells the facilitator that it certainly is? I mean, ....who would know better who's signature it IS than the guy HIMSELF??????

Your missing the point. The SS label essentially gives a virtual guarantee that the signature is authentic and was done by the artist. Anyone could trace an existing signature and apply it to another book and then take it to an artist to “verify it” In your case. 
I don’t get why people are so bent on trying to find a back door to getting their unwitnessed signatures to be considered witnessed...just keep the book in a nice top loader and enjoy it. If you’re buying books with unverified signatures, DO NOT let the seller factor it into the price and you will be fine. 
This label exists to define books that were WITNESSED by a cgc employee while signed, those are the rules and they are not bendable. Now if you feel they should offer a different type if label such as their competitors do, feel free to suggest it to them, but it’s unlikely they will do so as it would devalue the existing system.  

Edited October 19, 2019 by Jasten

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 10/15/2019 at 11:05 PM, Ochentayocho said:

I'm new. I'll give you that. But I keep reading all these comments telling me to think about it logically--taken to end results, we know that logic is not always the best guide. If you're eating the last meal in the world and you will not share, logic dictates someone either shares or someone dies. Logic doesn't seem so appealing when someone is harmed by the outcome. Please hear me out.

That's not an example of a logical argument. 

On 10/15/2019 at 11:05 PM, Ochentayocho said:

By taking the stance that a comic should be downgraded in quality if it has an unverified signature, CGC is basically creating a market where publishers feel pressured to pay them to verify sigs or else pre-signed issues become worth less than if they had no signatures at all. Seems like an unfair competitive advantage to me. Sure, a business has the right to survive. I wonder how quick the staunchest defenders would be to defend such choices if their collections were the ones suddenly devalued by one business's decision(s) in the name of self-interest.

This is also not a logical argument. Signed books aren't "suddenly devalued" if they're not submitted to the Signature Series program. They are worth whatever the market will pay for them. No one is pressured to pay anyone to "verify" sigs, and "pre-signed" issues don't become worth less than if they had no signatures at all.

If a publisher wants to participate in the Sig Series program, they are welcome to do so...in fact, publishers and creators enjoy special discounts from CGC that aren't available to anyone else...but they aren't required to. That the market is willing to "pay more" (which isn't necessarily true, either) for Sig Series books is the market being free. CGC doesn't create any market, and publishers don't really care if their products have any value after they sell them.

Signatures that don't follow the proper protocol are a defect like any other writing on the book and have to be graded accordingly.

No one is forced to submit to Sig Series. That the market considers the Sig Series program to have "added value" doesn't mean anyone must participate. There isn't anything unfair about the program.

[revat]

2 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

On ‎10‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 11:05 PM, Ochentayocho said:

By taking the stance that a comic should be downgraded in quality if it has an unverified signature, CGC is basically creating a market where publishers feel pressured to pay them to verify sigs or else pre-signed issues become worth less than if they had no signatures at all. Seems like an unfair competitive advantage to me. Sure, a business has the right to survive. I wonder how quick the staunchest defenders would be to defend such choices if their collections were the ones suddenly devalued by one business's decision(s) in the name of self-interest.

This is also not a logical argument. Signed books aren't "suddenly devalued" if they're not submitted to the Signature Series program. They are worth whatever the market will pay for them. No one is pressured to pay anyone to "verify" sigs, and "pre-signed" issues don't become worth less than if they had no signatures at all.

If a publisher wants to participate in the Sig Series program, they are welcome to do so...in fact, publishers and creators enjoy special discounts from CGC that aren't available to anyone else...but they aren't required to. That the market is willing to "pay more" (which isn't necessarily true, either) for Sig Series books is the market being free. CGC doesn't create any market, and publishers don't really care if their products have any value after they sell them.

Signatures that don't follow the proper protocol are a defect like any other writing on the book and have to be graded accordingly.

No one is forced to submit to Sig Series. That the market considers the Sig Series program to have "added value" doesn't mean anyone must participate. There isn't anything unfair about the program.

I agree with Oche.

The same thing happens with paper.  All these comic companies feel like they have to print their comics on paper instead of banana peels, and all of the banana peels I was hoarding are now essentially worthless.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

3 minutes ago, revat said:

I agree with Oche.

The same thing happens with paper.  All these comic companies feel like they have to print their comics on paper instead of banana peels, and all of the banana peels I was hoarding are now essentially worthless.

 

That will teach you to hoard banana peels.

[Jeffro.]

3 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

3 hours ago, revat said:

I agree with Oche.

The same thing happens with paper.  All these comic companies feel like they have to print their comics on paper instead of banana peels, and all of the banana peels I was hoarding are now essentially worthless.

 

That will teach you to hoard banana peels.

It's a slippery slope

[Subby1938]

Back in 2009 Alex Ross did a very limited sketch variant signed and numbered edition . From what I can see in cgc census they have been zero graded copies since it’s release . This is obviously because in those days I’m sure witnessed cgc signing were few and far between . Is it possible to get cgc to look at these special cases in a different light as these were numbered and came with COAs from Dynamic Forces . A sub variant of a variant . I have a copy I want it graded but do not want a green label . I know this is legit . It’s a shame imo. Loophole in this system that could be improved imo especially for older books.

[Jennifer F.]

Good morning,

Thanks for your message.  Unfortunately, we do not accept COA's as they can be easily counterfeited and it is difficult to verify.  The only way for a book to get a signature series label would be for that to be witnessed by an authorized CGC witness or to be submitted to us directly from an artist accompanied by a creator agreement form.  

Thanks,

[Subby1938]

Fair enough . It looks like that census will remain 0 graded signature series . It’s mind blowing because this feature was not offered in 2009 if I’m not mistaken . CGC has jumped leaps and bounds in what they do for the customer but these older books that were 100% signed and numbered by Ross should have some recourse . Why couldn’t CGC hire experts on comic signatures only similar to a PSA service to get yellow labels? It would be a service used many times I’m sure of it 

Edited May 18, 2020 by Subby1938

[Ryan.]

I feel like the rules set out for the Signature Series program are crystal clear. Yellow label = signature witnessed by a CGC witness. How can this be so confusing to so many people? 

[Ron C.]

This thread contains multiple topics. The yellow label rules are the most clear (and should be enforced to the letter if the program is to retain its high level of integrity).

Another topic previously mentioned concerns what is written on the Green (Qualified) labels. Here are two examples of mine... both unwitnessed signatures of Alex Ross that were properly given a qualified designation, but listed differently.

One has " 'Alex Ross' written on cover in marker" and the other has "Name written on cover in marker".  I would much prefer the former.... there is no guarantee of authenticity and it makes for a nicer presentation.  I understand that there are unknown and unreadable signatures out there, but in most cases CGC graders can recognize these signatures at a distance. For me, this one change would significantly decrease the stigma of a Green label (and likely steer more books to CGC that are now getting Red labels).

[Jeffro.]

23 hours ago, Subby1938 said:

Fair enough . It looks like that census will remain 0 graded signature series . It’s mind blowing because this feature was not offered in 2009 if I’m not mistaken . CGC has jumped leaps and bounds in what they do for the customer but these older books that were 100% signed and numbered by Ross should have some recourse . Why couldn’t CGC hire experts on comic signatures only similar to a PSA service to get yellow labels? It would be a service used many times I’m sure of it 

Send it to Voldy for their signature verification service.

[Ron C.]

51 minutes ago, Stooge McSchmuck said:

What makes you say that? Why would the graders be autograph experts?

I wouldn't think so, CBCS at least has a company that authenticates the Red label. A CGC Green is just the opposite.

I think you are missing my point. If someone like me can recognize many of the signatures out there then someone who looks at and grades comics for a living is even more likely to recognize the names. So, if a signature is recognizable, then I would prefer the unwitnessed name listed on the label if at all possible. As to your second comment.... 99 times out of 100 I will choose the CGC Green over the Red (especially if the name is listed).

[Subby1938]

2 hours ago, Stooge McSchmuck said:

You are mistaken, the SS has been around since 2001/2002. 

 

My bad I just have census results and 0 copies graded in CGC is unheard of imo.