Q for barefoot

It's curious who'll stay and who'll go but my gut feeling is a larger
percentage will go. We are all consumed with everything being fast,
new and changing. We want our food now, we don't have enough TV
channels (LOL) and we get bored so easily that if the power goes out,
we're lost of what to do! What's happening is all these celebs are
quick in and out as we get bored. NONE have the staying power of
stars of yesteryear. When our generation dies, the next generation is
really gonna lose out on quality.

On Tue, 6 May 2008 12:06:30 -0500, "Gummby3"
wrote:

Ironically, I was talking with some people along those lines too.
It's amazing how many of the 80's groups are still popular enough to
not only still be touring, but to actually DRAW a crowd of fans.
Heck, look at The Stones. They have to be held up with a walker
(tongue in cheek), but they still sell out venues. That can not be
said by most of the groups/singers from the last two decades. Now,
there are some actors/actresses that we have today that are going to
have some staying power. I think Kate Hudson will have a longer
career than her mother, for example, but you are correct that a good
portion of the current hot actors are going to disappear by this time
20 years from now.

in response sue...pearl jam is BIGGER than they were in the 90's (and
they don't even make videos or do publicity)...green day is too. many
of the bands of the early nineties have broken up...and they can do
what the 70's and 80s acts are doing now, re grouping and
touring...this includes van halen...van halen DIDN'T last 20
years....for a long time they were van hagar..that wasn't van
halen...just toured under the same name. and it's not even a reunion
tour now as eddie's son is in the band. eventually you'll see
soundgarden get back together...you are already watching how huge the
stone temple pilots are in a reunion as they are close to selling out
their 65 city tour- but i bet the singer doesn't make it through the
tour, his cocain and heroine addictions are SO BAD that he already
looks dead. metallica is a late 80's early 90's, and they will make a
big tour too...but you're right..
but def lappard has a big following, and they SUCK.

by the way, i just fielded an offer for my harrison ford, shia labeouf
combo for $700..so people are willing to pay for good stuff.
m

that's why people are paying $600 for tom brady at a private signing
(you don't even get to meet him) or $300 for brett favre...but people
like fran tarkenton, lawrence taylor, john elway just get $100 a
sig...
what's hot is hot (and now) the past doesn't seem to get recognized
anymore.
m

LOL I'll definitely have to say that we have a difference of opinion
on Def Leppard and leave it at that. :-)

Again, regarding Ford, are these people "willing" to pay that much or
is it an impulse buy because of the Indy Jones rush right now? I feel
that it's nothing but impulse and the prices will level off just like
it has for other living celebs. I would love to have Ford in my
collection. Not because he's a great actor. He's had almost as many
ho-hum movies as he has had hits. For me, it would be of more
sentimental autograph to me. I was 7 years old and 'Star Wars' was
the first major movie that I ever saw when it premiered in 1977. I
still clearly remember sitting with my family in a line that wrapped
around the theater FOUR times. He's just not sentimental enough to me
for several hundred dollars. :-)

--


Mike
Gummby3
-= Star Collector =-
www.star-collector.net
Celebrity addresses the way they should be - free.


"barefoot" wrote in message
...
in response sue...pearl jam is BIGGER than they were in the 90's
(and
they don't even make videos or do publicity)...green day is too.
many
of the bands of the early nineties have broken up...and they can do
what the 70's and 80s acts are doing now, re grouping and
touring...this includes van halen...van halen DIDN'T last 20
years....for a long time they were van hagar..that wasn't van
halen...just toured under the same name. and it's not even a reunion
tour now as eddie's son is in the band. eventually you'll see
soundgarden get back together...you are already watching how huge
the
stone temple pilots are in a reunion as they are close to selling
out
their 65 city tour- but i bet the singer doesn't make it through the
tour, his cocain and heroine addictions are SO BAD that he already
looks dead. metallica is a late 80's early 90's, and they will make
a
big tour too...but you're right..
but def lappard has a big following, and they SUCK.

by the way, i just fielded an offer for my harrison ford, shia
labeouf
combo for $700..so people are willing to pay for good stuff.
m

Again, that's a point of view and not fact. Since you deal in
dollars, if it doesn't put money in your hand, then they are not
"recognized" celebs any longer. To me, that just means that the
celebs are more accessible to the real fans and collectors. It's not
anything to get into an argument about. It's simple semantics. You
interpret old actors as not worth the effort and I see them as being
appreciative of true fans that remember them enough to search them
out. Case in point, you said people, for some reason, are paying $600
for Tom Brady and don't even get to see him. That's simply stupid. I
would at least want to have a picture taken with him or,the very
least, shake his hand, for that much money.

While the athletes you mention are impressive, to me, they aren't
worth that much money when I have received HOFers and future HOFers
for a fraction of that or free. I will value my free Earl Campbell
signed cards and my free Craig Biggio and Jeff Bagwell signed
baseballs (both on the sweet spots) because they were willing to sign
with no strings attached. Again, simple semantics. If those people
are happy with their pieces that, odds are (an opinion, not making a
statement as fact), they'll never get their full money back on, then
more power to them. :-)

--


Mike
Gummby3
-= Star Collector =-
www.star-collector.net
Celebrity addresses the way they should be - free.


"barefoot" wrote in message
...
that's why people are paying $600 for tom brady at a private signing
(you don't even get to meet him) or $300 for brett favre...but
people
like fran tarkenton, lawrence taylor, john elway just get $100 a
sig...
what's hot is hot (and now) the past doesn't seem to get recognized
anymore.
m

no one knows who sir lawrence olivier is. and
after my father's generation passes, absolutely no one will
"barefoot" wrote in message
news:206ca32f-52c0-4df5-bde0-

LOL......I vote the above as dumbest statement so far of 2008! Olivier's
place in history is secure and he is regarded as the greatest actor of all
time. I like Harrison Ford movies, but he doesn't even make the list of
great actors. Ford is an icon because of Star Wars and Indiana Jones, but
more of an action hero overall.

Heston and Douglas signed so many autographs, they will never reach the
value of someone like Brando or Elizabeth Taylor, who almost never signed.
It has more to do with supply and demand. People like Olivier will always
be in demand because they are now considered historical autographs, like
ex-Presidents. Do you understand this concept? Since you don't know
anything about Hollywood history, your statements are idiotic and laughable.
My wife and I are sitting here drinking a couple of Michelobs and the more
we drink, the funnier your posts get. Keep them coming......this is more
entertaining than watching The Sopranos!

"barefoot" wrote in message
...
Charlton heston doesn't
sell. he didn't sell before he passed, and doesn't sell after., but my
kirk douglas
just sits there and no one asks about him. same price. so using that
logic, i'd say that once the people 50 and older start to pass on, the
legacy of olivier(and others like him) will fade into oblivion.
m

i love reading that someone thinks that ford only sells for the "rush"
of him right now...that's idiotic...he's ALWAYS held his value...if
not the fact that the value has gone UP over the last few
years...there's no rush for him cause indy is coming out...
now there is a rush" for robert downey jr...i've had stuff from movies
like chaplin, that i can't give away....but i simply can't get enough
16x20's from iron man with a price tage of $250 plus. so figure
that...but there's no "rush" for ford...he's always been valuable.
look, i just sold a 16x20 for more money than official pix was
charging for a poster (yes, it has shia labeouf on it, but this is
almost DOUBLE the signing price.)

and yes, the personal experience is always nicer than a
purchase...ALWAYS!
mike

That's a nice goad, as I'm that "someone", but I'm not going to start
an argument over differing opinions. I personally don't think that
Ford is worth that much money. Nobody living and breathing is unless
they have done something to dramatically impact the world. That does
not include reciting a script or throwing a ball. :-)

--


Mike
Gummby3
-= Star Collector =-
www.star-collector.net
Celebrity addresses the way they should be - free.


"barefoot" wrote in message
...
i love reading that someone thinks that ford only sells for the
"rush"
of him right now...that's idiotic...he's ALWAYS held his value...if
not the fact that the value has gone UP over the last few
years...there's no rush for him cause indy is coming out...
now there is a rush" for robert downey jr...i've had stuff from
movies
like chaplin, that i can't give away....but i simply can't get
enough
16x20's from iron man with a price tage of $250 plus. so figure
that...but there's no "rush" for ford...he's always been valuable.
look, i just sold a 16x20 for more money than official pix was
charging for a poster (yes, it has shia labeouf on it, but this is
almost DOUBLE the signing price.)

and yes, the personal experience is always nicer than a
purchase...ALWAYS!
mike

well, i am sorry gummby...i don't pay attention to the names that say
stuff sometimes, and my usenet thing doesn't allow me to re read the
older posts to quote properly, or i would...i do apologize for that
one.
maybe you are right. in fact, i'll say this and sue has hit the nail
right on the head...
today's stars, even if they are tough, do sign a lot more than actors
of yesteryear.
with private signings and a lot more people collecting autographs,
autographs are more abundant.
tom brady did that signing, and it was limited to like 2000
autographs...maybe less...and althought he doesn't sign for free, 2000
autographs may be way more available (even at that ridiculous
price)...i'll bet there aren't even 2000 y.a. tittle autographs
available in the whole market.
same can be said for ford...if i have a lot, and he did a few private
signings for official pix and that master replica's company...there
are probably a lot more ford autographs than say lawrence olivier's or
marlon brando on the market alone (this is not even putting into
account the forgeries). people didn't carry around photos to get
signed or anything...and the liklihood of a studio signing are higher
back then, then they are now.

but i will say this gummby...it's that rational of saying that people
living and breathing aren't worth that money...it's why people are
buying forgeries without knowing what they are getting in to. harrison
ford, if he's willing to sign on set, tells you to wait to the end of
the day...so you can sit ALL DAY..and if his autograph isn't worth
$100 or more, then you wasted your whole day...if you aren't making
$100 a day at your job, you don't have a good job.
maybe $300 is a lot of money. but autograph collecting isn't an easy
job... i tell people everyday that i have to make my money TWICE...i
have to get the autographs AND THEN i have to sell them. it's not like
going to an office job and then just getting a paycheck...
i bought $1000 guitars to get signed by metallica recently (they were
$1000 ea as they were the esp models that the guys endorse), and i had
to wait at the in store signing for over 15 hours in a parking lot
waiting for the signing...you don't think it's worth it to sell the
guitars for $3000 ea (as i have already done)?
mike