• 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.

Do creators charge too much for signatures?
2 2

450 posts in this topic

A couple of observations...

1.  Adamantium said he was going to bed hours ago!

2.  CGC kind of changed the game by providing AUTHENTICATED (99%) signatures to the fans.  They are doing it in real time as opposed to after the fact "expert" opinions.  I think it's fair to allow the artists to react accordingly because to some fans at least the signatures do add value.  How much value should they add?  It seems highly speculative.  I recall a Star Wars 1 signed by the cast on Ebay a few months ago where they wanted 40000.  Is it even a 9.8 any more when its been manhandled 10 times?  Does the condition of the book even matter if its 40 times a 9.8?  It was probably a fake anyway...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn’t a tax, it’s completely optional. You don’t have to collect their sig. you don’t have to have it slabbed. It doesn’t have to be a yellow label. It’s certainly cool of the creators who choose to give wigs away or charge very little, just like its cool of bands to put on free shows. Doesn’t mean everyone else should do it always. You don’t like the ticket prices, don’t attend the show

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dupont2005 said:

This isn’t a tax, it’s completely optional. You don’t have to collect their sig. you don’t have to have it slabbed. It doesn’t have to be a yellow label. It’s certainly cool of the creators who choose to give wigs away or charge very little, just like its cool of bands to put on free shows. Doesn’t mean everyone else should do it always. You don’t like the ticket prices, don’t attend the show

lol

Right...and your decision to pay more tax than you are required to is completely optional. And the venue doesn't charge different prices for the same seat on the same night at the same time of purchase, whether the purchaser intends to use the ticket or resell it. See? It all ties back together.

Ok, this has been fun, and welcome back from your hiatus, but it's time for me to go to bed. 

You may be on to something with the "wigs" thing... hm

Night! 

Edited by RockMyAmadeus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Logan510 said:

What I have learned in this thread:

 

 

You haven't learned how to get people to like you even?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dupont2005 said:

This isn’t a tax, it’s completely optional. You don’t have to collect their sig. you don’t have to have it slabbed. It doesn’t have to be a yellow label. It’s certainly cool of the creators who choose to give wigs away or charge very little, just like its cool of bands to put on free shows. Doesn’t mean everyone else should do it always. You don’t like the ticket prices, don’t attend the show

I thought of it as a "tax" too, a slab-surcharge imposed by the creator.

I'm not a sig guy (though I love sigs on splash page), so my opinion probably holds less weight - except OTOH it also means I'm a disinterested person so my opinion is less likely an emotional reaction or the result of bias (and more likely to be reason-based).

I have no problem with creator charging a slab surcharge - if forced to guess I would assume that creator who charges extra for SS books is mind reading that the collector buying his SS signature is adding sig for higher value for future resale.  But I don't care that creator is mind reading since I don't care what his motive is for discriminating, since buyer retains his free choice to buy/not buy.

I discriminate all the time - when I see a shadowy figure in a hoodie while walking down street at night I discriminate and cross the street.  I sometime choose a fillet instead of a burger.  So won't complain about another discriminating when I can conceive of a rational basis for that person to discriminate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, grebal said:

I thought of it as a "tax" too, a slab-surcharge imposed by the creator.

I'm not a sig guy (though I love sigs on splash page), so my opinion probably holds less weight - except OTOH it also means I'm a disinterested person so my opinion is less likely an emotional reaction or the result of bias (and more likely to be reason-based).

I have no problem with creator charging a slab surcharge - if forced to guess I would assume that creator who charges extra for SS books is mind reading that the collector buying his SS signature is adding sig for higher value for future resale.  But I don't care that creator is mind reading since I don't care what his motive is for discriminating, since buyer retains his free choice to buy/not buy.

I discriminate all the time - when I see a shadowy figure in a hoodie while walking down street at night I discriminate and cross the street.  I sometime choose a fillet instead of a burger.  So won't complain about another discriminating when I can conceive of a rational basis for that person to discriminate.

Lots and lots of people who don't participate in the SS program being perfectly fine with a CGC punishment tax...so long as they don't have to pay it, fine, charge away! How delightfully easy it is to spend other people's money!

None of you...not a single one of you...would find it acceptable for your grocery store to charge a higher price for your eggs based on what you intend to do with them. None of you. You'd all pitch a fit, and rightfully so, because it's none of the grocery store's business what you intend to do with your eggs. But if you aren't affected by it...by all means, upcharge all you want! And you don't need to guess: most of these creators will tell you why, even though that reason is nonsense. 

lol

Now I need to go to bed. Night!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, kav said:

Regardless of the actual situation and what creators may believe their sigs do for sales, they are free to charge whatever they want.  People are free to pay that, or not.  I dont see the problem.

It's only a problem when it affects your bottom line.

Though I do feel bad for the collectors who're caught in this as collateral damage.

I always see people whining about how much Neal Adams charges and how ridiculous his prices are, but I see him at a lot of cons and his prices aren't going down so he must be doing well enough to justify what he charges ( which I have no problem with and no it's not because I am an "addict" ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, kav said:

Regardless of the actual situation and what creators may believe their sigs do for sales, they are free to charge whatever they want.  People are free to pay that, or not.  I dont see the problem.

I don't think RMA disagrees w/you on that point.  His argument, as I interpret it, is that the creators are misinformed or uninformed or don't have all the facts on which to transact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, KPR Comics said:

I don't think RMA disagrees w/you on that point.  His argument, as I interpret it, is that the creators are misinformed or uninformed or don't have all the facts on which to transact.

I've seen him say that he's tried to "educate" at least one pro and the pro didn't change his behavior.

Whacha gonna do (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kav said:

And in a nutshell that's the whole issue.  Its Don Quixote stuff to try to go around 'informing' people to your way of thinking.  Everyone thinks different.  Everyone thinks theyre right.  Trying to make someone see things your way when they don't care to is useless.  Creators don't care they are doing just fine.  If someone wants THEM to change because it affects the bottom line that falls under the category of creators going 'go away kid ya bother me'.

We all have our windmills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, the whole thread is yet another disingenuous attempt to provoke conflict, with the side benefit of muddying the water by people who have neither experience nor interest in the Signature Series program, and are therefore entirely unqualified to be offering their "opinions" on the matter.

It's a very straightforward, easily understandable issue. If it comes out of your pocket, no one is going to tolerate being upcharged for nothing in return.  You get the same signature, the same service, for the same effort, at a higher price, based on information that is none of a creator's business. There's no genuine, honest disagreement here, and there never was.

It is Monty Python-level absurdity for anyone to complain about others "trying to change people's minds" when they are doing precisely the same thing....and for dishonest reasons. It's all been explained. One need only read with an open mind. The only people's minds that need "changing" are the creators, and even that is merely a function of accurate information. And the only way creators are going to change their minds is if their customers...the ones getting the books signed, regardless of why...say something.

I could not possibly care less about "changing" the mind of some troll who doesn't give a single damn about the SS program. It is, as always, the people reading the thread, but not participating, who are my intended audience.

So, yes, someone is certainly tilting at windmills...I wonder who...? And, more importantly, why...?  hm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, jsilverjanet said:

thanks for using one of your posts and stopping by

My bad. "Do creators charge too much for signatures?" No but I hate the CGC/grading tax. Now I had to waste another comment on this previously never discussed topic by all of you fine folks with 5k plus comments over the past decade or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
2 2