Should signatures command a higher premium based on date?
0

11 posts in this topic

8,452 posts
Should signatures command a higher premium based on date?

Example: should super early (70s) stan lee sigs be of more value than current ones?

Or sigs that were taken on creator's birthday or close to his/her unfortunate demise etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,317 posts

Good question, but I don't think so.  

A signature is a signature.  Does an early Babe Ruth on a baseball command more than a retired Babe Ruth signature on a baseball?  

I think the quality of the signature and the item it is on is what factors in the desirable rate.  Like a New Mutants 98 that Stan worked on in 1971, he was a writing machine on that one :baiting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45,816 posts

Plus the fact that old signatures are unwitnessed so they are just 'name written on cover'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52,465 posts
1 hour ago, Aweandlorder said:

Should signatures command a higher premium based on date?

Example: should super early (70s) stan lee sigs be of more value than current ones?

Or sigs that were taken on creator's birthday or close to his/her unfortunate demise etc...

I'd say no.



-slym

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,910 posts
On 5/24/2017 at 5:18 PM, Mercury Man said:

A signature is a signature.  Does an early Babe Ruth on a baseball command more than a retired Babe Ruth signature on a baseball?  

Yes, actually.  Babe Ruth signatures which can be associated with particular dates/teams/championships are worth more than something he signed when he was retired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16,166 posts
On May 24, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Aweandlorder said:

Should signatures command a higher premium based on date?

Example: should super early (70s) stan lee sigs be of more value than current ones?

Or sigs that were taken on creator's birthday or close to his/her unfortunate demise etc...

Overall I’d say no, but in the case of Stan I could see where somebody might be willing to pay a bit more for a sig that looks like this, as opposed to the sometimes blobby, modern style made with a Sharpie.

 

ASM8.jpg~original

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,778 posts

In some cases, earlier signatures do command a premium.  A period minor league autograph sells for more than a later major league one for many stars. Roberto Alamar signed his name Bobby in the minors. Those signatures are much rarer than the tens of thousands he signed in the bigs. Mattingly used to sign as Donny until 1983/84. I own several TNMT #3s signed and dated by Eastman and Laird, when they were at a convention pushing the book. I'd charge more for them than just a normal #3 that I had signed today.

 

On the Spidey book, it always bothered me that  Romita couldn't bother writing out 1,000. It must have saved him five minutes, at most.

I remember when Jose Canseco decided signing his name JC would let him sign more per hour.  Promoters put a stop to that thankfully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,452 posts
34 minutes ago, shadroch said:

 

On the Spidey book, it always bothered me that  Romita couldn't bother writing out 1,000. It must have saved him five minutes, at most

It bothers me more thinking that Stan probably delegated that task to him lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41,778 posts

IIRC, that version sold for $5 when it came out.  I wonder what SL and JR got for signing it? Fifty cents a pop?

Share this post


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
0