Which would be better?

Forum rules
Sponsored link: Google Workspace 14-day free trial <<arrow$

Image Upload your pictures here: Surf My Pictures | Google Photos | Imgbb | Tumblr | Imgur

Post a reply

Smilies
:D :) :( :shock: :? 8) :lol: :P :oops: :cry: :roll: ;-) :| {up} {??} {down} :mrgreen: [us] [ca] [uk] [germany] {star} <<arrow$ [ugotmail]
View more smilies
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review
   

If you wish to attach one or more files enter the details below.

Maximum filesize per attachment: 256 KiB.

Expand view Topic review: Which would be better?

Re: Which would be better?

by SPAAMcollectorsforum » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:36 am

johnnylightninglives wrote:1 item signed by many will always be worth the most.

Not true.

Re: Which would be better?

by topsignatures » Sun Oct 28, 2012 1:26 am

Definitely agree.. much tougher to acquire and the harder something is to get, the more value usually

Re: Which would be better?

by autopenis » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:17 pm

ok, thanks

Re: Which would be better?

by johnnylightninglives » Tue Oct 23, 2012 6:45 am

1 item signed by many will always be worth the most.

Which would be better?

by autopenis » Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:49 am

If I was going to an autograph show and there was the cast of a movie there, would it be better to have them all sign one cast photo, or have them sign their individual pics. I will be in this situation in a few weeks when I meet the cast of Fright Night. Which option would be worth more in the future?

Top