Future of signed photos in the hobby?

[homerunhitter]

Any updates or other thoughts on this? I noticed sales of signed 8x10s seem to be down and it seems like no one collects them anymore since I saw a posting about this on another collecting site.Thank you who have responded.

[Huck]

I have been collecting autographs for over 20 years. To me, a licensed photo has the mlb copyright logo visible usually in one of the corners. That said, few if any players on the autograph circuit check to see if a photo is licensed by MLB. I could be wrong but Rod Carew comes to mind as one of the few players who states "will not sign unlicensed material". I have never had an item rejected. Currently, I am having hof's sign a large picture of the hall of fame in Cooperstown which a friend of mine took, had the picture blown up and airbrushed people out of the photo. Unique limited piece only signed by hofs.

The player is getting paid by the promoter what does he care what is put down in front of him to sign? I find the stock mlb photos offered at shows and online kind of boring (not that I don't own some) so I try to find something semi-unique (ex. I had Gaylord Perry sign a jar of Vaseline. He laughed the first time). I asked Duke Snider to sign his real name Edwin. He said "I don't sign Edwin that often". Duke was always a class act and signed Edwin "Duke" Snider. I also like b&w photographs. So, I would stress trying to find something unique or having the player add an interesting inscription. Back in the 90's players willingly added inscriptions, now most players charge a fee for adding inscriptions. There is also a limited use clause - you take a picture and have it signed etc. Not reproducing the picture in mass quantities. The photo-op is a standard offering at shows. Pay for a picture with the player. Picture is printed onsite (not licensed), which you then can have signed for an additional fee. As long as the money is flowing, I don't think most players care about licensing.

I agree with bigdaddy that the collector is either buying the photo, the autograph or perhaps both. In the future, the issue with a signed photo will always be, is the autograph legit? Period. Early on I decided to get all autographs in person. Over the decades, I relaxed a bit and was okay with family and collecting friends obtain autographs for me. Also, I opened up to mail order because I can't be everywhere. I also dabble in TTM. For peace of mind, the big names are always obtained in person. If someone out there is forging Leon Durham signatures, I can live with it.

In pockets of the hobby, I see depressed prices. Some collectors might need some fast cash to pay bills. When there is plenty of supply and little demand, prices fall. With so much time on their hands, collectors are reassessing their collections. Personally, I am finally looking to sell some material, but more from a quality over quantity issue.

As for selling in the future? It will depend on the item and the venue. You will not get rich selling stock signed photos. If some online sites are cracking down on unlicensed material, so be it, sell on BST on this site. Sell offline. Ebay has a bigger issue with forgeries, but the company does not want to address that issue. Another issue is wholesale prices. At a show once I was listening to a collector trying to sell a collection of stock signed photos to a dealer. The customer wanted a higher price than what the dealer was offering. Finally the dealer said "This is a nice collection, but I can get signed Bob Feller photographs for $10 wholesale".

Collect what brings you joy. Down the road if you make a little coin on the collection that is cool as well.

[doug.goodman]

Slightly off topic, but to your general point :

I would have to think that as the average signature has gotten more and more illegible, the amount of people who enjoy collecting them has gone, and will and will continue to go, down.

It's a trend that I see very little chance of changing in the near future.

Doug

[Huck]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

Slightly off topic, but to your general point :

I would have to think that as the average signature has gotten more and more illegible, the amount of people who enjoy collecting them has gone, and will and will continue to go, down.

It's a trend that I see very little chance of changing in the near future.

Doug

There are always lines at shows but the big money is behind the curtain (mail order). Mariano Rivera has a beautiful signature and price to boot. Granted some players signatures are gawd awful but at a paid appearance, most signatures are decent. Years ago, collectors complained about forking over $100+ for scribbles from Lawrence Taylor and Ray Lewis. At the risk of not being booked, I believe both modified their signatures.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by biohazard

There are always lines at shows but the big money is behind the curtain (mail order). Mariano Rivera has a beautiful signature and price to boot. Granted some players signatures are gawd awful but at a paid appearance, most signatures are decent. Years ago, collectors complained about forking over $100+ for scribbles from Lawrence Taylor and Ray Lewis. At the risk of not being booked, I believe both modified their signatures.

Mariano is an outlier in the new era of signatures, everybody knows that.

And, yes, I'm sure most players will improve their legibility when financial concerns outweigh laziness.

Also, I would posit that people who stand in line at shows are what we might call "the converted". I'm talking about people who haven't been converted, who haven't yet learned to love our hobby.

But, put a kid at the side of a field and let him (or her) collect autographs from all the players who are signing that day, and the average signature will be virtually unreadable. Sure, that kid knows that they are all players, and sure that kid, because he wasn't around when the average player signed like Mariano, will probably have a great time. But six months later, when showing his trophies to a friend, who asks the simple question "who's that?" his response will probably be "I don't remember, but I know __________ is on here somewhere, I remember him signing it".

That can't bode well in regards to my initial point.

[Huck]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

But, put a kid at the side of a field and let him (or her) collect autographs from all the players who are signing that day, and the average signature will be virtually unreadable. Sure, that kid knows that they are all players, and sure that kid, because he wasn't around when the average player signed like Mariano, will probably have a great time. But six months later, when showing his trophies to a friend, who asks the simple question "who's that?" his response will probably be "I don't remember, but I know __________ is on here somewhere, I remember him signing it".

That can't bode well in regards to my initial point.

I wish more players signed at games. If I was an owner it would be written into every contract that players will spend 10-15 minutes signing autographs for fans. With tighter security, netting and physical distancing, getting autographs on game day is going to get tougher.

Given that cursive writing is no longer taught in some school systems, one could argue most players will only be able to print their name or perhaps players will create elaborate stamps.

A signature at the field or on the street is usually considered a rushed signature. I am not going to debate that the penmanship of say post 1980 players is on par with prior eras. Some signatures are decent, others not so much. As much as I want to add Greg Maddux to a hof piece, I struggle with having to drop that much iron for that scribble. Of late the prices for some players Piazza and Randy Johnson to name a few is at a level where I just take a pass. When someone says "you don't have so-and-so" I just remember what a fellow collector always says "I don't have Babe Ruth either". I can live with not having Piazza or RJ on my hof piece.

You can't get them all, just enjoy the ones you do get.

[JRS123490]

I am very picky with getting licensed photos signed. As many of you know, Photofile is having major issues. They have told a few people that they are still in business, but after speaking to a few former employees, I just don't see how that's possible. Unless there is another company printing licensed photos (besides awful Fanatics,) that I don't know about, it will be cards for me from now on. Unfortunately, people will still continue to rip off images, but besides being against the law, it is extremely risky as Getty will sue without a question.

[JRS123490]

On a side note, I do think that a large percentage of signed photos are very tough sells as it is. Or if they do sell, they are for very nominal amounts. On the other hand, I have noticed a HUGE boom with cards. They are bigger than ever before.

[todeen]

Originally Posted by JRS123490

On a side note, I do think that a large percentage of signed photos are very tough sells as it is. Or if they do sell, they are for very nominal amounts. On the other hand, I have noticed a HUGE boom with cards. They are bigger than ever before.

I buy vintage photos. I recently bought a 1939 signed photo that was a publicity photo for the 1939 WS. It was even a TYPE 2. I would think that even modern photos, if filling a niche, could sell. WS, AS, accomplishments (like no hitters) will always be marketable. Generic photos, not so much.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[JRS123490]

I meant more generic photos. Like the common guys. Older guys that are uncommon on photos like Lombardi will most always do well.