What Are The Rarest CGC SS Celebrity Sigs
4 4

139 posts in this topic

33 posts

2500? C'mon. What is Mr. P's Clint Eastwood worth? $50,000? I have actually chased down Affleck six times in my chasing career and received more than a first name initial. So all I need is a witness with me? That is an amazing Stephen King and a super cool Travolta! Nice work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
835 posts

I'd really like to hear the story of how that Leo Dicaprio book happened.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,444 posts
5 hours ago, Monstertruck97 said:

2500? C'mon. What is Mr. P's Clint Eastwood worth? $50,000? I have actually chased down Affleck six times in my chasing career and received more than a first name initial. So all I need is a witness with me? That is an amazing Stephen King and a super cool Travolta! Nice work. 

Mr. P's Clint Eastwood is worth a solid 5 grand anyday of the week I would gladly pay him that if he would take time payments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
325 posts

I think we should start a petition to get CGC to  start tracking sigs.  It doesn't seem like it would be difficult.  That could help a lot of with all of claims of "only sig in the census."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42,250 posts
18 minutes ago, bigcbass said:

I think we should start a petition to get CGC to  start tracking sigs.  It doesn't seem like it would be difficult.  That could help a lot of with all of claims of "only sig in the census."

 

We've been talking about it for ten years.  Pandora's Box has been open so long, how could you possibly get all the information you needed to make it worthwhile? They could do it going forward, but that seems like it would just make things worse - i.e. unscrupulous people pointing to the "list" of sigs and not disclosing that it only covers 2017 forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
325 posts
1 hour ago, seanfingh said:

 

We've been talking about it for ten years.  Pandora's Box has been open so long, how could you possibly get all the information you needed to make it worthwhile? They could do it going forward, but that seems like it would just make things worse - i.e. unscrupulous people pointing to the "list" of sigs and not disclosing that it only covers 2017 forward.

They have the data, all they would have to do it search it.  Seems to me they could take say the 500 most common names (Stan Lee, McFarlane, Kirkman etc) and run searches on the notes section of all past books and come up with a number to start.  That would take a computer programmer about 15 mins of time.  And boom there is a start to a census.   Then they could just run other names as a new one came through.  For instance a new Arnold book comes through, you run a search of all past books with Arnold's name in the notes and out comes a number.  Sure it might take a couple of years to get it to be complete but it is better than what we have now.      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42,250 posts
10 minutes ago, bigcbass said:

They have the data, all they would have to do it search it.  Seems to me they could take say the 500 most common names (Stan Lee, McFarlane, Kirkman etc) and run searches on the notes section of all past books and come up with a number to start.  That would take a computer programmer about 15 mins of time.  And boom there is a start to a census.   Then they could just run other names as a new one came through.  For instance a new Arnold book comes through, you run a search of all past books with Arnold's name in the notes and out comes a number.  Sure it might take a couple of years to get it to be complete but it is better than what we have now.      

Well, it sounds like you understand the data mining aspect of it better than I do.  But there is an assumption that you are making that I think is part of the problem - and that is that all of the data is available and searchable together.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,837 posts
4 minutes ago, seanfingh said:

Well, it sounds like you understand the data mining aspect of it better than I do.  But there is an assumption that you are making that I think is part of the problem - and that is that all of the data is available and searchable together.

 

 

My understanding is that whenever a signature is added to a book, the names from the previous signing have to be entered manually.  That leads me to believe that the signing information is not as readily searchable as one might imagine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42,250 posts
6 minutes ago, somewhereintexas said:

My understanding is that whenever a signature is added to a book, the names from the previous signing have to be entered manually.  That leads me to believe that the signing information is not as readily searchable as one might imagine.

Exactamundo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
546 posts

 

28 minutes ago, somewhereintexas said:

My understanding is that whenever a signature is added to a book, the names from the previous signing have to be entered manually.  That leads me to believe that the signing information is not as readily searchable as one might imagine.

I can verify that you are correct with the manual label entries because I have had 2 yellow label books come back to me with typos. Once with a  different date and once with a different artist's name on the label when I added a new signature to it.

Both times CGC was more than happy to correct the label for free, but this leads me to believe that a historical database of searchable signature series details cannot be created at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
325 posts

I agree there would be some problems like typos or a person who uses two name like Billy Tucci (I sometimes see SS books that say William or Bill Tucci), but that happens even with Titles.  And while not perfect it would be useful.

Assuming that they record all the info in a field for each book when it is entered, it would not be extremely difficult.  It seems worthwhile to be given how many questions and threads I see on this issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 posts

I am aware it's not chasing, but with a snap of the fingers, a $50 autograph isn't worth $2,5000 or $5,000 because it's entombed and witnessed. 

I am addict of the yellow label and probably have over a hundred books that have a signed populous of under five.

They should do the work and provide us with that information, but in the long run, a thread like this is baseless since the number on so many is "zero' and it simply gets us wondering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,444 posts

Well First affleck isn't a 50 dollar autograph.  Never has been never will be.  Jefferydean morgan charges 80 dollars and has a line around the block same with norman redus,stan lee, Adam West(may he rest in peace) William Shatner, Tim Curry, Mark Hamill and so many more many of them charge between 100 and 200 and they attend conventions atleast once a year if not more.  Affleck does not and probably never would he signed posters at the D.C. Booth for 1 hour one per person. and darted out of there in a cloak with security.  This isn't a run of the mill sig from somebody that is at conventions signing yearly.  This is a superstar actor who doesn't need the money.  As for Being a Sig Series Addict I have 800 books and have been doing it for 15 years.  I have a pretty good idea of what books are worth.  I have bought sold witnessed and facilitated quite a few.  For example I sold random run of the mill D.C> Alan Moore SS books for between 400 and 800 dolars each Seven years ago and I know for a fact he signed over 50

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
835 posts

I may open a can of worms here.. hopefully not.

I completely disagree with this chasing method and cgc should not allow it.

Look, I understand most of these cgc official witnesses are trusted by the company but money talks. Who's to say one unscrupulous witness and a friend decided hey a leonardo dicaprio sig would be worth a lot of money! I can see someone faking it for greed purposes, which is why I asked previously to know the story behind the dicaprio sig here.

I think CGC should ONLY accept subs from events like conventions or where CGC  full time employed officials are in attendance to further guarantee any sig. Like how the old lables from circa 2005 were when it said Signed by so and so At Wiz World Philly on whatever date. There is too much grey area for me with these super rare sigs that it's enough for me to question the validity of them.

Now I know you're going to say well cgc can't be at every con! but there are trusted likes like Rich, Torrey and Dre who are and a simple check of the show program will show said celeb was in attendance.

Thoughts? I'm not calling cgc out here just saying money talks and all it takes is one person to do this to compromise everything cgc stands for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,155 posts
14 hours ago, TheRealVenom said:

I may open a can of worms here.. hopefully not.

I completely disagree with this chasing method and cgc should not allow it.

Look, I understand most of these cgc official witnesses are trusted by the company but money talks. Who's to say one unscrupulous witness and a friend decided hey a leonardo dicaprio sig would be worth a lot of money! I can see someone faking it for greed purposes, which is why I asked previously to know the story behind the dicaprio sig here.

I think CGC should ONLY accept subs from events like conventions or where CGC  full time employed officials are in attendance to further guarantee any sig. Like how the old lables from circa 2005 were when it said Signed by so and so At Wiz World Philly on whatever date. There is too much grey area for me with these super rare sigs that it's enough for me to question the validity of them.

Now I know you're going to say well cgc can't be at every con! but there are trusted likes like Rich, Torrey and Dre who are and a simple check of the show program will show said celeb was in attendance.

Thoughts? I'm not calling cgc out here just saying money talks and all it takes is one person to do this to compromise everything cgc stands for.

Not all labels from 2005 state the name of the con. I do believe it is only the Wizard World cons that are named. All others just say by who and date signed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43,086 posts
On 7/31/2017 at 1:11 PM, bigcbass said:

They have the data, all they would have to do it search it.  Seems to me they could take say the 500 most common names (Stan Lee, McFarlane, Kirkman etc) and run searches on the notes section of all past books and come up with a number to start.  That would take a computer programmer about 15 mins of time.  And boom there is a start to a census.   Then they could just run other names as a new one came through.  For instance a new Arnold book comes through, you run a search of all past books with Arnold's name in the notes and out comes a number.  Sure it might take a couple of years to get it to be complete but it is better than what we have now.      

No one who owns Lee, McFarlane or Kirkman signed books REALLY wants to know how many of them there are in the world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20,388 posts
11 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

No one who owns Lee, McFarlane or Kirkman signed books REALLY wants to know how many of them there are in the world. 

I did the math.

If my calculations are correct-----the exact number is---

A mega-sh!ton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
835 posts
7 hours ago, inthehottub said:

Not all labels from 2005 state the name of the con. I do believe it is only the Wizard World cons that are named. All others just say by who and date signed.

My point was making every lable going forward state what convention the book was signed at. It's too easy for a shady cgc witness to say ya we saw him on the street in hollywood and he signed it! then sell it for 5K

The whole chasing thing should be banished with yellow lables only given at cons where there is proof said celeb was in attandance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
339 posts
On 7/28/2017 at 11:11 AM, ADAMANTIUM said:

Didn't President Obama do some SS? I would say that is pretty rare....

Nope.  There is a CBCS one but no CGC.

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/06/01/cbcs-verifies-and-slabs-barack-obama-signed-comic-book/

 

Edited by dragonmgmt

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
4 4