How do you feel about Rob Liefeld charging $40 for a signature and $80 if key issue? 1 1

[NelsonAI]

Doesn't every grading company charge based on market value?

Rob and other artists are just following the marketplace.  If you think it's too much, don't line up.  Why should everyone else profit off his autograph?

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

On 6/1/2018 at 2:25 PM, Ladic said:

And you can't even get them CGC'ed anymore.

I don't understand this. Why not?

[ADAMANTIUM]

2 hours ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

I don't understand this. Why not?

i believe that you can now...

Liefeld was on a tiff, he quit doing cgc for a while, i believe that is no longer the case...

[mysterymachine]

Yes its wrong. And its also wrong that anyone would want his signature.  

[fastballspecial]

Signatures seekers & slab companies  have created this problem where the signer now feels entitled to their cut.
Nothing wrong with that, but some are going to push the limit. He has the right to ask what he thinks he 
can get. Just like we have the right to walk on by.

It just another after effect from Slab companies.

 

Edited June 16, 2019 by fastballspecial

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

56 minutes ago, fastballspecial said:

Signatures seekers & slab companies  have created this problem where the signer now feels entitled to their cut.
Nothing wrong with that, but some are going to push the limit. He has the right to ask what he thinks he 
can get. Just like we have the right to walk on by.

It just another after effect from Slab companies.

 

Considering that many people get sigs just to get verified slabs to resell, I can understand this. I like that some talent only charges for a CGC-witnessed sig. To be fair, a lot of older talent (I'm not putting Liefeld in this category) don't get the same work that they used to, so I understand that if there is a key issue where they can make an income from adding value to the book, they're going to do it.

[Crops068]

45 minutes ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

Considering that many people get sigs just to get verified slabs to resell, I can understand this. I like that some talent only charges for a CGC-witnessed sig. To be fair, a lot of older talent (I'm not putting Liefeld in this category) don't get the same work that they used to, so I understand that if there is a key issue where they can make an income from adding value to the book, they're going to do it.

I have absolutely no issue paying more for a CGC sig compared to a non, so long as they are keeping it within reason.  I have all 4 Wolverine limited series, would love to have Frank Miller's signature, I am however not willing to pay the $100 a pop he charges.  Just not something I think it is worth to me.  However I absolutely would have paid it for Stan's when he was alive to put on something that I feel it would have been worth to me.  But then I am not intending to flip what I have signed or slabbed.  Not my goal whatsoever.  Will I sell some at some point, maybe.  Just depends on what it is and what it means to me.

$80 for a Liefeld signature, that is a hard pass.  Hell $40 for a Liefeld signature is a hard pass.

[RockMyAmadeus]

11 hours ago, NelsonAI said:

Doesn't every grading company charge based on market value?

Rob and other artists are just following the marketplace.  If you think it's too much, don't line up.  Why should everyone else profit off his autograph?

 

~95% of the value of these comics...especially Liefeld's...is in what they are and their condition...NOT his signature.

Adding Rob's signature...even to a book like New Mutants #98, his single most valuable book...will COST you money, not PROFIT you, if the book grades, say, 8.5.

Why is Rob entitled to profit off the condition of your book?

[RockMyAmadeus]

6 hours ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

Considering that many people get sigs just to get verified slabs to resell, I can understand this. I like that some talent only charges for a CGC-witnessed sig. To be fair, a lot of older talent (I'm not putting Liefeld in this category) don't get the same work that they used to, so I understand that if there is a key issue where they can make an income from adding value to the book, they're going to do it.

This is just an expression of greed and envy, and a lack of understanding of what the Sig Series program actually means.

"What I intend to do with the book" is no one's business but my own. The only...and I mean the ONLY...reason it's even an issue at all is because collectors behave like heroin addicts and are terrified of being cut off. That is the SOLE AND ONLY REASON why anyone gets away with it. And CGC forces the issue by catering to the desires of creators, rather than submitters.

You wouldn't tolerate it for a flat second if you bought something at the store, and the store asked you what you intended to do with it afterwards, much less tried to charge you a different, HIGHER price for the item depending on your answer.

So why do you think it's tolerable for creators to do the same thing...?

Creators can change whatever they want. They want to charge $1,000, charge $1,000. But it is flat out discrimination to charge one price for one person, and a different price for another, for the exact same effort. It's naked greed and envy, fueled by misinformation, some of which is deliberately spread by the self-interested.

It hurts fans, it hurts creators, and it hurts CGC...and very, very few people seem to understand this.

Edited June 16, 2019 by RockMyAmadeus

[NelsonAI]

The comic is raw when you ask and pay Rob for his autograph.  It's your problem if you submit a low grade comic for him to autograph.

As a creator, his autograph presumably has a perceived value, otherwise people would not ask him to sign, let alone pay for an autograph.  It's up to you to decide if you can profit off the flip.  If not, don't line up and ask for an autograph.  Flip the book without his signature.

[RockMyAmadeus]

17 hours ago, Crops068 said:

I have absolutely no issue paying more for a CGC sig compared to a non, so long as they are keeping it within reason.  I have all 4 Wolverine limited series, would love to have Frank Miller's signature, I am however not willing to pay the $100 a pop he charges.  Just not something I think it is worth to me.  However I absolutely would have paid it for Stan's when he was alive to put on something that I feel it would have been worth to me.  But then I am not intending to flip what I have signed or slabbed.  Not my goal whatsoever.  Will I sell some at some point, maybe.  Just depends on what it is and what it means to me.

$80 for a Liefeld signature, that is a hard pass.  Hell $40 for a Liefeld signature is a hard pass.

What you do with the book after it's signed is not a single person's business in any conceivable manner whatsoever. You have no need to justify whether you flip or not. It's no one's business, and asking it is not only rude, it's an abuse of the addict who is terrified of saying or doing the wrong thing for fear of being cut off, because if you SAY to a creator "I'm sorry, sir/madam, but this is my property, and what I intend to do with it, with all due respect, and your work means a huge amount to me, but it's rather rude of you to ask."

Those words have never left my lips, though they have crossed my mind a thousand or more times. Why? 

Fear of being cut off. Fear of being cut off by the creator, fear of being cut off by CGC.

So, I keep my mouth shut, say nothing, and I am allowed to continue to play in the sandbox.

It's soul-killing.

Edited June 16, 2019 by RockMyAmadeus

[RockMyAmadeus]

19 minutes ago, NelsonAI said:

The comic is raw when you ask and pay Rob for his autograph.  It's your problem if you submit a low grade comic for him to autograph.

You are completely correct! It IS my problem if I submit a low grade comic for him to autograph, and not his; in the exact same manner, it's also none of his concern if I submit an ultra high grade comic to him and happen to "profit" off of his signature. 

Glad we agree that you can't have your cake and eat it, too! 

19 minutes ago, NelsonAI said:

As a creator, his autograph presumably has a perceived value, otherwise people would not ask him to sign, let alone pay for an autograph. 

According to whom? I have a semi-completed run of New Mutants signed by Liefeld, for which I paid nothing for him to sign many years ago. I still have nearly all of those books. I have no intention of selling most of them. So what is the "perceived value" of his autograph in that case....? I didn't pay anything for them. 

You may not be aware of this, but the "end user" of Sig Series slabs are collectors. SS slabs don't just get endlessly passed around between flippers. Collectors pay because they have to, or they don't get the signature, not because that signature has a "perceived value" to them. 

19 minutes ago, NelsonAI said:

It's up to you to decide if you can profit off the flip.  If not, don't line up and ask for an autograph.  Flip the book without his signature.

Agree, completely! But....what if I don't want to "flip the book" in the first place...?

Then what................?

PS. I have taken your advice and "not lined up and asked for an autograph" from Liefeld since 2013. Sound advice! Of course, it doesn't help Liefeld that he's turned down thousand upon thousands of dollars, as well as the opportunity for others to own ultra high grade examples of his work (which is a real thing, by the way), as well as costing CGC dozens, if not hundreds, of submissions...just talking Liefeld, here...that they WOULD have otherwise gotten...not MAY, WOULD...but hey, I guess Rob thinks he doesn't need the money.

I wonder what will happen when the general public gets tired of Deadpool...

 

Edited June 16, 2019 by RockMyAmadeus

[NelsonAI]

I'm not an autograph guy but I have seen Rob's lines.  I don't believe he ever asks fans what they plan on doing with his autograph.  Like most creators, if you pay him, he'll sign. 

Is he taking advantage of Deadpool being "hot".  Sure.  Go to any Wizard show.  How many "D list celebs" wished they charged more for autographs when they were hot?  You have to make the $ while you can.  

Even if you received a free autograph, the perceived value is greater than $0.  Otherwise, why would you have him sign and "devalue' a mint condition comic that you clearly cherish?

[RockMyAmadeus]

5 hours ago, NelsonAI said:

I'm not an autograph guy but I have seen Rob's lines.  I don't believe he ever asks fans what they plan on doing with his autograph.

That is incorrect, and has been for about 5 years. He demands to know of every single person in his line what they intend to do with their books, and charges a different price based on their answer. Oh, he doesn't say the words himself...he doesn't want to be directly rude, after all...his handlers and/or his signage say it for him.

5 hours ago, NelsonAI said:

Is he taking advantage of Deadpool being "hot".  Sure.  Go to any Wizard show.  How many "D list celebs" wished they charged more for autographs when they were hot?  You have to make the $ while you can.  

 

Not the point. As I said earlier, the issue is not him charging for his signature. No one begrudges him taking advantage of his current popularity. The issue is him (and any other creator) charging a different price for the exact same service (signing a comic) based on what the person obtaining the signature intends to do with it afterwards. If he wants to charge $1,000, God bless him. It's charging one person $1,000, and another person $1,500, based on nothing other than what those people intend to do with the books afterwards, which is no one's business but the owners of those books, and doesn't get the person paying $1,500 anything more from Liefeld than the person paying $1,000.

The comment about Deadpool was that the die hard collectors...the ones he's gouging "for CGC"...are the only ones going to be around after the fad ends, and he will have alienated most, if not all, of them by treating them poorly.

5 hours ago, NelsonAI said:

Even if you received a free autograph, the perceived value is greater than $0.  Otherwise, why would you have him sign and "devalue' a mint condition comic that you clearly cherish?

Because you're confusing sentimental value with monetary value. They're not the same thing. I cherish those books because they made an impact on me at a formative time in my life, not because they're worth a certain amount of $$$ (and often, that amount is "less than cost.") What's a Secret Origins Special #1 (1989) signed by Sam Kieth worth, even in 9.8? Pretty much nothing. Don't care. The book is important to *me*, and that's all that matters.

Edited June 16, 2019 by RockMyAmadeus

[Kevin76]

Rob can charge whatever he wants, He's the Tebow of the comic art world, although Tebow is better at football than Liefeld is at drawing but it's the uneducated fanboys who are lining up for his signature. "keys" that are $80 are NM 87 and 98, so it's $80 to get those signed and every other book is $40. I go on myslabbedcomics and just cringe at all the yellow labels people collect. I don't see the appeal. 

[NelsonAI]

I repeat, I've never heard Rob ever ask fans their plans.  If you have and it bothers you, feel free to discuss it with Rob or his handlers.

My AMC movie theatre gives senior citizens 10% off.  I pay more for the same service.  If I don't like it, I can leave.

A glossy picture of Tom Cruise would be worth more with Tom's autograph than without it.  It doesn't matter if the autograph was free or paid for.  The signed pic would be valued higher even if the incremental value was only one cent.  Same with a Sam Kieth comic.  The comic would be worth more autographed.  The comic might be worth a $1.  The autographed comic might be worth $2.  Sentimental value is irrelevant.  Autographs by celebrities are worth more than $0.

[divad]

On 6/1/2018 at 11:34 AM, MadGenius said:

I don't care what he charges per signature, but it should be the same regardless of what issue it is.

This is America folks . . . he can do whatever the truck he wants.

 

[divad]

And get away with. I wouldn't pay a nickel for his sig. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 6/16/2019 at 2:14 PM, NelsonAI said:

I repeat, I've never heard Rob ever ask fans their plans

Ok. I've never seen a baseball game in Yankee stadium. Does that mean they don't exist?

When your "handler" asks you what you intend to do with the item being signed, or if a sign asks the same thing, it is Rob asking fans their plans. Belaboring this point is silly: Rob charges extra based on what people intend to do with their books, and the only way he knows what that intention is is if he asks. Rob doesn't say "is this for CGC/grading?" because he doesn't want to be rude. So he has others do it for him.

Why is it always the people who are self-admittedly not even involved in the Sig Series program who have all the answers...? 

On 6/16/2019 at 2:14 PM, NelsonAI said:

If you have and it bothers you, feel free to discuss it with Rob or his handlers.

His "handlers" have no authority; they are merely gatekeepers who have a vested interest in getting Rob as much money as possible. Trying to talk to them is like trying to persuade a tiger to give up meat. Rob has been made aware of this, but he has other people...those self-same "handlers"....whisper in his ear that those doing Sig Series are...ALL OF THEM...making "phat stacks of cash" off his signature. Rob is free to make his decisions, and I am free to point out that it hurts him, it hurts his fans, and it hurts CGC, because it has and does.

On 6/16/2019 at 2:14 PM, NelsonAI said:

My AMC movie theatre gives senior citizens 10% off.  I pay more for the same service.  If I don't like it, I can leave.

You said you're not an "autograph guy", so I understand if you're not aware that these arguments have been made endlessly, and debunked just as often. A discount given to a special class of people is not the same thing as an upcharge for a special class of people.

Your analogy fails, because AMC isn't charging based on the intentions of their customers. They don't ask people if they intend to write a review about the movie, or use any element of the movie as a springboard for their own projects, or are just there to enjoy it. They charge based on the characteristics of the buyer themselves, not what they intend to do with the experience after the fact. Is it discrimination? Of course...but it is discrimination in favor of a certain class, not discrimination against a certain class. In other words, it's not discrimination at the discriminated party's expense (which is what the upcharge is.)

If I were AMC and put up a sign saying "anyone viewing our films who intends to use the experience in a way we think may potentially make you money will be charged an additional amount."

Such a move would be seen, rightfully, as absurd, and met with laughter and scorn. But that's exactly what creators are doing.

On 6/16/2019 at 2:14 PM, NelsonAI said:

A glossy picture of Tom Cruise would be worth more with Tom's autograph than without it.

Again, these analogies fail for a number of reasons:

1. A "glossy picture of Tom Cruise" has only nominal value. A generic "glossy picture of Tom Cruise" (your example) isn't, itself, a collectible. 

2. Tom Cruise's autograph has value on its own, completely irrespective of what it is on. Tom Cruise could sign a napkin, and it would have value because it's his signature.

3. A "glossy picture of Tom Cruise" can be reproduced, for that same nominal cost, forever, by those who own the IP rights.

On 6/16/2019 at 2:14 PM, NelsonAI said:

It doesn't matter if the autograph was free or paid for.  The signed pic would be valued higher even if the incremental value was only one cent. 

Yes, if it is Tom Cruise. "Tom Cruise" is the operative phrase, here.

On 6/16/2019 at 2:14 PM, NelsonAI said:

Same with a Sam Kieth comic.  The comic would be worth more autographed. 

And that is where your analogy fails, because that's not true. 

1. Comic books are produced at a specific moment in time, and if reproduced, are not "originals", irrespective of value.

2. Because of that, comic books can, and many do, have value that isn't nominal. If I run out of X-Men #94s, I can't simply call up Marvel and order more copies of the original book that came out in May of 1975.

3. Virtually every comic book creator signing napkins adds no value to that napkin, with a tiny handful of exceptions. Even Stan Lee's signature, on a napkin, doesn't add value.

It is a false assumption, then, that a "comic would be worth more autographed", either relative to the COST, or even absolutely.

I have hundreds of comics that are signed that have no value, much less "worth more" because they are signed. 

On 6/16/2019 at 2:14 PM, NelsonAI said:

The comic might be worth a $1.  The autographed comic might be worth $2.  Sentimental value is irrelevant.  Autographs by celebrities are worth more than $0.

Sentimental value isn't irrelevant to the point I made earlier, which was that you asked me why I would "devalue" a "mint condition comic that I clearly cherish." In that scenario, no, sentimental value is not only NOT irrelevant, it's the only reason that comic was signed. 

You can't change the parameters of the argument if the original ones don't fit.

Sam Kieth is not a celebrity. Rob Liefeld is not a celebrity, despite his hopes and dreams.

Tom Cruise is a celebrity. So is Screech, from "Saved By The Bell." And there are plenty of celebrities whose autographs are worth $0.

Edited June 19, 2019 by RockMyAmadeus

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

7 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

You said you're not an "autograph guy", so I understand if you're not aware that these arguments have been made endlessly, and debunked just as often. A discount given to a special class of people is not the same thing as an upcharge for a special class of people.

Your analogy fails, because AMC isn't charging based on the intentions of their customers. They don't ask people if they intend to write a review about the movie, or use any element of the movie as a springboard for their own projects, or are just there to enjoy it. They charge based on the characteristics of the buyer themselves, not what they intend to do with the experience after the fact. Is it discrimination? Of course...but is is discrimination in favor of a certain class, not discrimination against a certain class. In other words, it's not discrimination at someone else's expense (which is what the upcharge is.)

Would it be better if the charge was $80 for a signature, but a 50% discount was offered if the book wasn't being graded?