• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

John Byrne at NYCC Friday, Oct. 6th. Can any witness take books?
0

60 posts in this topic

Yea, I think most of us are in that boat. I brought 4 of the storage folio cases to protect my books in travel. A nice amount of those books were for that fabled back row. I had even tried making contact with a representative to see if some workable deal for us both could be had and was led to believe that in fact my be the case. I think I returned home with 2 full boxes at least, maybe more, with no signatures on them due to the ridiculousness of things. It soured my NY experience a tad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Of course it's fine for Byrne to say how he wants to sign books. It's not ok for him to say what should happen with those books after he signed them.

I would agree with your statement if Byrne wasn’t involved in any way, but he is.  He is involved because he is signing the book, and therefore it appears that he is putting conditions on his involvement.  I don’t believe this is uncommon in business.  My understanding is it’s called a covenant.

From Wikipedia: A covenant is a type of contract in which the covenantor makes a promise to a covenantee to do (affirmative covenant) or not do some action (negative covenant).

Obviously, this isn’t a legal agreement we’re dealing with here, but what I believe Byrne’s position is “I’ll sign your item as long as it doesn’t get CGC SS certified”.  In this case, he’s bypassing the fan and going straight to CGC with his “covenant”.

That said, I would love to add a John Byrne CGC SS book to my collection but I guess that won’t be happening anytime soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Coach said:

I would agree with your statement if Byrne wasn’t involved in any way, but he is.  He is involved because he is signing the book, and therefore it appears that he is putting conditions on his involvement.  I don’t believe this is uncommon in business.  My understanding is it’s called a covenant.

From Wikipedia: A covenant is a type of contract in which the covenantor makes a promise to a covenantee to do (affirmative covenant) or not do some action (negative covenant).

Obviously, this isn’t a legal agreement we’re dealing with here, but what I believe Byrne’s position is “I’ll sign your item as long as it doesn’t get CGC SS certified”.  In this case, he’s bypassing the fan and going straight to CGC with his “covenant”.

That said, I would love to add a John Byrne CGC SS book to my collection but I guess that won’t be happening anytime soon.

It's not hard to understand and it's the creators choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys this really isn't worth debating.  Sure 10 years ago no comic creator really charged for signatures and if they did it was usually less than 10 dollars.  In todays market place the general consensus artist can charge and have a sliding scale based on what is being done with the book.  While some artist don't want to be involved in the certified comic market in any way.  This is a right afforded to them by god and their birth in the united states or even right to work in the united states.  Is it right some say yes some say no.  I believe that even if we don't understand a creators decision we should respect it.  If there answer is a hard no we listen and check back around in the future to see if there view has changed.  If the comic community doesn't like it they can boycott signings or product or both.  If this happens enough perhaps the market will correct itself.  If the market doesn't correct it self then perhaps that means it was correct in the first place.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Coach said:

I would agree with your statement if Byrne wasn’t involved in any way, but he is.  He is involved because he is signing the book, and therefore it appears that he is putting conditions on his involvement.  I don’t believe this is uncommon in business.  My understanding is it’s called a covenant.

From Wikipedia: A covenant is a type of contract in which the covenantor makes a promise to a covenantee to do (affirmative covenant) or not do some action (negative covenant).

Obviously, this isn’t a legal agreement we’re dealing with here, but what I believe Byrne’s position is “I’ll sign your item as long as it doesn’t get CGC SS certified”.  In this case, he’s bypassing the fan and going straight to CGC with his “covenant”.

That said, I would love to add a John Byrne CGC SS book to my collection but I guess that won’t be happening anytime soon.

It's inappropriate for Byrne to be putting conditions on the disposition of the item after it is signed.

That doesn't mean he can't, or won't try, but it's none of his business. If he wants to sign it, great. If he doesn't want to sign it, great. He has complete and total control over his own signature. However...he has absolutely ZERO say what happens to that signature AFTER he has signed it.

Now, if CGC honors his request to not certify his signature, that's THEIR choice, but it IS a VOLUNTARY choice on the part of CGC, and they are NOT bound by any legal conditions to honor it. CGC's contract is with the customer...not John Byrne or any other creator. John Byrne cannot "bypass" the fan, because the fan is the owner of the property being signed. 

Once John Byrne puts his signature on the comic, that specific signature no longer belongs to him, provided the person obtained the signature under the terms to which both parties agreed. Can Byrne put conditions on obtaining the signature? Of course he can, and that's why CGC honors it. But I'm not talking about what he CAN do, but what is appropriate...what he SHOULD do...and again, it's totally and completely inappropriate for anyone to be putting conditions on what someone can and cannot do with their property.

If I hired a painter to paint my house, and he tried to impose conditions of his service on me based on what I intended to do with the house after he painted it, I'd laugh in his face, tell him to get off my lawn, and hire someone else.

It's petty and petulant, and shouldn't be tolerated in the marketplace. Why does John Byrne, or any creator, get to dictate what collectors do with their property, as a condition of their signing it? But people DO tolerate it, because: addicts. And that's why absolutely nothing of value was signed this past weekend. I got "not 9.8" Namor 26 signed, because I wanted to get SOMETHING signed, and Jae was there, too. It would have been REALLLLY nice to have a double signed SS'd 9.8 Namor #26, but...that's the way it goes.

 

 

Edited by RockMyAmadeus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SignatureSelect said:

Guys this really isn't worth debating.  Sure 10 years ago no comic creator really charged for signatures and if they did it was usually less than 10 dollars.  In todays market place the general consensus artist can charge and have a sliding scale based on what is being done with the book.  While some artist don't want to be involved in the certified comic market in any way.  This is a right afforded to them by god and their birth in the united states or even right to work in the united states.  Is it right some say yes some say no.  I believe that even if we don't understand a creators decision we should respect it.  If there answer is a hard no we listen and check back around in the future to see if there view has changed.  If the comic community doesn't like it they can boycott signings or product or both.  If this happens enough perhaps the market will correct itself.  If the market doesn't correct it self then perhaps that means it was correct in the first place.  

It's not worth debating? On the contrary, it's a very worthwhile debate. Collectors are having to pay SUBSTANTIALLY more for something that a creator is willing and able to do for much less, based on misconception at best, and fraud at worst. It's beyond rude to ask people what they intend to do with their property. It's no one's business. And to add insult to injury, to charge a different price for the same service is even worse. The creator isn't doing anything differently. It's the same signature, for the same effort. 

But because of greed, on their part, and the part of others who convince them of things that aren't necessarily true, they get away with it, because: addicts.

I, and many others, perfectly understand their decision AND respect it, because that's their right. It's my right to say the above, as well. 

But there are also a lot of others who do NOT respect it, and I watched someone in front of me, apparently a known quantity to the "exclusive rep" who stood there and said "no, these aren't for CGC! Come on, man, you know me, I assure you, these books aren't going to be submitted" (I'm paraphrasing.) 

It was awkward and uncomfortable, and worse, that person..telling the truth or not...should NEVER have been put in that position in the first place. It encourages people to be dishonest, and that's never a good thing. It creates an adversarial relationship between creator and the public that just isn't necessary.

I'm a witness. What if, after the books are signed, and my facilitator and I are processing them for submission, we notice a book or two or three that has a flaw that we missed, and decide that copy, or those copies, won't be subbed after all, because it would be throwing good money after bad to pay the slab fee? It happens to people all the time. Do we get to go back to the creator and say "these weren't going to be subbed after all, can we have a refund on those?"

Of course not. First, that mistake is on us, no question. Second, it's a bit tacky.

But, if creators charged one price for everyone, this would never be an issue in the first place. 

I asked one creator why he charged a different price, and he completely hemmed and hawed, because HE KNEW it was wrong to do so. So, he tried to justify it by saying "well, it's for people who get 10 copies of (name of hot book he worked on here) signed." What does it matter to him what people do with their books? It's none of his business. If he has a problem with people POTENTIALLY making money off his signature, he should charge a price he's comfortable with, and that solves that.

Think about it: if I bring 10 copies of the same book to get signed, does that mean I'm not a fan...?

Not necessarily.

Am I a flipper?

Not necessarily. What if I want a 9.8, and I've got 10 borderline copies? It happens all the time. 

What if I'm a witness, and there are 10 people who have all sent my facilitator the same book to get signed, because they couldn't be there themselves?

If I bring 10 DIFFERENT books to get signed, does that mean I AM a fan...?

Not necessarily.

So, creators making assumptions like this only opens them up to negative consequences, and encourages people to be dishonest.

He asked me if my books were for CGC, and I said some of them were, and some of them weren't (true. I frequently have books from my facilitator that are "CGC" stack and "non-CGC" stack.) He saw what I had, and that none of them were valuable books (not that it matters!), and we negotiated for the "non-CGC" price, which I was happy to pay. The creator wasn't cheated, and neither was I, and we were both satisfied with the outcome. But this creator KNEW charging different prices was wrong, and hopefully, my very polite, very gentle challenge made the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This discussion, by the way, is part of the process of the market correcting itself. 

I don't see anyone happily and gladly paying double (or more!) prices just because they want their books slabbed. I don't see anyone saying "what? You charge the same price for raw AND slabbed sigs? Madness! Please, TAKE MORE OF MY MONEY!!" (except that this DOES happen, frequently, by people who tell creators "keep the change!" because they WANT to...not because they're FORCED to, as a condition of obtaining a sig.)

And the emotional, irrational argument that "these creators DESERVE their cut!" is nonsense. If you think a creator deserves something, there's absolutely nothing stopping you from sending a creator a check. Nothing at all.

I would suspect that there are quite a few of these "these creators DESERVE their cut!" people who donate not a single cent to either creators, or creator assisting charities like the Heroes Initiative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

This discussion, by the way, is part of the process of the market correcting itself. 

I don't see anyone happily and gladly paying double (or more!) prices just because they want their books slabbed. I don't see anyone saying "what? You charge the same price for raw AND slabbed sigs? Madness! Please, TAKE MORE OF MY MONEY!!" (except that this DOES happen, frequently, by people who tell creators "keep the change!" because they WANT to...not because they're FORCED to, as a condition of obtaining a sig.)

And the emotional, irrational argument that "these creators DESERVE their cut!" is nonsense. If you think a creator deserves something, there's absolutely nothing stopping you from sending a creator a check. Nothing at all.

I would suspect that there are quite a few of these "these creators DESERVE their cut!" people who donate not a single cent to either creators, or creator assisting charities like the Heroes Initiative.

My new thing is to pull the books out that I want to get signed, talk about them with the creator to show I know whats up, then pull out the cash.  Ask kindly about their CGC upcharge and ask if it can be waived, and then put the book and cash away right in front of them if they decline.  "I appreciate your work, but I don't understand why you'd charge more for the CGC sig.  I choose not get this book signed, thanks for your time."  No need to need to be combative or mean.  Just let them know how you feel, let them think about it, be polite, but let them know that they've disappointed a fan an possibly cost themselves money.  Otherwise they won't know if no one ever goes up to them and tells them.  When they realize they are disappointing REAL fans AND losing out on real MONEY, maybe things will change.  Until then, why would they change? 

We have millions of people in this country who don't understand the most basic economic concepts, and even when faced with reasonable explanations, they act against logic and their own self interests.  There's no reason to think that a comic creator will change his/her mind WITHOUT the benefit of someone laying out the logic for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, revat said:

My new thing is to pull the books out that I want to get signed, talk about them with the creator to show I know whats up, then pull out the cash.  Ask kindly about their CGC upcharge and ask if it can be waived, and then put the book and cash away right in front of them if they decline.  "I appreciate your work, but I don't understand why you'd charge more for the CGC sig.  I choose not get this book signed, thanks for your time."  No need to need to be combative or mean.  Just let them know how you feel, let them think about it, be polite, but let them know that they've disappointed a fan an possibly cost themselves money.  Otherwise they won't know if no one ever goes up to them and tells them.  When they realize they are disappointing REAL fans AND losing out on real MONEY, maybe things will change.  Until then, why would they change? 

We have millions of people in this country who don't understand the most basic economic concepts, and even when faced with reasonable explanations, they act against logic and their own self interests.  There's no reason to think that a comic creator will change his/her mind WITHOUT the benefit of someone laying out the logic for them.

Just curious, how would you respond if the creator asked "You're obviously a real fan, why is my autograph on a CGC SS book preferred over a raw ungraded book"?

 

Edited for a typo

Edited by Coach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Coach said:

Just curious, how would you respond if the creator asked "You're obviously a real fan, why is my autograph on a CGC SS book preferred over a raw ungraded book"?

 

Edited for a typo

You didn't ask me, but I'll answer: because I like it that way.

What other reason does there need to be? 

Let me be more blunt: there is no other reason that needs to be given. "Because I like it" is, and should be, all the answer that is needed.

I don't ask the people who buy my merchandise what they intend to do with it after they buy it. It's none of my business, and it's beyond rude to even ask. If they can make more money than I did, more power to 'em. 

That it is tolerated on the scale it is is just a symptom of addiction and hero worship. 

After all...drug addicts don't give their drug dealer lip either, right...?

People like Chris Claremont should be THRILLED that there are comics that are worth being signed by him (phrased that way on purpose: it is the COMIC and its CONDITION, not the SIGNATURE, that makes the package valuable.) 

Claremont made nearly $3,000 at NYCC last weekend in less than two hours, signing about 300 books, just signing the ones I was witnessing. He signed all day long, all four days, and charged for everything. Kudos to him that there are books worth signing, and worth paying his DOUBLE surcharge for "graded books."

If he were to raise his price to $20...like some foolish creators are doing (and far worse)...he wouldn't have made that $3000, because the majority of those books are a LOSS if a $20 sig fee is factored in. We're talking books like X-Men #225 and #232, here...not all "key" books by any stretch. He might only have made $500, if anything.

Marv Wolfman charges people $5 to sign books...and $20 for slabs. I haven't had a single book signed by Marv Wolfman in 2 years, despite having literally hundreds of books I would be thrilled to pay $5 ea to be signed...books like NTT #11, 12, 13, 23, 29, 37, etc. I'd be happy to pay Marv $1,000 to sign 200 books...work that would take him an hour or so....instead, he gets nothing at all. He's priced his signature out of the market.

I get that there are creators who don't like slabbing. That's their right. But it seems a very odd way to cultivate a fanbase by alienating those people who do like it. If the goal is to not sign as much, as some have suggested, why sign at all? Just charge a higher price for everyone, and the problem solves itself.

What about the people who paid $600 for a Frank Miller signature right around two years ago...? Are they feeling pretty good about paying that?

I paid $350 for two of them. $700 for signatures that now cost $200, if I'd just waited. But because we were all afraid that we might not get another chance, we paid it. Do people think that doesn't leave a welt...? It sure does. Is it the fault of the people charging $600, or $350? No, because there were people...including me...willing to pay it. That's the way it goes. You pays your money, you takes your chances.

But there are consequences to everything, and the consequence here is a bitter taste in my mouth, and an aversion to the people...including Miller...who did that. And if the shoe happens to ever be on the other foot, you can guarantee these things aren't forgotten. "Remember when you convinced Miller to charge $600 because everyone thought he was going to die, and you totally played on that fear...? Yeah, that page of art you're holding in your hands is 5 times sticker for you....if I even decide to sell it to you."

And that's how it works. What comes around does go around. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that why collectors prefer CGC SS books is none of the creator’s business.  But revat seems to be trying to facilitate understanding and change from creators.  You yourself hoped to make a point with a creator with your polite challenge.  I believe asking about the CGC SS preference is a genuine question and it seems like answering that you like it and the rest is none of their business is contrary to facilitating any sort of understanding or change from creators.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Coach said:

Just curious, how would you respond if the creator asked "You're obviously a real fan, why is my autograph on a CGC SS book preferred over a raw ungraded book"?

 

Edited for a typo

I haven't done it a bunch, but I'll relay what has happened so far.

 

Michael Golden - his agent basically has him working in a sig factory when he's signing, and she's mostly in control of everything.  So he just said, "OK" and I moved along, no big deal.  Another note about Michael Golden.  When his agent WASN'T present at another con I was at, he charge $3 for CGC sigs and $0 for non-CGC sigs.  With the agent present at this most recent con....SUBSTANTIALLY MORE for both.  To be fair, she was managing his booth and hawking his wares very effectively and garnered A LOT more business than when he was there alone, so I think that while her presence may night be as great for each individual customer, she's does pretty well for Golden (which is her job).

Josh Middleton - he signed non-cgc for free, so I had him busy signing raws when I asked about CGC.  I let him know, but he was actually chatting mostly with someone else at the time.  He seemed real engaging and probably would have listened if I stayed to chat, but I didn't want to interrupt, and he didn't press it. 

Someone else?  Maybe Clayton Crain? Can't remember. 

You know what's weird?  I'd rather give $5 to $10 to someone who charges everyone than someone who just charges $5 extra for CGC.  And ironically I feel bad getting a ton of CGC sigs from someone who signs for free, like Art Adams.  I'd rather pay someone $5each for 10 sigs than get 5 free ones from Art Adams, because I feel bad about it (I know I could give Art money anyways but it feels kinda weird, like a charity or something? and he's always busy drawing and I feel like I'm interrupting, even though he's very gracious and has awesome prints!)

But to actually answer the question, I think I'd say "The grading not only provides a grade, but also helps preserve the condition.  It makes it easier to display, and in some cases easier to sell in the future.  By your pricing it seems like you might be concerned that I will sell this comic for a profit at your expense.  And I might, but profit doesn't come too easily, the return on investment usually isn't great, and usually the majority of the value comes from the condition as opposed to the signature.  If you're interested, I'd be happy to use my phone to help show you examples."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Coach said:

I agree that why collectors prefer CGC SS books is none of the creator’s business.  But revat seems to be trying to facilitate understanding and change from creators.  You yourself hoped to make a point with a creator with your polite challenge.  I believe asking about the CGC SS preference is a genuine question and it seems like answering that you like it and the rest is none of their business is contrary to facilitating any sort of understanding or change from creators.

It's all a matter of presentation. You can tell someone it's none of their business without using the words "it's none of your business." The way you phrase the question is a leading one, and the position that many creators take: "what's so special about the slabbed book over unslabbed? (with the underlying, usually unstated rest of that sentence being "...unless it's because you want to sell it?") Isn't the fact that I signed it in front of you good enough...?"

The answer should be fairly self evident.

Here's a picture of an SS slab:

s174.jpg.7ccdf3afeb321130096e312bccd9bb2

(I cry whenever I see these.)

That's "the package." You have the book, the signature, the grade, the information about the book, when it was signed...it's really quite the appealing product, and...whether I'm selling the book or not, the fact of the matter is, I know that someone had their eyeballs on that book when Byrne signed it in 2004 (sob.) Specifically, since that was the one and only signing that Byrne did that were slabbed.

Here's an unslabbed signed book:

main_1-Stan-Lee-Signed-Spider-Man-Issue-

Still very cool, but doesn't have all the other stuff that comes along with the slab, and the authenticity of the signature is much more in doubt. The slab, if one is to take the "profit motive" argument out of the equation, is clearly and objectively a superior product to the raw, unsigned copy. I can purchase an SS copy, and know that that book was signed by that creator, that signature was witnessed, usually on the day in question (though not always), and the chances of forging are much, much smaller. 

If I wasn't there in person, I can get one and be sure it's the real deal. 

And even if I WAS there in person, why should I be bound to forever keep a copy that the creator signed, if I find one that suits me more? If there's no sentimental attachment to THAT copy, but rather the experience, then there's nothing stopping me from taking a copy I like better and getting that one signed, then selling the "lesser" copy. 

The more you unpack the circumstances, the more it demonstrates that the bottom line is two-fold: 1. creators don't think it's "fair" that people "make money off of their signatures" (which is absurd, when you consider publishers, printers, distributors, and retailers, AND the fact that it is the COMIC...not the SIGNATURE...that has the value), and 2. others have come along and convinced those creators of their "suspicions", but "if you let me represent you, I'll make sure you get your cut!!"...playing into the greed of creators (yes, folks, creators are people, too.)

Oh, and by the way...with the added bonus of controlling the supply of these books on the market, in effect trying to create a monopoly, because THEY certainly aren't paying the price that the rest of us have to, so they can price any competition out, while dumping their own. How INCREDIBLY convenient! 

Everything else is just rationalization.

The Golden Age of Sig Series has, sadly, passed away. I'm glad to have been a part of it. No longer is it the handful of guys hustling to get sigs for a handful of customers. Now it's "BIG BUSINESS!", built on deception, playing into fear and greed, in which EVERYONE loses....creator, CGC, fan...except, of course, those "exclusive" guys...all they do is win. 

After all....what happens when every creator is funneled into such a scheme...? It's already happening. Look at this place, littered with "exclusive" deals. It's disgusting. If you want to get your books signed AND slabbed, you MUST go through Company X and pay their fee...even if you don't NEED the services of Company X...or you can forget it.

CGC should have put a stop to this years ago, but sadly, they did not, and now here we are. Such a shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After giving the issue some thought, I believe there are valid points on both sides.  I don’t pretend to know all, but for me, it boils down to value.  If you take two books: same title, same condition, and same signature, it’s obvious that a CGC SS one will maintain a higher value than a raw uncertified one.

 

If a creator recognizes this and opts to charge a higher price for a signature going towards a book getting CGC SS certification, I don’t begrudge them asking a higher price.  I also don’t begrudge them for other conditions that I have seen such as personalizing or, in Byrne’s case, not wanting CGC SS certification.  Now this is my opinion and I have no problem if people disagree with me.

 

To clarify, I’m not saying revat or RockMyAmadeus are wrong, our positions on this issue may not align, but I recognize and respect their opinions.  I sincerely hope that common ground can be found on this issue with any creators with which there is a divide.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Coach said:

After giving the issue some thought, I believe there are valid points on both sides.  I don’t pretend to know all, but for me, it boils down to value.  If you take two books: same title, same condition, and same signature, it’s obvious that a CGC SS one will maintain a higher value than a raw uncertified one.

Unfortunately, you're making the very same error in logic that some creators are making: you CANNOT compare the value of a raw book with a slabbed book, completely regardless of any other factors involved.

The value of a slabbed book is in the number in the upper left hand corner of the book. Yes, that number exists because the book is generally in that grade range, but the VALUE of that slab is in the number on the label. Have no doubt about that. 

That's why you'll never, ever sell a raw uncirculated 1886-O Morgan dollar for $115,000, but you CAN sell one for that price if it's slabbed at MS65:

https://coins.ha.com/itm/morgan-dollars/1886-o-1-ms65-pcgs/a/1121-4977.s

You break that coin out of the holder, and guess what...? 

You won't be able to sell it for $115,000. Same coin. Same condition. Even the same pedigree (Eliasberg, a potent one at that.) But try and sell it out of that slab, and you'll be lucky to get $20,000 for it. *Maybe* that particular example, you might get more, but you're not getting $115,000 for it.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/Morgan-1878-1921/39464/i.html?_from=R40&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&_nkw=1886-o+uncirculated&_sop=16

The difference in value between a raw, uncertified book and a slabbed SS book IS NOT...repeat, IS NOT...because of the signature. 

It's because of the slab.

And people who don't understand that have gotten themselves into a lot of trouble over the years.

By the way...even if you WERE to compare the two, I can show you plenty of examples where the raw, uncertified book is WORTH MORE than the slabbed SS one.

Examples:

Amazing Spiderman #285 CGC 9.4 SS Signed by Zeck, sold for $25 Nov 13 2011

Amazing Spiderman #285 CGC 9.4 SS Signed by Zeck, sold for $25 May 8 2011

Amazing Spiderman #285 CGC 9.4 SS Signed by Zeck, Salicrup, and McCleod, sold for $31 Oct 8 2017

Amazing Spiderman #293 CGC 9.0 SS Signed by Zeck, sold for $10 May 10 2009

Batman The Cult #1 CGC 9.6 SS Signed by Starlin, sold for $43 Feb 25 2016

Batman The Cult #1 CGC 9.6 SS Signed by Starlin, sold for $40 Feb 24 2016

Swamp Thing #31 CGC 9.8 SS Signed by Totleben & Bissette, sold for $45 Jan 21 2014

Swamp Thing #27 CGC 9.2 SS Signed by Totleben & Bissette, sold for $36, then $21, then $16, all in 2013 (that one was a super loser.)

(Source: GPAnalysis.com)

The rough MINIMUM cost for each and every SS slab is $30. MINIMUM. That means the cost of shipping to and from plus certification, and maxing every potential savings you possibly can. Most slabs run in the $40-$50 range, all certification costs figured in. 

Zeck charges $10 per CGC slab (because Renee makes him.)

Totleben charged $10/ea. 

Bissette charged $5/ea.

Starlin has been all over the map, but now he charges $20 for slabs (yay, jerk who pissed him off in May!)

eBay and others take 10% or more, Paypal another 3% minimum. 

And that's not even considering the value of the book itself, which in many cases is just set at $0, OR shipping, OR labor.

End result? Each and every one of those slabs here...and thousands more just like them...sold at a loss...sometimes a substantial one.

Raw examples of the above, on the other hand, would typically not sell at a loss. You could probably get $5-$10 for a raw signed copy of ASM #293 signed by Zeck, for example. In other words...you wouldn't be selling them at a loss, or, at least, not a loss that even comes close to what a slab loser would sell for. 

Trying to compare a raw, uncertified signed copy with a CGC SS slab betrays a fundamental, basic lack of understanding of how this market works, and what it costs to participate. These costs are REAL, and MUST be borne by someone for the slab to exist. You can't say "well, a raw signed copy sold for $10, and a slabbed SS copy sold for $45, ipso facto, the slab made more money!"

54 minutes ago, Coach said:

If a creator recognizes this and opts to charge a higher price for a signature going towards a book getting CGC SS certification, I don’t begrudge them asking a higher price.  I also don’t begrudge them for other conditions that I have seen such as personalizing or, in Byrne’s case, not wanting CGC SS certification.  Now this is my opinion and I have no problem if people disagree with me.

That's your right, and there's nothing at all preventing you from paying creators an additional amount commensurate with the additional value you think this service brings. I DO begrudge them asking a higher price for slabs, because it's discriminatory and rude to ask what I intend to do with my property. 

I wouldn't dare ask a stranger what they intended to do with some good or service I sold them...so why would anyone think a creator asking the same thing is a normal, rational, polite thing to do...?

The problem is, the creator, as I explained in in the section above, isn't recognizing anything that actually exists. They have a perception that is inaccurate, and basing their decisions on that inaccurate perception.

1 hour ago, Coach said:

To clarify, I’m not saying revat or RockMyAmadeus are wrong, our positions on this issue may not align, but I recognize and respect their opinions.  I sincerely hope that common ground can be found on this issue with any creators with which there is a divide.  

I hope that creators come to understand the market that they want a piece of, so they can come to an informed decision about the value their signature does...or does not...have. If someone wants to charge $160 for their signature, hey, more power to them. But I would hope they do so from a position of knowledge and understanding about the real value of their signature, and not because they think people are "making huge stacks of money off their sigs!"

 

Link to comment
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