Jim Starlin hates CGC! 3 3

[kav]

8 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Are we really having this discussion......? Have we reductio ad absurdum'd here?

what happened to

2 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Let's stay away from the personal commentary about others, yes?

[Prince Namor]

39 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Sure, they don't owe anyone a signature...and they never have.

If they want to stop signing, that's their choice.

Of course, the fans don't owe them the business, too.

That doesn't seem to be a mutually beneficial outcome.

For anyone!

[oakman29]

To hell with Starlin.

Who really gives a sheit anyway.....

[joeypost]

 boy oh boy, this thread sure made a left at Albuquerque.

The truth of the matter, after all the arguments posted in this thread, is that Mr. Starlin has made a decision. A decision that may be based on an incomplete knowledge of the SS process, but one based on how he was treated by those who are part of the process.  Unless someone steps up and explains/apologizes  things to him, to remedy the situation, his decision will likely become a permanent one.

[deadleg]

I think the forums needed this thread. 

[Ken Aldred]

My only Sig Series slab is a Marvel Two-In-One Annual 2 signed by Starlin.  It has his initialled JPS signature, but it’s not really neat and legible, and someone once thought that the book had been signed by Jay Z.

Edited May 16, 2017 by Ken Aldred

[1Cool]

10 minutes ago, deadleg said:

I think the forums needed this thread. 

  I was thinking the same thing when I saw multiple new pages overnight and couldn't remember this much discussion on the new forums.  And here I was worried my title would get the thread pulled.

[Prince Namor]

1 hour ago, joeypost said:

 boy oh boy, this thread sure made a left at Albuquerque.

The truth of the matter, after all the arguments posted in this thread, is that Mr. Starlin has made a decision. A decision that may be based on an incomplete knowledge of the SS process, but one based on how he was treated by those who are part of the process.  Unless someone steps up and explains/apologizes  things to him, to remedy the situation, his decision will likely become a permanent one.

Well said. 

[ComicConnoisseur]

9 hours ago, Drbearsec said:

Amazing that all of this could have been avoided by the lady at CGC giving him $100 or so to cover what he got stiffed.  Awful awful decision making by those on the scene.  

That is it. If he gets paid a $100 there is no bad publicity or this thread. It is always better to prevent a fire than deal with one.

 

[mschmidt]

8 hours ago, SteppinRazor said:

You aren't guaranteed it's an authentic signature.  You're just believing the witness witnessed what he said he did.  It isn't different in that respect than a COA.  The only extra protection you have over a forged COA is that it's harder to forge a yellow label slab than photoshop a fake COA.  However, you really don't have any proof the witness didn't sign it him/her self.

I've got a few books with COAs that I got through ordering from Marvel.  Only I know that for sure, and that is a matter of trusting that the company or the creator did what they said.  The only way to know if it's an authentic signature is to witness it yourself.

Nonsense. The whole point of the SS label is that CGC guarantees it's an authentic signature by the person mentioned on the label.

[F For Fake]

11 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

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.

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

RMA, I'm having some difficulty with the quoting, but here is your exact quote from page 10:

"The thing that is making an SS book valuable is its condition, not the signature. The signature only amplifies the value that already exists, if any."

So is this admission that you're barking mad? 

 

[SteppinRazor]

Just now, mschmidt said:

Nonsense. The whole point of the SS label is that CGC guarantees it's an authentic signature by the person mentioned on the label.

I agree that's the point.  That's the point of a COA too.  That doesn't mean the witness is integrity inviolate.  There's a mention ITT of an ex-witness doing something shady and an allusion to shadier things.

The SS label is much more secure than a paper COA, but it isn't invulnerable, nothing is.

[mschmidt]

7 minutes ago, SteppinRazor said:

I agree that's the point.  That's the point of a COA too.  That doesn't mean the witness is integrity inviolate.  There's a mention ITT of an ex-witness doing something shady and an allusion to shadier things.

The SS label is much more secure than a paper COA, but it isn't invulnerable, nothing is.

Nobody's claiming anything is invulnerable.

I am simply stating that with a SS label CGC has issued you a written guarantee that you're getting an authentic signature for the book in the slab, but with a COA nothing's guaranteed. Look at the wording on a Dynamic Forces COA, for instance - they very specifically do not guarantee any sort of authenticity because it would be impossible for them to do.

[F For Fake]

Ok, I think I've finally got the multi-quote thing figured out, for the record. Underline and bold added by me.

19 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

That isn't accurate, and that's the very misunderstanding that is causing this conflict. The thing that is making an SS book valuable is its condition, not the signature. The signature only amplifies the value that already exists, if any.

 

17 hours ago, F For Fake said:

I guess that's the point I'm "misunderstanding".  Seeking out and submitting books for the purpose of grading out at 9.8 and reselling is a pretty standard thing.  And of course, all of that should and will factor into the realized price. 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. 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. 

 

11 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

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.

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

 

[SteppinRazor]

1 minute ago, mschmidt said:

Nobody's claiming anything is invulnerable.

I am simply stating that with a SS label CGC has issued you a written guarantee that you're getting an authentic signature for the book in the slab, but with a COA nothing's guaranteed. Look at the wording on a Dynamic Forces COA, for instance - they very specifically do not guarantee any sort of authenticity because it would be impossible for them to do.

Granted, the COA books I have came from Marvel, but the COA specifically states unconditionally guaranteed authentic signatures.

Anyway, it is certain that SS is far more reliable than a COA because the methodology makes it not only harder but less worth forging.

[seanfingh]

11 minutes ago, F For Fake said:

Ok, I think I've finally got the multi-quote thing figured out, for the record. Underline and bold added by me.

 

 

 

Now that you have the quote function figured out, spend some time on logic.

[Lucky Baru]

10 hours ago, kav said:

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

COA's are required by law in CA if you are a business selling autographs.  OK, these entities are exempt - pawnbrokers, the individual who signs the memorabilia, and websites not principally in the businesses of selling collectibles and whose proprietors don’t hold themselves out to as having special knowledge or skill about collectibles.

[Lucky Baru]

36 minutes ago, mschmidt said:

Nonsense. The whole point of the SS label is that CGC guarantees it's an authentic signature by the person mentioned on the label.

Correct me if I am wrong but many of the signatures aren't "witnessed".  Unlike PSA/JSA who have a witness who sits with the person signing the autographs and watches all of them being signed; the autographs on who knows how many yellow labeled books are a drop it off, artist or somebody signs the books, then the "witness" swings back to collect them, and gets them to the yellow labeling company to be slabbed/graded.

Edited May 16, 2017 by Lucky Baru

[F For Fake]

10 minutes ago, seanfingh said:

Now that you have the quote function figured out, spend some time on logic.

Who pulled your string anyway?

Which part of the logic are you having trouble with? 

RMA said that the thing that makes a SS book valuable is the condition, not the signature.

I said that it's insane to say that condition is the sole factor when the entire point of Signature Series is the signature.

RMA said that is indeed insane, and that no one ever said that, although that is exactly what he said.

What am I missing?

[Drbearsec]

52 minutes ago, mschmidt said:

Nonsense. The whole point of the SS label is that CGC guarantees it's an authentic signature by the person mentioned on the label.

But if some of the anecdotes are true that have been shared in this thread even THAT isn't full proof.  Process breakdowns seem To happen.