With all of the exclusive creator/talent signing deals...
5 5

252 posts in this topic

6 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

No. The point was purely about whether or not a sponsor/publisher would only allow certain things to be signed AT ALL. But that wasn't the case with the Hot Topic/R&M signing. The fact is, they DID allow comics to be signed, which isn't at all how you presented it at first. No one "picked it apart"; your example didn't relate to your point. It would be like saying "if Marvel was having a signing at their booth, they allowed DC/Image/Dark Horse books to get signed, until someone came up with a PILE of DC/Image/Dark Horse books, and then they said "no more DC/Image/Dark Horse books!" THAT would be analogous to your Hot Topics example, but I was never talking about decisions based on caprice.

Here's what you said:

In the example you gave, you're talking about a publisher (or, in this case, a sponsor) only allowing certain things getting signed, and disallowing other things getting signed, from the outset, as a PRE-condition of the signing. That's not at all what happened, though. In this case, they DID allow comics, until someone decided not to. You've completely changed the parameters of your argument from "publishers/sponsors can dictate what creators can and cannot sign at their events" to "publishers/sponsors can change their minds midway through an event." It guts the whole point you were trying to make. A sponsor "changing their mind midway through a signing" is not at all the point we were discussing, and is wholly irrelevant to the entire discussion. Had you gotten in line BEFORE said "facilitator", you WOULD have been able to get your comic signed.

I'm not trying to be contentious or argumentative with you, but you can see where someone might have an issue with this, can't you...? If your arguments aren't consistent, they're going to get challenged, and rightfully so. Don't be offended: be consistent.

Had they done that to me, after waiting in line for an hour, I would have gone to the convention organizer and told them what happened. You get enough complaints like that, you don't get invited back, no matter who you are.

You were joining statements together in my post that didn't go together. They were in the same post, but different parts of it. You just put them together to try and make my example look hypocritical.  Besides, you could have even gone further than that. Hot Topic isn't even a publisher. It wasn't the same point. My only point to that example, was just own personal experience to all my comments about how a creator can tell someone they will not sign something because of an agreement (contract or not). I have been very general about my comments on this. You are trying to narrow my points.

My general point is creators having to abide by obligations to publishers/sponsors or whoever based on a contract/agreement. Who/when they set the rules are details, details that would be in the contract or wherever, you are getting too narrow in regards to my points (I'm not doing that to yours). Most likely if a creator is signing at a publisher event and a publisher doesn't allow (or decides to stop allowing) window bags (cough, cough Marvel), then Im sure the creators have to abide by it. 

And the other point I was making was that if a creator has an exclusive deal with a third party, then its not a monopoly (original point). The Lebron James contract was too general and was partially tongue in cheek. But, the analogy of the sports cards and memorabilia is almost exactly the same. The model has been going on there for a long time and is just making its way into other industries.

If the creators don't abide by any of this, is it enforceable? Civilly, probably it is. Im not a lawyer, so won't delve too much further, but Ive signed a million NDAs and many, many contracts. Its expensive to enforce sometimes so damages would have to be excessive. I was sued once along with Apple and learned a lot from that. I'm sure that if it came to it, and these companies felt they had excessive damages, they would sue if they felt the contracts were broken.

Im not going to dive into more details further. Its getting too deep and Im tired of reading/typing novels. You can pick my comments apart further, this time, I'm really not commenting anymore. I just continued because I thought the LA Comic Con story would be interesting to people. Other people can judge for themselves. It is an interesting subject nonetheless. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, kevhtx said:

You were joining statements together in my post that didn't go together. They were in the same post, but different parts of it. You just put them together to try and make my example look hypocritical.  Besides, you could have even gone further than that. Hot Topic isn't even a publisher. It wasn't the same point. My only point to that example, was just own personal experience to all my comments about how a creator can tell someone they will not sign something because of an agreement (contract or not). I have been very general about my comments on this. You are trying to narrow my points.

Oh come now...you're really going to pretend that these two paragraphs, appearing again here in their original, unedited context:

"As for the publisher signings, the creators do signings for the publishers at times. At conventions, if the publishers are there and have a booth, at specific times, they will sometimes go to that booth and sign for the publishers. Ive heard that sometimes they can only sign those publishes books for fans (I don't know if thats true?). When saying that earlier, I don't know the contract details between the publisher and the creator so if there are those types of stipulations then they have to abide by them. I was just saying if there were stipulations. Obviously I don't know the details between them. 

Ive been in line at a con (LA Comic Con last year) to get something signed and when I got to the creator (Justin Roiland and Dan Harmon), because they were there with a sponsor (Hot Topic), they wouldn't let them sign my comic, I had to get their poster signed instead or nothing at all. The creator (Roiland) looked at me and said, sorry, I can't sign that. He pointed to the hot topic person standing behind him. "

...were completely unrelated, separate thoughts, that had absolutely nothing to do with each other in any way....? Even though they were written in such a way as to imply that the story of the second paragraph was an example of the idea expressed in the first...?

Yeah, ok. ;) I didn't try to "make your example look hypocritical." I demonstrated the inconsistency of your statements. If you're now trying to say that's not what you meant, you might want to try harder to write what you actually mean, so there's no "misunderstanding" by others, no? 

Again, don't be offended: be consistent.

52 minutes ago, kevhtx said:

My general point is creators having to abide by obligations to publishers/sponsors or whoever based on a contract/agreement. Who/when they set the rules are details, details that would be in the contract or wherever, you are getting too narrow in regards to my points (I'm not doing that to yours). Most likely if a creator is signing at a publisher event and a publisher doesn't allow (or decides to stop allowing) window bags (cough, cough Marvel), then Im sure the creators have to abide by it. 

When you're discussing details, you can't have a problem with someone getting into the details. The creators don't have to abide by anything. In that scenario, it is up to whomever is managing the line to handle that. Not saying it's not possible, but I've never heard of any event where the PUBLISHER, rather than the CREATOR, dictated the terms of what they would, and would not, sign. Byrne, for example, probably had an agreement with IDW, but I suspect IDW asked Byrne...rather than dictated to him...what the conditions were.

52 minutes ago, kevhtx said:

And the other point I was making was that if a creator has an exclusive deal with a third party, then its not a monopoly (original point). The Lebron James contract was too general and was partially tongue in cheek. But, the analogy of the sports cards and memorabilia is almost exactly the same. The model has been going on there for a long time and is just making its way into other industries.

You can't make an analogy, and then several hours later, when that analogy is demonstrated to be unworkable, claim it was "partially tongue-in-cheek." That's poor form. Your point about a monopoly is wrong, as I already explained at much length earlier. The monopoly is NOT WITH THE CREATOR, but rather between the "exclusives" and CGC. I don't know how to make that any clearer. If the only way I can get a book signed and put in an SS slab is through A SINGLE COMPANY, then that SINGLE COMPANY (NOT the creator) has a DE FACTO monopoly. It has nothing to with the creator, and nothing to do with the sports cards and memorabilia industries. I can get the creator to sign any time the creator wants to sign; I CANNOT get it slabbed in an SS slab unless I go through THAT SINGLE COMPANY.

"But, doesn't the creator have a monopoly over their signature??" you might protest. And the answer is, of course. That's the way it is, and there's no changing that, obviously. If I want an Art Adams signature, I have to go to ART ADAMS and have him sign, if he is willing.

However, I do not NEED "Company X" to get ANY specific creator to sign, except that I am forced to...not by the creator, but by the exclusive and CGC. It is in the interests of the exclusive to keep things that way...they have a monopoly over their "stable" (I wonder if creators like to be referred to as animals...?)...it's NOT in CGC's interests to allow that, but they do it anyways, in the interest of preserving good will with creators.

52 minutes ago, kevhtx said:

If the creators don't abide by any of this, is it enforceable? Civilly, probably it is. Im not a lawyer, so won't delve too much further, but Ive signed a million NDAs and many, many contracts. Its expensive to enforce sometimes so damages would have to be excessive. I was sued once along with Apple and learned a lot from that. I'm sure that if it came to it, and these companies felt they had excessive damages, they would sue if they felt the contracts were broken.

It doesn't matter if the creators abide by it or not; the monopoly exists for the company that is the "exclusive provider of signed books for SS slabbing with CGC." As intriguing as this side discussion about creators signing deals with "signature exclusives", this discussion doesn't have anything to do with creators signing exclusive deals with "Company X" or anyone else; it has to do with exclusives convincing creators to tell CGC not to slab the books they sign unless customers go through the exclusives. 

You've signed a million NDAs...? Wow. That's a lot. Also, what do you have against apostrophes...? ;)

52 minutes ago, kevhtx said:

Im not going to dive into more details further. Its getting too deep and Im tired of reading/typing novels. You can pick my comments apart further, this time, I'm really not commenting anymore. I just continued because I thought the LA Comic Con story would be interesting to people. Other people can judge for themselves. It is an interesting subject nonetheless.

Okey dokey. You're more than welcome to continue the discussion; as am I, as is anyone. I have no interest in "picking apart" anyone's comments: I care only about consistency and meaning. But by all means, if you'd rather not discuss it further, I certainly wouldn't want to force anyone to do anything they didn't want to do. Take care!

 

Edited by RockMyAmadeus
Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 12:15 PM, Ryan. said:

My passion for SS has been diluted due my latest experience at the Boston Con, where there was visible disdain from creators for anyone who had a CGC witness in tow, along with the increasingly absurd "slab fees" being posted on creator tables. Frankly, it wasn't a fun experience.

I remember about a year and a half ago at a medium-sized show in New Jersey, I approached a creator (who will remain nameless) and had about 5 books that were all unique and all window-bagged.  He wasn't working on anything at the moment and was just looking around.  When I caught his eye, I approached, smiled, and said "Hello".  Before I could say anything else, he quite aggressively said "I'm not signing anything in those cutout bags!" and proceeded to look around.  No eye contact, no greeting, no common decency. 

If the books were for me, I'd have turned around and left them unsigned, probably after telling him how disappointed I was in his attitude.  But I was getting these books done for a friend, so I swallowed my pride and complied with his rudely laid-out demands; much as it hurt my soul to do so. 

I had never personally dealt with this creator before, I had what I considered a reasonable number of books to get signed (again, all unique and no keys), I wasn't toting around a large stack of books and going table to table, and I had the cash out and ready to pay his clearly-posted fee (which said nothing of window bags).  This creator decided to pass judgment on me for no other reason than I approached him with window-bagged books and he decided that I wasn't worth the common decency and basic level of respect that one would expect in this setting.  It was at a convention during signing hours...it's not like I was stopping him in the street or anything. 

Up until that point, I could convince myself that the disdain from the creators over the SS program wasn't as bad a people were making it out to be.  But when that happened to me and I started seeing this same thing happen more and more frequently, Sig Series lost a lot of luster with me. :frown:

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Turtle said:

I remember about a year and a half ago at a medium-sized show in New Jersey, I approached a creator (who will remain nameless) and had about 5 books that were all unique and all window-bagged.  He wasn't working on anything at the moment and was just looking around.  When I caught his eye, I approached, smiled, and said "Hello".  Before I could say anything else, he quite aggressively said "I'm not signing anything in those cutout bags!" and proceeded to look around.  No eye contact, no greeting, no common decency. 

If the books were for me, I'd have turned around and left them unsigned, probably after telling him how disappointed I was in his attitude.  But I was getting these books done for a friend, so I swallowed my pride and complied with his rudely laid-out demands; much as it hurt my soul to do so. 

I had never personally dealt with this creator before, I had what I considered a reasonable number of books to get signed (again, all unique and no keys), I wasn't toting around a large stack of books and going table to table, and I had the cash out and ready to pay his clearly-posted fee (which said nothing of window bags).  This creator decided to pass judgment on me for no other reason than I approached him with window-bagged books and he decided that I wasn't worth the common decency and basic level of respect that one would expect in this setting.  It was at a convention during signing hours...it's not like I was stopping him in the street or anything. 

Up until that point, I could convince myself that the disdain from the creators over the SS program wasn't as bad a people were making it out to be.  But when that happened to me and I started seeing this same thing happen more and more frequently, Sig Series lost a lot of luster with me. :frown:

Great story, keep 'em coming!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/23/2017 at 6:00 AM, Turtle said:

I remember about a year and a half ago at a medium-sized show in New Jersey, I approached a creator (who will remain nameless) and had about 5 books that were all unique and all window-bagged.  He wasn't working on anything at the moment and was just looking around.  When I caught his eye, I approached, smiled, and said "Hello".  Before I could say anything else, he quite aggressively said "I'm not signing anything in those cutout bags!" and proceeded to look around.  No eye contact, no greeting, no common decency. 

If the books were for me, I'd have turned around and left them unsigned, probably after telling him how disappointed I was in his attitude.  But I was getting these books done for a friend, so I swallowed my pride and complied with his rudely laid-out demands; much as it hurt my soul to do so. 

I had never personally dealt with this creator before, I had what I considered a reasonable number of books to get signed (again, all unique and no keys), I wasn't toting around a large stack of books and going table to table, and I had the cash out and ready to pay his clearly-posted fee (which said nothing of window bags).  This creator decided to pass judgment on me for no other reason than I approached him with window-bagged books and he decided that I wasn't worth the common decency and basic level of respect that one would expect in this setting.  It was at a convention during signing hours...it's not like I was stopping him in the street or anything. 

Up until that point, I could convince myself that the disdain from the creators over the SS program wasn't as bad a people were making it out to be.  But when that happened to me and I started seeing this same thing happen more and more frequently, Sig Series lost a lot of luster with me. :frown:

I have been keeping a closer look at social media and other areas. 

While I disagree with people’s sense of entitlement what a creator should or should not do for you and the exclusives that creators and facilitators get. What I can’t argue with is the number of people who were big SS supporters who now have a distate towards the SS program.

I think the 70 to 80 percent of the people I know who CGC as a result don’t want anything to do not with just the SS, but the convention scene as a result. In their opinions, the shows are setting themselves up as money grabs not being able to get show exclusives the moment the con opens, and certain creators behaviors.

All I can say is the SS room is dead quiet for what it used to be like in here. 

While I think the entitlement is wrong. I do have to agree now the behaviors and exclusives are hurting the industry.

Edited by reddwarf666222
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Derbyfan701 said:

Just curious......

I'm aware how/where the facilitators and witnesses come into play with the SS program.  I know it will vary depending on the show, but how many witnesses are generally in attendance for a con on behalf of CGC? 

Completely depends on the size of the show and how many books CGC estimate they will take in. At this years WW Chicago, for instance, CGC had 3 witnesses at the booth - at NYCC, it was more than 15 people spread across two booths.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
5 5