The Comic Book Convention Thread

I didn't have internet access. I was there Wed-Fri and Sunday.

Yes, I am a Luddite.

Ah well, it wasn't meant to be.

Like two ships in the night....

BUT...I will say this about Neal: he charges the same price for everyone, regardless of what they plan on doing with their property aftewards.

He doesn't charge a stupid-ass discriminatory "CGC surcharge", like Len does, because he "thinks you might be making money off of his signature."

It's none of anyone's business what anyone does with their property, and it's beyond offensive to ask. Either sign it or not, charge or not. Charging one price for this, and another price for that, for EXACTLY THE SAME SERVICE...that is, putting your signature on a comic...is discriminatory and built on greed.

And greed isn't someone "wanting too much money."

No, greed is the manifestation of someone thinking YOU get more more than THEY THINK you deserve. Nothing more, nothing less.

A creator goes online, sees something they signed being offered for (insert WHATEVER amount a creator thinks is offensive here), and becomes indignant. "How DARE they make money off of MY signature??"

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is greed.

They don't understand the mechanics of the situation. They don't have any grasp of the details of why that seller is asking...or, selling...for that amount.

And so, they become offended, and the result is what we see today: "CGC? Oh, that will be MORE money. Because I/we think you don't deserve that money. I/we don't care about the details. I/we just see the end results, and am/are offended over our misperception."

After all...why does any comic have value? Can a signature on a piece of feces add value to it? No, there must be foundational worth to the item for it to be worth adding a signature to....whether that foundation is monetary or sentimental, that foundation MUST EXIST for the signature to add value.

So, if I take the risk of paying Neal $50 to sign a Superboy #148, and it comes back a 9.2, and I was hoping to sell it...I've lost money.

Does Neal take that risk...? Nope. He got his $50. He took no risk at all. None of these creators do in signing these books. They take zero risk, but they expect a cut of the reward...? How does THAT work...? In what business ever conceived does a party which accepts NONE of the risk of a venture get to reap ANY of the reward...?

And yet, many of these creators are doing that exact thing: demanding a cut of the reward, while accepting ZERO risk. It's a violation of economic principles going back thousands of years.

I respect Neal to the hilt for charging a flat price for his signature. I may not be willing to pay it. I may chuckle at his lack of market understanding of the value of his signature. But I will NEVER complain about his right to charge whatever he wants. It's HIS signature, and if he wants to charge $1,000,000, more power to him. I say go for it.

I think I recall seeing a CGC pricing on his list, but to be honest my attention to it ended the moment I determined what I'd need to pay.