quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:

quote:

Originally posted by webjon:
Unsigned trading cards generally don't make good fodder for getting signatures because they aren't designed for signatures and generally don't have a good space to sign. Perhaps that plays in to why they aren't often used for signatures.

Some might disagree.

It is not some who might disagree, it is One who might disagree. Linking an article you yourself wrote! That is laughable.

Whoa! Where did that come from?

You don't believe there is a hobby history of getting cards signed? I would think that 5 minutes after Topps started cranking out mass produced sets that the idea crossed at least a few heads.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

However it is also absolutely true that unless you are collecting something that doesn't have a "cash" market out there, like matchbox covers or purple ceramic frogs, you probably don't want a cheap or second rate collection. Hence the problem when an average card collector who is regularly spending a good deal of money finds that the "best" cards have stupid prices and he/she can't or won't go along with it.

Fortunately I think the market is still broad enough that different budget levels can play. I think if I had gotten into this hobby yesterday I would collect watching actual auctions (vice BIN's). I have seen price differences as high as 60%. Granted this knocks me out of the really high end cards. Maybe I would allow for a big purchase every quarter or 6 months.

There are still many potential cards out there going for cheap. The Jennifer Hudson that webjon brought up is a great example.


Yup, cons are not for cards. Online shopping and ebay have destroyed the overhead and when most collectors see something at a convention and the first thought is to check it out online. In the few times I have purchased something the price difference made it worth the "have it now" factor.

Standard convention autographs (8x10's and other flats)are generally priced out of any real resell value from the word go. The people out there getting free autographs often sacrifice signature quality because of the signing conditions. Free being a loose term as nothing is free, there is always a calculated cost.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
It has to do with the title license and often the character photo. You will pay way more for any James Earl Jones' autograph card as Darth Vader in a Star Wars set than you will for his same signature on his Conan card. Yes I'll take the Conan one, in near mint please.

Another way to look at it is the Conan card is truly the more rare title. There is always a potential of a value flip. I have one of each but my Star Wars one is a sticker. I really like my Thulsa Doom card, great signature with a long haired James Earl Jones.

Other than the destruction of original signed material, I think my biggest concern is this hack and chop method of autograph card manufacturing becoming more popular.


My only reason for bringing up TTM was the viability of getting trading cards signed and not so much about value. Hard core TTMers tend to collect a ton of lesser known or obscure signatures. Mostly because of their success rate. Not that big time celebrities don't sign TTM but the closer you get to the A list, the more suspicious of the signature you need to be. Any real authentication has to be a back end cost which reduces much of their boasting about how they get everything for free. Even sending out requests with return SASE has a minimum cost but can add up depending on your RTS rate.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Anyway great subject to discuss, so many twists and turns.

Ditto

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
There are still many potential cards out there going for cheap. The Jennifer Hudson that webjon brought up is a great example.

My only reason for bringing up TTM was the viability of getting trading cards signed and not so much about value. Hard core TTMers tend to collect a ton of lesser known or obscure signatures. Mostly because of their success rate. Not that big time celebrities don't sign TTM but the closer you get to the A list, the more suspicious of the signature you need to be. Any real authentication has to be a back end cost which reduces much of their boasting about how they get everything for free. Even sending out requests with return SASE has a minimum cost but can add up depending on your RTS rate. Originally posted by Raven:
Anyway great subject to discuss, so many twists and turns.

Ditto [/QUOTE]

Love it, TTM signed cards are another twist and turn and a whole other subject by itself. It is my feeling, I could be wrong, but I think the number of collectors who send out cards to be signed has dropped significantly post 2000s. I'm sure that it can be tied directly to the rise of the certified autograph card and their easy availability once they became guaranteed in boxes. For collectors who do TTM, I think it's personal and not that they want something for free. They want something others don't have and the collections are great on a satisfaction level, but not so great on a re-sale level and that is the drawback.

As you say, back-end third party authentication, for what it is now worth, is a must with TTM signatures if you have a shot to convince anyone they are genuine. It's not that they aren't mailed to the right place. Many celebrities don't see their mail. Studio people, assistants, secretaries, friends and family may be signing these things as a gesture to the fans and not fully realizing that they are distributing forgeries that will taint the market. Also buying anything from anyone who declares that a raw signed card came TTM is like saying "I think it's real, but don't hold me to it". So when it turns out to be a fake, as many do, it's your tough luck. If you bought one of those SMG auto cards for $7 on eBay, you probably should have known that.

More downsides to it are the visual appearance. TMT cards are often signed in the wrong spot, in ballpoint pen. Two wrongs that make the card look bad. I once knew a guy who would send a nice marker away with every request and tell them to keep it, just so they wouldn't use their own ballpoint. Cards signed in ballpoint ink show heavy impressions on the surface, but not so much ink in the strokes. They fade away a lot faster in some cases. Glossy cards will produce streaky signatures with markers and they may smear if they were thrown back in the envelopes or mishandled when signed. I have seen some TTM autographs that looked like they had fingerprints in them. Maybe that's a plus.

Don't bother trying to get a TTM signed card from any person who has readily available, cheaper certified cards. There is no competition with certified cards, just buy one instead.

Never send a valuable card away TTM and you really shouldn't get any valuable card not issued with a certified signature already signed in any manner. You would actually be losing at least half the value of the card and cutting down it's demand significantly. Get common cards signed and the autograph value will increase the card, not detract from it, but you still will need documentation or certification to sell.

I never sent any celebrity a TTM card, but I did send Magic cards to some of the graphic artists back around 1993 - 1994 and I got back really beautiful signed cards. Most expertly done and some inscribed. So if you want a great signature done properly, I guess my advice would be to find an artist.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:


You don't believe there is a hobby history of getting cards signed? I would think that 5 minutes after Topps started cranking out mass produced sets that the idea crossed at least a few heads.

I've seen plenty of signed cards from the 1930's, including wWI fighter aces from Skybirds.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

As you say, back-end third party authentication, for what it is now worth, is a must with TTM signatures if you have a shot to convince anyone they are genuine. It's not that they aren't mailed to the right place. Many celebrities don't see their mail. Studio people, assistants, secretaries, friends and family may be signing these things as a gesture to the fans and not fully realizing that they are distributing forgeries that will taint the market. Also buying anything from anyone who declares that a raw signed card came TTM is like saying "I think it's real, but don't hold me to it". So when it turns out to be a fake, as many do, it's your tough luck. If you bought one of those SMG auto cards for $7 on eBay, you probably should have known that. Big Grin

More downsides to it are the visual appearance. TMT cards are often signed in the wrong spot, in ballpoint pen. Two wrongs that make the card look bad. I once knew a guy who would send a nice marker away with every request and tell them to keep it, just so they wouldn't use their own ballpoint. Cards signed in ballpoint ink show heavy impressions on the surface, but not so much ink in the strokes. They fade away a lot faster in some cases. Glossy cards will produce streaky signatures with markers and they may smear if they were thrown back in the envelopes or mishandled when signed. I have seen some TTM autographs that looked like they had fingerprints in them. Maybe that's a plus. Wink

Don't bother trying to get a TTM signed card from any person who has readily available, cheaper certified cards. There is no competition with certified cards, just buy one instead.

I think the hobby and who signs is a bit more fluid than your description. Although it still happens I think most celebs have the idea of either on or off when it comes to signing. A preprint is one thing but other people signing has gotten negative media attention over the years. I joined an autograph group on facebook (about 1800 members mostly TTM)and they do come up with some interesting success. Quite a few people with certified cards do return TTM and the signature is the same. Many of the members really are bargain hunters. Sometimes I will post one of my cards and someone will pop up with theirs and how they got it for free. Sometimes they post some high end stuff (like Elvis) that looks horrible but they got a great deal on it. There is no grasp that it would sell for 10X more if the seller would run it through Beckett or PSA. I keep reminding them that if it's fake, it's not a good deal. One dude really tore into me because I proved his Neil Diamond was a pre-print. I stayed cool and poked fun of him. 30 minutes later all of his rants were deleted. A bit of self delusion with some of them.

Still, I am surprised at how many celebs are signing TTM these days. I have even seen a couple of recent ones from Teri Garr who signs around her bouts with MS.

I think the celebs who have an avoidance to TTM are the ones that get far more requests than they can physically respond to or they can go to cons and keep the lines full at $50 a pop.

Not many ballpoint pen sigs come back these days but I really like it when it does. Just something about an older, non glossy card with a ballpoint sig. Sending a pen with the request? Wow! I wonder how many pens were lost without a return? These days with the price of postage that would put each request up towards the $10 range. As it is, the cost of postage, return postage, envelopes and what you want signed already puts the process in an area that if you can find a certified autograph card of the same person for under $20 it is more cost effective just to get it. Still, going back to the original thought, if someone wants an 5x7 then it doesn't matter how cheap the card is.

I did TTM in the early 2000's and got some success with the likes of Charlton Heston, Robert Duvall, Teri Garr and Charles Bronson but it's a lot of work. Especially if you want to make each request unique. I find it just isn't how I want to spend my off time. Just keeping my current collection documented takes up enough.

And yes! Celeb DNA (no matter how slight) is always good!

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:


You don't believe there is a hobby history of getting cards signed? I would think that 5 minutes after Topps started cranking out mass produced sets that the idea crossed at least a few heads.

I've seen plenty of signed cards from the 1930's, including wWI fighter aces from Skybirds.

Oh yeah, I mean Topps ran several baseball releases with facsimile signatures back in the 70's. Sort of promoting the idea.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
I think the hobby and who signs is a bit more fluid than your description. Although it still happens I think most celebs have the idea of either on or off when it comes to signing. A preprint is one thing but other people signing has gotten negative media attention over the years. I joined an autograph group on facebook (about 1800 members mostly TTM)and they do come up with some interesting success. Quite a few people with certified cards do return TTM and the signature is the same. Many of the members really are bargain hunters. Sometimes I will post one of my cards and someone will pop up with theirs and how they got it for free. Sometimes they post some high end stuff (like Elvis) that looks horrible but they got a great deal on it. There is no grasp that it would sell for 10X more if the seller would run it through Beckett or PSA. I keep reminding them that if it's fake, it's not a good deal. One dude really tore into me because I proved his Neil Diamond was a pre-print. I stayed cool and poked fun of him. 30 minutes later all of his rants were deleted. A bit of self delusion with some of them.

Still, I am surprised at how many celebs are signing TTM these days. I have even seen a couple of recent ones from Teri Garr who signs around her bouts with MS.

I think the celebs who have an avoidance to TTM are the ones that get far more requests than they can physically respond to or they can go to cons and keep the lines full at $50 a pop.

Not many ballpoint pen sigs come back these days but I really like it when it does. Just something about an older, non glossy card with a ballpoint sig. Sending a pen with the request? Wow! I wonder how many pens were lost without a return? These days with the price of postage that would put each request up towards the $10 range. As it is, the cost of postage, return postage, envelopes and what you want signed already puts the process in an area that if you can find a certified autograph card of the same person for under $20 it is more cost effective just to get it. Still, going back to the original thought, if someone wants an 5x7 then it doesn't matter how cheap the card is.

I did TTM in the early 2000's and got some success with the likes of Charlton Heston, Robert Duvall, Teri Garr and Charles Bronson but it's a lot of work. Especially if you want to make each request unique. I find it just isn't how I want to spend my off time. Just keeping my current collection documented takes up enough.

And yes! Celeb DNA (no matter how slight) is always good!

Autograph collecting, autograph card collecting and Thru-The-Mail autograph collecting are like different rooms in the same big house. If you want to eat you go to one place, if you want to sleep you go to another place and if you want to watch your big screen TV you go someplace else. In every room you have a different set of behavior and its very hard to try to do it all in one spot without making a mess. So that ends my whimsical wisdom.

If you are talking to a group that has a majority of TTM autograph collectors, they will not want to hear about the downsides to that hobby. They are there to support each other and boast of their successes. Nothing wrong with that, but for the people weighing TTM signatures on cards against certified cards from card makers, TTM loses every time. It's only when there are no certified cards made for that signer, or the cost for that signer is out of reach, or that signer is especially well liked by the collector, that TTM becomes a good personal alternative.

And it is a personal alternative because the financial benefits are mainly not there or considerably less than the value of the certified card and you are going to need authentication. I know that TTM is a red flag for me. There are many signed items being sold on eBay that are all from long time personal collections obtained TTM or in person at plays and movie premieres, sometimes obtained by a third party or thru an Estate. That's what they say and good luck when an item turns out to be not genuine. The seller will say they acted in good faith and its news to them, but "the price was reduced so it was a bargain". Much like that collector who didn't want to acknowledge that his fake signature was worthless, sellers of fakes try to say it's OK because they aren't cheating you as much as they could if it really were real.

And my friend who sent out those pens didn't want them back. It was a gift for the returned card. That was a long time ago when the mail didn't cost what it does now. It is time consuming and postage is more expensive if you do many TTM requests these days and chances are the bigger celebrities are not signing or you may get some facsimile token back.

I don't parse it out. You either get a genuine hand signed autograph or you don't. There is no sliding scale for fakes, forgeries, counterfeits, pre-prints, autopens, stamps, facsimiles, or secretarials. They are all fakes, whether authorized or not, and they taint the market as they change hands. Despite the occasional negative media attention, I think many celebrities don't care about their fan mail once they start to get some. Bigger celebrities don't answer and/or are protecting their money signature for the contracted appearances.

Naturally if you want to do TTM cards, most of those negative aspects will be ignored and I'm sure you can build a very nice personal collection. Just don't do it expecting to get a lot of money some day.

I just saw an ad on Twitter for one of Leaf's 8X10 photo releases.

It made me wonder -- what sells for more one of the 8 X 10s in one of these products or a certified autograph from the same celeb.

I don't even know if you can really tell one of the Leaf 8x10s from a regular 8x10. . .

I puttered around on eBay a bit. . .

Ted Dibiase unsold at $9.99 in a photo, with sales from $7-15 in cards. So about the same. . .

Tommy Flanagan: 8x10 unsold at $23.
GOTG Sold at $15, and one sold paired with a Sean Gunn auto for $40.
I didn't see any SOA auto cards, which surprised me. . .

I then sorted by highest priced thinking that bigger celebs will be easier to differentiate.

Daniel Craig 8 x 10 as Bond sold for $75 -- finally perhaps an actual comparison!
Bond card: Highest Price (excluding relic cards / dual autos) $200.
Lowest Price: 1 sold at $96.07. A bunch sold around $125.

Paul Rudd 8 x 10 (Our Idiot Brother pic -- not the best) $67.50
Parks and Rec card $69, $80, $85, $91, $100

Hayden Christensen 8 x 10 from Star Wars sold for $60.69
Star Wars Card: $81, $88, $92, $99, $99, $99, $101, $108 + a bunch more.

The Leaf/Donruss 8x10s are another tricky area that crosses boundaries and autograph collecting styles. Years ago when they came out with signatures from sports stars, the 8x10s were really made just like oversized cards. Some people liked them, but it wasn't a big success because the main fan base were card collectors who generally don't like anything but the standard trading card size, primarily because of storage issues.

Also if you are comparing non-sport celebrity signatures on any 8x10s to licensed certified cards, that card has its own value for being part of a regular or premium set, plus it has the value of the signature. The 8x10, even if certified as genuine, has it's value based solely on the market worth of the signature. For that reason, although you may find some exceptions especially if you are looking at random auctions, I would think that the certified autograph card would normally be found at higher prices than the same signer on a Leaf issued or other 8x10 would achieve.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
The Leaf/Donruss 8x10s are another tricky area that crosses boundaries and autograph collecting styles. Years ago when they came out with signatures from sports stars, the 8x10s were really made just like oversized cards.

I think we are referring to different products. The products I am referring to are literally just 8x10 photos sold in packs like a blind box. Most of the photos are PSA authenticated.

The Rudd and Christensen autograph I mentioned above are just PSA authenticated 8x10s in a toploader that happened to be sold by Leaf. The Craig has Leaf authentication.

Yeah, I was thinking of something else. I never tried these, sounds like a grab bag type product. But since there is no 8x10 set to even try to collect, I think my conclusion would be the same.

If the same signer has a certified autograph card in a licensed product, that card will most likely be selling for more, maybe a lot more, than the authenticated signed 8x10 from Leaf, if it is a reasonably known celebrity. If it is a common signer with little demand it won't make much difference either way because you can't get any lower than a $7 or $8 common card and the 8x10 with a certification has to go for at least that much no matter the signer.

Obviously if no certified signed card exists then the 8x10 will be the best choice available.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:


You don't believe there is a hobby history of getting cards signed? I would think that 5 minutes after Topps started cranking out mass produced sets that the idea crossed at least a few heads.

I've seen plenty of signed cards from the 1930's, including wWI fighter aces from Skybirds.

Oh yeah, I mean Topps ran several baseball releases with facsimile signatures back in the 70's. Sort of promoting the idea.

Indeed, back in the 50s. The first regular sized Topps baseball set from 1952 had facsimile signatures.

I think there are a lot of over-simplifications and assumptions in this thread regarding how and why people collect.

Autograph cards have always been my favourite type of trading card insert and I started buying them as an extension of my card collecting hobby, NOT because they were certified. Authenticity was an inherit expectation given the type of collectable and the obvious need for any company to stand behind their product if they want to stay in business.

As for the whole trading cards vs. 8x10/photo debate...
I think a lot of autograph collectors at conventions are not the same as collectors of collectibles at all, but rather are accumulators of mementos. I am flabbergasted at these shows were everyone seems to place their just-signed cherished photographs on the floor to put into their folders or bags, or walk around with them in hand, causing creases galore. I can't fathom the card collector, with preferences of near-mint condition in their mind, chucking our prized cards on the floor.

It's not the same crowd at all. I have been stood in queues at conventions and other attendees in the line have seen a card I am to have signed and ask what it is.

That said, I am a cross-over collector. I primarily stick to 8x10s at shows because they are a nice size for decent images, but not too large to store, and none of them are going up on the wall (they WILL fade): display factor is not a consideration for a lot of people. In fact in several autograph groups I follow, where they all take it very seriously, many advocate creating high quality scans of their signed photos and display the copies on the wall to fade, with the originals stashed safely away.

As for authenticity and certification services, and the value they may add, or the advantages of 'certified' cards over signed photos...

I don't care that others may think my signed photos are fakes, or that they would be harder to sell without a PSA or Beckett sticker on the front. I don't need anyone to tell me the photo is real when it was signed in front of me. I won't waste my time attaching 3rd party verification for some future potential buyer when I am buying these things for my pleasure, not to sell. They are a memory of someone who's film work I admire. I consider all the money I spend at conventions a write-off and 'value' never comes into it. Not least of all because I usually prefer everything personalised.

I also get trading cards signed at shows because they make a fun addition to my 'official' autograph cards. Again, I don't care authenticity is less concrete for someone else. I have a Shatner Trek chase card signed by the man that, IMO, looks better than any of his pack inserted cards and that is what matters to me.

Don't get me wrong, the manufacturers name has made it easier for me to shift some of my official cards in the past, but when I'm six feet under, I don't reckon I'll be worrying much about resale value of anything.

What happened to collecting for fun?

quote:

Originally posted by X:
What happened to collecting for fun?

Nothing. I would guess that a majority of the people reading this post right now are collecting just for the fun of it. That doesn't mean we can ignore the financial aspects of buying non-sport cards when costs have gone beyond what many collectors used to view as their discretionary income.

As for the "over-simplifications and assumptions in this thread" that I think you are protesting, sometimes its just a matter of trying to cover a very large and complex topic in a brief and hopefully understandable manner. In any event, I have read your post and apart from saying you don't care about autograph certifications or re-sale value yourself, you have more or less confirmed the validity of the very same points that have been brought up this discussion. It's fine if you don't see the need, but others do.

That our card collections will probably survive most of us is unfortunately very true.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

quote:

Originally posted by X:
What happened to collecting for fun?

Nothing. I would guess that a majority of the people reading this post right now are collecting just for the fun of it. That doesn't mean we can ignore the financial aspects of buying non-sport cards when costs have gone beyond what many collectors used to view as their discretionary income.

As for the "over-simplifications and assumptions in this thread" that I think you are protesting, sometimes its just a matter of trying to cover a very large and complex topic in a brief and hopefully understandable manner. In any event, I have read your post and apart from saying you don't care about autograph certifications or re-sale value yourself, you have more or less confirmed the validity of the very same points that have been brought up this discussion. It's fine if you don't see the need, but others do.

That our card collections will probably survive most of us is unfortunately very true.

I am not ignoring the benefits or need for manufacturer certification, just saying that it is not necessarily the main reason to purchase a card for some people.

When purchasing motivations are further mixed with conversation on resale value, again as a primary motivation to purchase, then I'll stick with my assertion that the purity in the fun of it is being diminished.

Take the new Trek Inflexions thread in the New Releases sub-forum where not one person has said anything positive about a single card in the set, but rather the cost and resale implications because of how the manufacturer has chosen to release this particular product. If only people just bought what they liked and could afford they might get a little more fun out of life.

quote:

Originally posted by X:
I am not ignoring the benefits or need for manufacturer certification, just saying that it is not necessarily the main reason to purchase a card for some people.

When purchasing motivations are further mixed with conversation on resale value, again as a primary motivation to purchase, then I'll stick with my assertion that the purity in the fun of it is being diminished.

Take the new Trek Inflexions thread in the New Releases sub-forum where not one person has said anything positive about a single card in the set, but rather the cost and resale implications because of how the manufacturer has chosen to release this particular product. If only people just bought what they liked and could afford they might get a little more fun out of life.

So even though I have been posting in that ST thread, since you bring up Star Trek Inflexions here, I'll try to clarify my own opinion.

Just like you, I don't sell my certified non-sport autograph cards or any personally signed items I may get. However I do want to be able to prove that my autographs are authentic if I had to, because authentication is the single most important requirement for an autograph. Period. It is way too easy to collect fakes, anybody can do it. The manufacturer's certification is not the reason I purchase any autograph card, it's because I want that particular signer. However I need the certification for my own peace of mind. These cards are not full proof, but they are the best guarantee of genuine signatures that I know of other than seeing them signed in my presence and I need that assurance for me, not for anyone else.

But if anyone feels the need to convince anyone else, or they do want to sell their signed items someday for any decent sort of money, then they need stuff that is either inherently guaranteed, such as certified cards, or are confirmed thru documentation or third party authentication. None of that part is my opinion. I consider it proven fact.

As for ST Inflexions, the reason why the early conversation has been centered around the cost is because this set is next in line as an ultra premium non-sport product and it's rumored to be at $3,200 a case with 350 cases made. So of course people are going to ask "do we need this, is it worth it"? I did talk about the autograph list. I said every signer mentioned has had autographs in other Star Trek products and collectors who really wanted them probably have them already. That may not be a positive statement, but I think it's accurate, even given Cumberbatch's rare incentive card.

What else is there to say? You know that the Inflexions autos are going to cost more for the same signers then the autos previously released from cheaper boxes, of the same title, showing them as the same characters. A card collector will have fun when he/she can get something for less, not more. When something previously unaffordable, falls into his/her price range, not gets farther away. Saying "if only people just bought what they liked and could afford they might get a little more fun out of life" is fine, but pointing out ST Inflexions makes for a poor example. Card collectors may well like it, but they have to consider value, not as a motivation to buy, but as a motivation to NOT buy. The purity of fun is equally diminished when you spend too much for what you get or you want something that you can't or won't buy because it's stupidly priced. It's not about re-sale for collectors who don't sell, but it is about spending hobby money wisely and if they can do that they do have fun.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:

quote:

Originally posted by X:
I am not ignoring the benefits or need for manufacturer certification, just saying that it is not necessarily the main reason to purchase a card for some people.

When purchasing motivations are further mixed with conversation on resale value, again as a primary motivation to purchase, then I'll stick with my assertion that the purity in the fun of it is being diminished.

Take the new Trek Inflexions thread in the New Releases sub-forum where not one person has said anything positive about a single card in the set, but rather the cost and resale implications because of how the manufacturer has chosen to release this particular product. If only people just bought what they liked and could afford they might get a little more fun out of life.

So even though I have been posting in that ST thread, since you bring up Star Trek Inflexions here, I'll try to clarify my own opinion.

Just like you, I don't sell my certified non-sport autograph cards or any personally signed items I may get. However I do want to be able to prove that my autographs are authentic if I had to, because authentication is the single most important requirement for an autograph. Period. It is way too easy to collect fakes, anybody can do it. The manufacturer's certification is not the reason I purchase any autograph card, it's because I want that particular signer. However I need the certification for my own peace of mind. These cards are not full proof, but they are the best guarantee of genuine signatures that I know of other than seeing them signed in my presence and I need that assurance for me, not for anyone else.

But if anyone feels the need to convince anyone else, or they do want to sell their signed items someday for any decent sort of money, then they need stuff that is either inherently guaranteed, such as certified cards, or are confirmed thru documentation or third party authentication. None of that part is my opinion. I consider it proven fact.

As for ST Inflexions, the reason why the early conversation has been centered around the cost is because this set is next in line as an ultra premium non-sport product and it's rumored to be at $3,200 a case with 350 cases made. So of course people are going to ask "do we need this, is it worth it"? I did talk about the autograph list. I said every signer mentioned has had autographs in other Star Trek products and collectors who really wanted them probably have them already. That may not be a positive statement, but I think it's accurate, even given Cumberbatch's rare incentive card.

What else is there to say? You know that the Inflexions autos are going to cost more for the same signers then the autos previously released from cheaper boxes, of the same title, showing them as the same characters. A card collector will have fun when he/she can get something for less, not more. When something previously unaffordable, falls into his/her price range, not gets farther away. Saying "if only people just bought what they liked and could afford they might get a little more fun out of life" is fine, but pointing out ST Inflexions makes for a poor example. Card collectors may well like it, but they have to consider value, not as a motivation to buy, but as a motivation to NOT buy. The purity of fun is equally diminished when you spend too much for what you get or you want something that you can't or won't buy because it's stupidly priced. It's not about re-sale for collectors who don't sell, but it is about spending hobby money wisely and if they can do that they do have fun.

Again, a lot of assumptions.

I don't buy to resell (usually), but have sold some of my cards, so I certainly appreciate the benefit of having the manufacturer back up the item's authenticity. Of course it is necessary in selling a product like this to a customer.

However, and I am aware I am paraphrasing here, you said earlier that a convention signed trading card is problematic, in comparison to a pack-inserted card, because authenticity is harder to prove. If you want to sell it yes. Otherwise no. I don't need to prove Carrie Fisher signed a SW Galaxy card for me. I don't care if anyone thinks it could be fake. The only question is whether I feel the actor is worth paying for to have them sign a card for me in the first place.

As for ST Inflexions...

quote:

Originally posted by Raven
I said every signer mentioned has had autographs in other Star Trek products and collectors who really wanted them probably have them already. That may not be a positive statement, but I think it's accurate, even given Cumberbatch's rare incentive card.

No, it is not accurate. Of course some collectors will have some of these autos already, that is the nature of the game with RA's penchant for multiple styles of autographs, but not every collector will have these card from these actors. I want Stewart, Gates, Burton, Whoopi, Plummer, Weller, and Cumberbatch particularly, and there will be others also looking forward to some of these cards. I really wanted the above actors on official Trek cards but have held off for YEARS, hoping to see the movie series autos get expanded, and now they are coming at last.

Do we 'need' them? Well we don't need any cards do we? Some will want them.
Are they 'worth' it? As ever, people will pay what they feel a card is worth.

The majority of collectors will not be buying cases so why they get upset about the RRP case price is beyond me. This happened last time when collectors were up in arms about the Trek Premium Pack release and somehow everyone survived. I picked up the Anthony Zerbe Very Limited auto from that set a couple months ago for £10/$13. How could this happen when it came from a 'premium product'?! I'd say that was money wisely spent.

I imagine master set collectors are at the greatest risk of being alienated, or collectors who like to buy a couple traditional style boxes, or $5 base set collectors, but that ship sailed a long time ago as manufacturers are changing things up all the time now. For those who aren't beholden to strict collecting models, take my word for it, the hobby is a lot more fun.

quote:

Originally posted by webjon:


Tommy Flanagan: 8x10 unsold at $23.
GOTG Sold at $15, and one sold paired with a Sean Gunn auto for $40.
I didn't see any SOA auto cards, which surprised me. . .

I noticed that SOA card of his drying up last year. It will pop up now and then. There really aren't that many cards from Season 1-3 out there in general.

Of course between GotG and SOA, Chibs is obviously the more popular character and he only signed once.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:


And it is a personal alternative because the financial benefits are mainly not there or considerably less than the value of the certified card and you are going to need authentication. I know that TTM is a red flag for me. There are many signed items being sold on eBay that are all from long time personal collections obtained TTM or in person at plays and movie premieres, sometimes obtained by a third party or thru an Estate. That's what they say and good luck when an item turns out to be not genuine. The seller will say they acted in good faith and its news to them, but "the price was reduced so it was a bargain". Much like that collector who didn't want to acknowledge that his fake signature was worthless, sellers of fakes try to say it's OK because they aren't cheating you as much as they could if it really were real.

Yup! I have seen this as well. The unfortunate part of the authentication game is that there are a great many signatures that will loose money if it is spent to get it authenticated. In such cases the buyer needs to educate themselves on the autograph in question. There are many unauthenticated sigs I am sure both of us could look at and make a decision with a high degree of certainty. Even professional authentication isn't 100%.

I think if I did ever return back to the TTM game I would ONLY swing for the fences. Obviously the closed system method of collecting autographs will always be my preference (yours too, I think) but it can be fun to see what you can get utilizing other methods. ;-)