[MOPO] Signatures On Posters Have Consistently Been A Bonanza For Me
Interesting that many people think a signature on a vintage piece may more often than not hurt instead of help. I think the nay-sayers have never really had any experience with that. I would file this in THEORIES THAT COLLAPSE UNDER EXAMINATION where such declarationslike "Always buy a mint folded onesheet over a linenbacked version, it'srarer and far more in demand" are filed away. I was fortunate to have a CITIZEN KANE insert consigned to me signed by Orson Welles. The provenance was beyond reproach.Insert was NMint folded with one fold fairly deep where insert was folded back the wrong direction in order for Welles to sign easier while sitting at a table. Insert was purchased with buyer fully aware that a mint rolled version would be up for auction only 4-5 days later at Heritage.But I estimated what it would sell for and then felt strongly Welles' signature worth a 20% extra premium based on the results of signed 3 sheets years earlier I was able to track down. I followed live on-line with great anticipation and when bidding stopped so did my pulse. Heritage's insert sold foralmost three thousand dollarsLESS.All of a sudden acid reflux is causinga burning inching its way up my esophagus while thoughts ofclient dissatisfaction extrapolating to a drive by hit ora smart bomb on my headwerebeginning to seem perfect legitimate scenarios inmy immediate future. I was in agony. But in one of the most considerate actions ever madeon my behalf that I had ever experienced in this business, while the auction at Heritage was still going my phone rang and it was my client. Immediately launching into "I know you and you are probably upset over the sale etc. ... Do not worry I am thrilled with my signed insert and I have no regrets what so ever" That was class.Insert has since been sold at an even greater premium,again keeping in mind this over a mint rolled version. So maybe Wells is one of only a handful that a signature can so impactpositively the sale of a vintage item. But the same dramatic differenceas a percentage of sale price over the average price has occurred for mewith a Lucas signature on THX-1138, Charleton Heston on anything from Ben Hur, Patrick Swayze on Dirty Dancing and David Lean big time on Lawrence of Arabia. But I was lucky as these arematerials with directors or actor associations that are so cool. My most recent example was I had the great italian super-photobusta on linen for JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS and had listed on Ebay twice possibly three times with no sales or even solicitations for an offEbay purchase. With the help of fellow Mopoer Ron Magid at the Spring Courts, while I manned my table he got Ray Harryhausen (for $20 ) to sign the piece along the bottom with a bold black marker. I listed on Ebay and it sold in 5hoursBuy It Now at a higher price than I had originally listed the first time. But on the whole, singling out the Courts Shows or the upcoming Chiller theatre, theseevents host a ballroom full of forgettable 20 seconds of fame personalities that rarely qualify as household names..Hell if you farted on live TV back in the 60's they'll havea table waiting for you if desired. But people seek their autographs and pay to have them.But I made a very interesting observation at the last Courts Show. The two big "draws" were Mickey Rooney and Debbie Reynolds. They actually caused lines to form especially Rooney on Saturday. What I noticed going down their lines besides the fact that 80% of the people were as wide as they were tall and the event again 100% white, was that no one was having original studio material signed. Most were blank 3 x 5cards the balance stills or magazines. I had Rooney and Reynolds lobby cards as low as $10 and not one sold. So it does beg the question why mix? But clearly its the autographseekers the dog and poster vendors the tail..each drawing their own collectors. But would anyone there or at Chiller Whatever in Jersey, their signature actually undermine the sale of a vintage piece? I don't think so, at worstthe impact would beno measurable increase in sale price. And when offering a signed piece, its just another positive to encourage a purchase over a competitor. Butit would be great to hear from Rich and Grey on the following. Rich, say you had a comic book slabbed and graded a 9.2 of the third Batman comic book. If it were signed by either the illustrator or author on the cover.how much if any penalty in grade points would be levied? What if it was Walt Disney's signature on aDonald Duck comic book? Or to Grey, a nmint to mint folded Double Indemnity onesheet is in the offer by Heritage. If it was signed by Fred MacMurray would you alter the onesheet's grading downward or simply ignore its presence and grade the poster as submitted by its condition? freeman fisher8601 west knoll drive #7west hollywood, ca90069 Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at
[MOPO] Signatures On Posters Have Consistently Been A Bonanza For Me
** That was a great post, Freeman. What is intriguing about it is the cross over debate that goes on about signed pieces on posters or books or any other paper with something else printed on them. ** I also collected signed first edition, first printing books. A first edition is not necessarily a first printing. Today, you can identify most first printings by the presence of a number 1 on the countdown string of numbers on the back of the title page. The lowest number that appears is that book's printing. For example, if you see: 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 ** You're looking at a first printing If you see... 9 8 7 6 5 4 You're looking at a fourth printing. Publishers have different ways of marking their first printings, but smart collectors of signed books ALWAYS look this because so many people buy first editions not realizing that later printings are worthless, unless they are signed. ** There are two schools of thought about signed paper -- if an inscription is included, such as To John Doe, thanks for everything, signed (insert celebrity name here) -- some feel it's not as desired as one that is signed with just a name. This is true for contemporary signatures. However, when an inscription is added by a celebrity who is dead, this drivers forgers crazy because not only do they have to mimic the signature, they have to mimic all the other words. Because Orson Welles is dead, anything signed by him is valued, with or without an inscription. The supply of authentic signatures by dead people is now finite. For living authors or celebrities, comparisons between authentic and forgeries are more difficult, but collectors generally prefer signatures dedicated to NO ONE from celebrities who are still living. ** Another target of forgeries is Audrey Hepburn. Her signature is easy to copy. I own a signed letter to a fan referencing a lost re-strike photo of her Oscar for Roman Holiday. It helps that I also have the original envelope, all written in her hand. It's dated 1998 on personal stationary from her home in Tolenchanz, Switzerland, where she is also buried. It is postmarked. I wish I had her signature on a lobby card, but then I'd have to deal with authenticity issues and do a lot of comparing with real documents or checks. I like the letter. ** Janet Leigh's signature is inscribed to me. She recently died. Only when I think of it, I realize it could be worth more because she signed my Psycho one-sheet with more than just, Janet Leigh. She had a good career, but she was no superstar. However, Psycho is the film for which she will always be remembered. And I'm glad the thing is inscribed psychotically yours because down the road, having more words than just Janet Leigh for others to inspect, will make it more difficult for people to declare it's fake...even if I had NO picture of her signing it (which I do). ** Have you seen Humphrey Bogart's signature? It's super flamboyant. Difficult to copy. He didn't sign much, nor did Orson Welles. Getting signatures to those superstars is a coup. Those you see for sale are mostly done by publicists. At the peak of their fame, who had time to sign autographs? The studio publicity machine took care of everything. ** Here's another giveaway. I once ran into a guy who tried to sell me a signed lobby of Shanghai by Rita Hayworth. Only problem? It was signed in a Sharpie. Rita died in 1987. The Sharpie did not become the instrument of choice until after the 1970s. But Rita was already deep into Alzheimer's by the 1970s. The only thing real signed by Rita is either in ball-point or in fountain ink. ** Thanks for weighing in on the theories which collapse under examination stuff, Freeman. If authentic, Orson signing ANY poster even in VG or less condition is valuable. Billy Wilder stuff is also good, but Hitchcock is better. I also agree with Kirby. My Waterfront poster signed by Karl Malden is worth no more or less to a collector even if he was an Oscar winner for a different movie. It's not the same as if my poster was signed by Brando, who was a notorious non-signer. But I can live with it. A Brando signature would require exhaustive examination with legal documents to ensure a buyer isn't getting fleeced. And if fake, it would be equivalent to a doodle by a 6-year old, wrecking its attractiveness AND its value. -koose. Original Message Follows From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU Subject: Signatures On Posters Have Consistently Been A Bonanza For Me Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 11:12:25 EDT Interesting that many people think a signature on a vintage piece may more often than not hurt instead of help. I think the nay-sayers have never really had any experience with that. I would file this in THEORIES THAT COLLAPSE UNDER EXAMINATION where such declarations like Always buy a mint folded onesheet
Re: [MOPO] Signatures On Posters Have Consistently Been A Bonanza For Me
Title: Re: [MOPO] Signatures On Posters Have Consistently Been A First, let me say I know NOTHING about autographs and their value, so I have a pure collector's approach here. Personally to me, it makes a huge difference WHO signed a poster and WHEN it was signed. I would value a vintage signature on a vintage poster much higher than a signature obtained at a celebrity show. Actually, I would rather have an unsigned vintage poster than one with a contemporary signature. My CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON onesheet is signed by Ben Chapman (one of the two guys in the creature suit). I bought it signed and the autograph is in the bottom border, so it doesn't bother me, but frankly: I couldn't care less, and I don't think it makes any difference to the value of the poster. On the other hand, the CREATURE onesheet pictured in Tony Nourmand's FILMPOSTERS OF THE 50s has been signed by Jack Arnold. Now, to me, THAT would make a difference. Not only was he a very important director, also, for all I know, he never added to his income by selling autographs at celebrity shows. Come to think of it, I also have an INVADERS FROM MARS onesheet, signed by Arthur Franz. Not sure if this increases the poster value, but I honestly doubt it... At least I'm pretty sure it's original, after all, who would bother to fake an Arthur Franz? Helmut Hamm http://www.filmposter.net Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Re: [MOPO] Signatures On Posters Have Consistently Been A Bonanza For Me
But it would be great to hear from Rich and Grey on the following. Rich, say you had a comic book slabbed and graded a 9.2 of the third Batman comic book. If it were signed by either the illustrator or author on the cover.how much if any penalty in grade points would be levied? What if it was Walt Disney's signature on a Donald Duck comic book? Freeman I think if you had a CGC graded book in high grade witha signature on the cover it would reduce the value considerably this might not be the case with a lower graded copy however. The difference here is that comic fans are have always been a bit anal with the grade of the book, and writing on the cover is a clear defect there might be a few exceptions to this rule for instance, let's say you have a copy of Action comics #1 (first appearance of Superman) with vintage 1939/40 signatures from Siegel Shuster - that this would be a huge find and would demand a good premium. Now while there are many comics with their signatures that were gotten by collectors during the 1970's-80's, their resale value has historically been small. Same for Jack Kirby, Stan Lee etc. I think the key would be to find a Spiderman #1 signed in 1962 by Steve Ditko, a Detective #27 or Batman #1 signed by Bob Kane in 1939 etc and that copies of these books signed during the 1980's etc would not achieve anything for a fan other than a discussion just like this one on MoPo. as a matter of fact, most autographed comic books have the signatures on the bottom of the front page, as collectors of comics are generally averse to having the covers defaced but to be signed on the inside is no distraction On movie posters there is no doubt a different mindset. There is only one place to sign - on the front. It is easy to understand why a Citizen Kane poster signed by Welles would be a wonderful addition to anyone's collection. Who would not pay a HUGE premium if a copy of Frankenstein was found autographed by Karloff - in fountain pen dated 1931/32?? So my opinion is that a vintage signature on a top poster would be a great plus to top end collectors, but that having an Eric Bana autograph on a Hulk 1sheet wouldn't be anything more than a curiosity Rich-- Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
