Signed cues vs. unsigned

Mr. Bass Man

Mr. Bass Man

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
In the case of signed and unsigned work from classic makers (and by signed I'm referring to cues like Palmer, rambow, joss, ect where they are script to an individual as well as cues from makers that have no markings vs a logo being present) how does that affect the value? Obviously there are cue values increased by the fame of the signee but in general does this affect the value in a negative way in terms of collectibility?
 
Mr. Bass Man said:
how does that affect the value?
Click to expand...


For me it affects the value in such way that I simply won't buy a signed cue.
Or better, it would have to be a seriously low price for me to buy a cue with some other dude's name on it.
A thousand dollar cue for 50 bucks? I might think about it then.
Same goes for cases.
Just not ready to spend my money on it.
 
Mr. Bass Man said:
In the case of signed and unsigned work from classic makers (and by signed I'm referring to cues like Palmer, rambow, joss, ect where they are script to an individual as well as cues from makers that have no markings vs a logo being present) how does that affect the value? Obviously there are cue values increased by the fame of the signee but in general does this affect the value in a negative way in terms of collectibility?
Click to expand...

If I understand your question, you are asking whether the presence of a player's name in addition to the cuemaker's logo affects the value.

Generally speaking, I value Palmers and Paradise cues with personalization greater than those without. But with that said, there are a great many other factors involved in such a comparison.

Whether personalization translates into a higher dollar value is questionable, but in no case does it devalue the cue. What does devalue a cue is when the original label or foil is removed, or defaced by attempting to eliminate the personalization. A Palmer or Paradise lacking a foil is a big problem.
 
Depends on the maker...Name on a cue means nothing on certain cues.. Gives those cues traceable history.

Sometimes the story is what makes the items value.....
 
My question is how would you know it is genuinely signed by the player? And not some photoshopped or faked signature. Maybe they should video the signing by the player :)
 
9Ballr said:
For me it affects the value in such way that I simply won't buy a signed cue.
Or better, it would have to be a seriously low price for me to buy a cue with some other dude's name on it.
A thousand dollar cue for 50 bucks? I might think about it then.
Same goes for cases.
Just not ready to spend my money on it.
Click to expand...

That's good to know... I think Im gonna send all my cues out and have my name engraved in them. That way I'll know they'll never end up in your hands..LOL :rolleyes:
 
I would absolutely not want a cue from one of the classic masters signed by any player. Collect cues or collect autographs, but not on the same product. Might help the value of a production cue, but I can't see it doing anything but hurting a quality custom cue.
 
Mrdodd72 said:
I would absolutely not want a cue from one of the classic masters signed by any player. Collect cues or collect autographs, but not on the same product. Might help the value of a production cue, but I can't see it doing anything but hurting a quality custom cue.
Click to expand...


He doesn't mean signed BY the player. He means signed/engraved by the maker stating who it was made for...
 
In that case, if it was signed personally by the maker, to the player, I would imagine it might increase the value. As long as the integrity of the cue is maintained.
 
Signed cues

Mr. Bass Man said:
In the case of signed and unsigned work from classic makers (and by signed I'm referring to cues like Palmer, rambow, joss, ect where they are script to an individual as well as cues from makers that have no markings vs a logo being present) how does that affect the value? Obviously there are cue values increased by the fame of the signee but in general does this affect the value in a negative way in terms of collectibility?
Click to expand...

Not if the cue has a certificate of authentication.

There are allot of cue makers who never signed there work in the beginning.
 
I had a Richard Black cue that had his name and then the guy who he built the cue for name below it.

When I had the cue refinished (it need one anyway), I had the owners name removed and it still had Richard Black's signature on it.

Ken
 
If the cue-maker has a nice signature, it looks cool.....when the cue-maker's penmanship is the shits, it looks horrible and I would not want it.......I won't mention any cue-makers but everyone has eyes....yu know some of these cue-makers.......gotta have a neat signature or don;t have any.......and Richard Black's signature is great........so is Ernie's Ginacue.....James White has a great signature too but there are some cue-makers that sign their cues that look like a 5 year old signed it.......ruins the look if the signature is poorly written and I'd rather not have it if that were the case.

Matt B.
 
My friend Dennis Glenn has some of the very best Balabushkas and Szamboti cues ever made
and he thinks so much of the players who played with them that he has them sign the cues for him

He has the cue Willie ran the 526 signed,he has RonnieAllen'sGina signed,it makes for c a wonderful
collection and has thrilled hundreds of us who view it

He has over 100 signed Balabushkas and szambotis

It has always been my opinion that his is the best collection in the world for both reasons
 
Thanks for asking this! I think a smart lesser known cue builder would personalize the cue in a way that is removable later on. For example on the buttcap. Well know makers should not need to worry as much imo if they have good hand writing, their cues already have good market value.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top