Ace Comic Con Seattle — June 22-24, 2018 0

[RockMyAmadeus]

21 minutes ago, WooYeah said:

See, this is where you have to be careful with Joe.  He's so pedantic with semantics that you have to be very specific. Even when you know he knows what you mean,  he will intentionally misinterpret it if you don't phrase it exactly right.  Example above.

He's not telling people what they can charge for their sig,  he's telling them what they can''t charge for their sig.  Big difference in Joe's underachieving mind. 

This is a great example of "Stu Cathell's" rank hypocrisy and demonstrates how divorced from the truth he is.

Notice what he tries to do here. He's accusing me of doing the very thing he's doing in this very post.

He cleverly tries to word the issue to make it seem as though the issue is between THE AMOUNT they "can" charge and THE AMOUNT they "can't" charge...except that's not the case at all.

What CAN they charge for their signature? Anything they want. $5, $25, $5,000. The amount is irrelevant.

What CAN'T they charge? A different price for the exact same signature. 

Which is, of course, the distinction he tries to erase.

This is "Stu Cathell" intentionally misinterpreting it, even when he knows what you mean.

In "Stu Cathell's" mind, warped by his hatred of CGC and all things associated, the people he hates are guilty of the things he does.

[RockMyAmadeus]

3 hours ago, Logan510 said:

Amen.

I find it funny that some call it discrimination.

Discrimination is not letting someone eat at a restaurant based on their race / religion etc.

Charging more money for signatures to potential vultures is just smart 

Discrimination is not limited to "race" or "religion."

Calling people who participate in the CGC Signature Series program "vultures" on their own board is pretty ballsy.

[porcupine48]

3 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Discrimination is not limited to "race" or "religion."

 

Agreed.

[Logan510]

18 minutes ago, porcupine48 said:

Agreed.

Never said it was 

[porcupine48]

8 minutes ago, Logan510 said:

Never said it was 

Hey,I was just agreeing.Dressing funny and having wacky hair my most of my life got me a pile of discrimination.

[porcupine48]

It was after I posted that I read even further up and was like uh oh,other stuff is going on  I'm not taking any sides here.

[stephenshamus12]

Hey all,

I think the topic has gone a bit sideways. As a promoter, our job is to disseminate the information we are given when we are booking the Illustrators or Writers or anyone for that matter. If we let you know ahead of time the fees, regardless of whether or not it's tiered (ie first one free, second one is $X OR $XX for CGC), then you can make an educated decision. Whether or not the creator makes any money will be solely dependent on the value that the fans place on that item or autograph. Some Illustrators charge $50 a sketch and some charge $500. If they overprice or price gouge, they will not sell very many. The key for us is to know during the booking process so we are not "surprised" on site, which can happen (and has, likely to all promoters). So, as I stated in my first post, it was a valid issue, one that we are aware of, and one we will pay much closer attention to for our next event. The rest of the debate on here is really just opinion one way or another on whether or not folks should be charging a premium, tiered pricing, or charging at all. I'll leave that one to you all. My personal opinion is that a Creator should charge a fair fee based on time, experience, fair market value, and any other factors they deem important. If they are off base, the market will correct them, as they won't sell very much. -Stephen 

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, BassGMan said:

There are alot of different variables here for sure. And each one could be discussed, though what I am talking about are general policies, and how I understand and can agree with why some creators charge more for some services, based on perceived intent of the fan/dealer bringing in books for sigs. One thing for sure, I do feel bad for the fan that just wants his or her own book signed. Really this is probably the majority of the attendees standing in line waiting for a sig. But because there are certainly some that have taken advantage of these creators and used them in order to make a buck for themselves, I understand why some have adapted these polices. More power to them. 

This is an argument from, or appeal to, emotion. "They're being taken advantage of!", while simultaneously completely ignoring all the points I've made. You're arguing that everyone should think it's a bad thing that creators are "being taken advantage of", that SS people who also sell are somehow doing something bad or wrong, and that then justifies their charging a discriminatory price to some people over others. 

This is the very heart, the very essence, of an argument from emotion. 

You've not answered a single point I've brought up, and sidestepped the entire issue by simply repeating what you've already said. 

For example, you say, over and over again, that the creators are "being taken advantage of"...but you never explain, even once, how, and you certainly won't address my points.

1 hour ago, BassGMan said:

Quick example using myself as the fan/dealer. Back in 2000 when Al Feldstein (of EC Comics fame) came to SDCC for appearances, he also was set up to do signatures a few times during the show. This had been advertised (EC reunion going on) so I knew to come prepared. I loaded up my suitcase with a ton of $2 EC reprints. I went through his line several times and each time had him sign 8-10 books, which he did gladly for free. I also had him sign a few originals! Anyway, with those reprints, I took them home and sold them on Ebay for $10-15 a pop. I also included a photo of him signing at the con to add to the authenticity. So we are not talking big bucks here, but making a few extra bucks on each book helped to feed my hobby. A few years later Feldstein came back for another signing and appearance at SDCC. This time he was charging $20 per signature. I still had the chance to talk with him for a bit but did not purchase a single signature from him. He shut my little operation down, as he should have. There are alot of guys out there like me, like I was back then. Gaming the system.

Oh, I see. "Do as I say, not as I do."

Well, that certainly makes sense, then. YOU feel bad because YOU "took advantage" of Al Feldstein, so now, everyone ELSE should feel the same way you do. 

Gotcha.

Except that's not the issue, here. I'm not talking about getting FREE signatures. I'm talking about being charged a HIGHER PRICE than someone else for the same signature. You admit to "gaming the system", and you weren't even willing to pay Feldstein a single dime for his sigs, so now, others should pay for your "crime", by being forced to pay a CGC punishment tax if they dare want to get their book (GASP!!) slabbed....? Do you understand the issue...? These creators are already willing to sign for $X. Any amount, to anyone. No one is "taking advantage" of them; that's the price THEY set, that THEY are willing to accept for their signature...UNLESS you plan on slabbing it, and all of the sudden, now it's $X PLUS some amount.

Tell me...did you ever give Feldstein or his family anything for all those free sigs you got? Donate anything to the Heroes Initiative, for example, on his behalf? Did you even ask Feldstein if you could give him something for his free sigs? Because all of the people I am familiar with in SS almost never "take advantage" of free sigs in the way you did, if ever, without giving something back, or at least asking if they could give them something. Just curious, no need to answer, none of my business.

2 hours ago, BassGMan said:

Yes, I don't follow every aspect of the system and do not follow how much is realized for CGC's competitors signed slabbed books, but I do follow quite a lot and have been in this hobby for a long time, as a fan, con dealer, comic store owner, and small time Ebay dealer for almost 20 years. There is actually no emotion here with my opinions on the matter. I don't care personally as I'm not involved. I really don't care about sigs anymore as the cost and time to wait in line is not worth it for me (though it used to be). I am using all reason, fairness and an understanding of where both the creators are coming from, as well as the dealers trying to make a buck off a creator and the innocent fan. 

Arguing from, or appealing to, emotion is a logical fallacy that has little to do with what you feel, personally. You're encouraging others to "feel bad" for the creators, because they're "being taken advantage of"...without being willing to discuss the facts.

Notice the phrases you use to that end: "dealers trying to make a buck off a creator"...and "innocent fan." These are attempts to manipulate people to see things your way by appealing to their emotions, rather than reason, because "trying to make a buck off a creator" and "taking advantage of creators" carries obviously negative connotations. And what is an "innocent" fan...? 

These are not arguments from reason...quite the contrary.

2 hours ago, BassGMan said:

Regarding the one-sided profit comment I made, again you are missing the point. No doubt that these guys are making good money for charging for a sig. This is what they charge you with the understanding that they are charging a fan for a signature on a book, NOT what they are charging a dealer for a book to resale.

No, I'm quite certain that I'm not missing the point at all. This is a complete assumption on your part, contradicted by your experience with Al Feldstein above. Do you recognize that? So, Al Feldstein, when he apparently (which is another assumption on your part, but a fair one at least) sees that people are "taking advantage" of his free sigs and selling them on eBay, institutes a price for his signature of $20. But you say, here, that he was charging $20 "with the understanding" (how you arrive at said "understanding", you don't explain) that they are "charging a fan for a signature on a book"....yet you SPECIFICALLY cite Feldstein as an example of charging BECAUSE you, and others like you, got those books signed for resale.

So which is it...?

You see, and I'm not quite sure why I'm telling you something you already know, but people have been selling books signed by creators since the first creator first set pen to book. This has been happening for decades, long before CGC existed. Since when have creators been oblivious to this practice? 

And that doesn't even address the blurring of lines between a "fan" and a "fan who occasionally sells to support his habit" and "a fan who sells a lot to support his habit" and a "full time dealer." What if one of those "fans" decides he or she doesn't want the book they got signed, for whatever reason, and they decide to sell it? Have they now crossed the line to being a dealer? Should they then go back and give the creator some money for the sale? And what if the dealer can't sell the item, but has to take a loss? Does this dealer go back to the creator and ask for a refund?

It's obvious how this idea falls apart rather quickly.

What money a creator makes from charging for his or her signature is none of my business. Do you see the corollary...? What I make from MY property is none of THEIR business.

THAT is how it works.

And while, yes, there are certainly creators who become offended that people "profit" off of their signatures, and become terribly upset that someone who claimed they were "their #1 fan!!" to obtain a signature then turns around to flip it...slabbed or not...that's a foolish, naive way to look at it, that hurts THEM. Again...this has been happening since the 70s, if not earlier. The right thing to do is charge whatever you want...including nothing...and stop worrying about what the person on the other side of the table might do with it after.

Creators shouldn't even be asking the question in the first place.

I sell things all the time that people turn around and flip...and not just things that I picked up and am trying to resell...no, most of the time, I'm selling my WORK, in the form of pressing. I worked on that item, and made it BETTER than it was...it's the fruit of my labor that I'm selling...and which takes a lot more time and effort than a signature...but if I were to get upset that someone flipped something I sold to them, I'd be very foolish and naive, and only hurting myself.

And if someone gives me a sob story about how they really need this item at such and such a price, it's up to me to decide if I will accept it or not...and if I do, and they turned out to have lied, what should I do about that? Get bitter and upset and punish everyone else, as you are suggesting creators should be doing, and applaud them for doing? Or shrug my shoulders, recognize that karma is real, and move on?

2 hours ago, BassGMan said:

Had it not been for these dealers gaming the system (like I did with my Feldstein example) then odds are you may not be charged that $20 to begin with, or at least you'd be charged less. Though I do not know for sure, I think there is a pretty good chance that some of these creators have jacked the signature prices up KNOWING that some of these people will sell their signed books, and this is one way for the creator to make a buck for himself too off of this practice. 

So, discrimination is perfectly justified, so long as the creator can "make a buck for himself"...?

The ends justifies the means...?

Again...the issue isn't how much they charge. Never has been, never will be. The issue is charging a DIFFERENT price, and demanding to know what someone intends to do with their property.

2 hours ago, BassGMan said:

Yes, lots of variables. We can each rattle off all kinds of scenarios and personal examples. My whole point is just to say that I understand and can agree with the steps some of these creators have taken in order to not be taken advantage of. Good for them. Sorry for the fan that just wants a signed book for their personal collection. 

This is a classic appeal to emotion. "Good for them." I understand how you can agree with it...after all, you got yours, so who cares about what happens afterwards, right...? You can "understand and agree with the steps" taken in order to not be "taken advantage of"...by people like you, right? The ends perfectly justifies the means, in your view.

"Sorry, fan. Tough luck. You should have gotten your books signed before everyone wised up. Oh, you weren't even collecting then? Oh well."

Let me spell it out for you very clearly: if a creator is charging for his or her signature what he or she feels his or her signature is worth, he or she IS NOT, BY DEFINITION, being "taken advantage of."

ON THE CONTRARY...the CREATORS are the ones taking advantage of the CGC SS program by charging a CGC punishment tax of two, three, four, or MORE times the price if the book is "for CGC." THAT is what is ACTUALLY happening. And, because we behave like addicts, most of us quietly say "ok" and go along with it, because we're afraid to be cut off. It is the very DEFINITION of taking advantage, of "gaming the system."

And here you are, defending it.

So, save the "creators are being taken advantage of!" tripe, because they're not. The ones who charge a CGC punishment tax are the ones taking advantage of slabbers, whether those are fans, dealers, or somewhere in between. 

3 hours ago, BassGMan said:

Geez, you brought 150 books to be signed by one (or maybe it was several) creators? That is terrible. And you find that to be OK? For something like a that maybe a private meeting on the side could be arranged. Even if you had all those books signed, what about all the little guys behind you that wanted their one book signed? I'll admit I was terrible a few times when I brought up a small pile to be signed by a creator in the past. Sometimes other fans even looked at me like what in the hell am I doing? Selfish is what I call that, and I've had selfish moments in the past too so I understand it. 

What an irresponsible thing to say, based on erroneous assumptions about how the CGC SS program works. You sit in judgement, but you know nothing of the process?

As I said before, you ought to become familiar with the entire program, how witnesses and facilitators operate, and how CGC is represented, before you speak about it.

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, porcupine48 said:

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Discrimination is not limited to "race" or "religion."

 

Agreed.

 

1 hour ago, Logan510 said:

1 hour ago, porcupine48 said:

Agreed.

Never said it was 

Yes you did, Right here:

Quote

Discrimination is not letting someone eat at a restaurant based on their race / religion etc.

That's exactly what you did. Did you forget what you posted...?

[RockMyAmadeus]

54 minutes ago, stephenshamus12 said:

If they are off base, the market will correct them, as they won't sell very much. -Stephen 

This particular market is much too small to "self correct" efficiently, and creators have finite lives. 

By the time the correction comes...if it comes at all...the creator may no longer be with us.

And some creators, not at all aware of why they "didn't sell much" may place the blame where it doesn't belong...like on the convention itself....and may decide not to appear in the future, when the reality was, they actively turned down opportunities standing right in front of them to make the money they were there to make. But, as you mentioned, you can't say anything on the ground.

Making con promoters like you aware of this gives you a leg up in negotiating with creators in the future...if they say "I don't make what I need to make at your events", you can respond with "have you considered that charging a different price for the same service is turning off your customer base?"

As well, part of the process of market correction is awareness and discussion, which is what is taking place here. Without such awareness and hashing things out, it's a guarantee that nothing will change. 

Just so I'm clear, my issue is not attendees being made aware of the prices beforehand, but rather being charged a different, higher price for the exact same service...and not merely charging, or even tiered pricing in general, so long as something extra is being offered for the price...I hope you can see and agree that that's a bad practice. After all, it's not something the ACE organization does. I'm just letting you know, as an attendee, my specific concern. I hope you take it into consideration, and I recognize that you have much bigger issues to deal with. Feel free to ignore all the rest of the hashing out between members.

Thank you for your time.

Edited July 2, 2018 by RockMyAmadeus

[BassGMan]

RockMyAmadeus, while I give you very high marks for your debate skills, I still see, as WooYeah mentioned in this very thread (I see that mention was erased but is still captured in his quote above in your post), how you are playing with words and creating your own conclusions/arguments in order to make a point and swing "the jury" to your side. Are you an attorney? You have the skills of one. That is great for a debate, and if I was an attorney I may use the same skills. However, this is not a court of law and we are just talking comics, sigs, convention and artist policies in what I consider casual conversation. While I may not be putting in alot of time to perfectly state my words in a way that you cannot use against me, I think I am being pretty clear in my overall message. It is pretty simple really. Creators don't like being used by dealers in such a way as we have been discussing. Some don't care. Others take a stand. I support those who take a stand to avoid being taken advantage of. Heck, I'm fine with those who don't as well. Go ahead, take your 150 books to the next con and hopefully you can have them all signed. Good luck to ya'! 

Edited July 2, 2018 by BassGMan

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 minutes ago, BassGMan said:

RockMyAmadeus, while I give you very high marks for your debate skills, I still see, as others have mentioned in this very thread, how you are playing with words and creating your own conclusions/arguments in order to make a point and swing "the jury" to your side.

I would be very careful about giving any credence to the opinions of "Stu Cathell", who has been banned from the CGC board for a decade and a half, and who has made hundreds of user names to harass people here, all of which have also been banned, simply because he hates CGC.

I am not "playing with words." I am making counterarguments to your statements that I hope are reasonable and persuasive, just as you are doing. Nothing more, nothing less. If you think you have a valid counterargument, you should make it. Discussing me, personally, is not relevant. It would be nice if you addressed my specific points, and apologized for saying my bringing 150 books was "terrible" and "selfish", when you admittedly don't know anything about the program or how it works, but I'm not holding my breath

I agree with you...you are being clear with your overall message, which I have rebutted. Others can come to their own conclusions.

[BassGMan]

39 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

I would be very careful about giving any credence to the opinions of "Stu Cathell", who has been banned from the CGC board for a decade and a half, and who has made hundreds of user names to harass people here, all of which have also been banned, simply because he hates CGC.

I am not "playing with words." I am making counterarguments to your statements that I hope are reasonable and persuasive, just as you are doing. Nothing more, nothing less. If you think you have a valid counterargument, you should make it. Discussing me, personally, is not relevant. It would be nice if you addressed my specific points, and apologized for saying my bringing 150 books was "terrible" and "selfish", when you admittedly don't know anything about the program or how it works, but I'm not holding my breath

I agree with you...you are being clear with your overall message, which I have rebutted. Others can come to their own conclusions.

I don't know Stu, or you, so I am just winging it in that respect. Although I don't know the exact situation in what you are dealing with, with your 150 books, I do know, based on my experience, how it is having been through the process many, many times standing in line with others waiting to get books signed. If there is some new system where you make appointments for an allotted amount of time, and others with one or just a few books are not waiting behind someone with 20, 50 or 150 books, then fine. but if lines are like I remember them, then yeah, those guys that try to get dozens and dozens of books signed while others wait, I believe are being rude and selfish. Terrible may be too strong of a word to use, it is not evil, just rude. But maybe some other system is being used now, and if so I am unaware. Anyway, this is just one detail of many regarding this situation. I guess I am just trying to be neutral. I don't favor the fan over the creator. I can see how both the innocent fan and the creator can get the shaft in these scenarios. 

Edited July 2, 2018 by BassGMan

[▫️]

Once again I miss an opportunity to meet Sam Kieth. And on my home turf no less. Knew about it in advance but the job has me working out of country. 

Anyone have any images?