Unpopular Opinions

I thought this might be a fun topic (and to be kept lighthearted). Who are some popular Entertainment/ Sports figures you won’t collect simply because you dislike them that might be wildly enjoyed by others? I’ll start with my “dislike - will never collect” list as follows:

1. Guns N’ Roses

2. Nirvana

3. U2

4. Pearl Jam

5. Prince

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jason H yesterday

"Will never collect" i don't think I have any.. probably need more guidelines. If given to me for free, ill put anyone in my collection even convicted murderers. Ill drop complete strangers though. The average Joe in the next town over working hvac.. I don't need that

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug James yesterday

If you offered me $5,000 cash with the condition that I’d have to keep a John Wayne Gacy Signed Painting I’d tell you to keep your 5 grand. That’s a fact. That’s just me.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason H yesterday

Haha fair enough. I don't blame you.. but you can't erase history. Regardless of the act, he is part of our culture and a part of events that possibly shape our future.

This brings to mind the - its always sunny episode about Hitler... I would not want a peice of history like that completely destroyed regardless if I feel uncomfortable carrying it. Although, thinking about it, certain items are probably best in other hands. I can see your point but personally, I don't let autographs get to me mentally. I have a lot of autographs of people who play the part of villains in my favorite movies. I love to hate these people.

On the music side, I absolutely detest Billy's eyelash (inside joke) but would still pick up her autograph at retail. Ive missed out on all previous chances. No regrets of course either way. I can see both sides but personally feel I'd be closing my mind if I failed to see a reason why to collect certain autographs over others. Monetary value could also come into play for many people.

If this became a "people I detest" in general thread, im sure noodle head Justin Timberlake would be close to the top, also the Kardashians and the dude who plays Blippi that my 4 year old loved for a while.. (I believe him and Justin Timberlake are the same person)

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug James yesterday

Yes, agree that we can’t change history for sure. I suppose that opens up the broader (less severe than killer) considerations. What to do with the Bill Cosby and Diddy autos 🙂

As for Timberlake, I never understood the attraction. I can see young girls liking his look but he’s just a richer version of Corey Feldman.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jason H yesterday

I have both Cosby's and Feldman's autographs. Corey was in so many of my childhood movies including Gremlins and Goonies so your comparison to Timberlake, while hilarious and just, irks me a bit even though taking away his parts probably wouldn't change too many outcomes for movies. I can see what you mean but you pulled on some strings there lol..

Its all about perception and mood. Ask me another day and I might even give a somewhat different answer. I love posts like this that make you think about items you already have in your collection. Forcing you to contemplate and change perspective on some

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug James yesterday

I’ll give him credit on movies just not these god awful “Comeback King” YouTube videos. lol.

I figured we all get so sucked into the “it’s real” / “not real” posts that at times we forget the “community” aspect and it’s good to actually bring some different angles to the forum. I’m glad you participated!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by crazyrabbits23 yesterday

I'll collect just about anything. Even if I personally disliked a certain author or personality, it's doubtful that it would make any difference if the work was unique enough/had an interesting-enough signature/inscription that it was something I couldn't find easily.

For a time, I had a signed book from an infamous former media personality (who's name I'm not writing, as I'd rather not see any attention given to the clown) on CBC Radio who was eventually tried (though not convicted) for prolific deviant behavior against numerous women over a decade-plus period before he got caught. The book had an inscription that was descriptive enough to suggest that the author had written it as a way so as to poach a victim, as he was expressly inviting them on a date. (That, and the book came with a sales slip that showed me exactly where the book was bought and at what time, validating accusations that were later brought up by investigative reporters about a certain book launch event in Toronto). I eventually shredded the sales slip and donated the book again because I was downsizing my collection and couldn't justify keeping it, as it had no long-term value.

There are a handful of authors whose work I simply won't touch because they have horrible/lame signatures. Michael Ondaatje (the author of The English Patient) is one I won't touch if I see a signed book from him in a thrift store -- he simply signs with a glorified line acrosss the page. It's on par with Meg Ryan as the weakest all-time signatures from any creator (though I know there are some basketball stars out there who pull the exact same stunt because they just don't want to sign anything, period).

There are others whose signed work I won't touch because the market is so full of fakes that the juice just isn't worth the squeeze. This includes Dylan, MJ and The Beatles. This forum has taught me that the number of fakes in the collecting sector are so prevalent, and on so many prominent auction sites, that I would never, EVER, spend money on it as a collector or as a fan. There's just too much risk.

There's also a lot of modern autopenned/secretarial stuff that's been pumped over the past year by artists that should know better that it's negatively impacted their reputation, all in the name of securing short-term profits through fans who don't know any better/initial #1 Billboard charting sales.