cloudofwit

:o Did he send it bicycle messenger or stool pigeon? I think it was sent through the little old lady from Pasadena.

:o

68 years old...9.4...white pages.

I sure am, and me too! What a wonderful group of guys and gals that understand the collector mentality:thumbsup: I try to cut the collectors slack in their pursuit of putting together a collection, and I've met many, many folks here that are more concerned with the welfare of their fellow collectors, rather than the bottom line flipping value of what they are selling - this is a greeeeaaaaat place!!! (imagine Tony the Tiger there...., ) Frosted Flakes.

Very nice books.

:laugh:

plus a 9.6. :smile:

That Batman #251 is beautful; with that said, do the 4-5 spine ticks put this into the nik bump realm? :shrug:

Kudos to comicdey for some good mid-grade Marvel deals. :smile:

Nice Red Sonja!

Gimme a break. Label chasers and registry addicts regularly pay nosebleed prices for HG CGC books, and raw copies sell for nowhere near the same amounts. That's a fact, and I have never, ever, ever seen a common Byrne X-Men raw copy selling for thousands of dollars, but some CGC copies do. And using Zilla as an example to support your specious claims is hilarious, as everyone knows his buyers are ingesting pure crack. GPA measures and reports on CGC sales, so therefore it's only valid for CGC copies. How this can be difficult for some to grasp is beyond me. But the common Byrne X-Mens you're referring to are likely the 9.8 or highers--which aren't all that common (I haven't checked the census, maybe there's tons, but I doubt it). As to Zilla, the scary thing is these folks aren't on crack, so some other phenomena is going on. But I think you're falling for the either-or fallacy. It doesn't have to be either GPA for CGC or not at all; using it as a barometer for raw isn't as invalid as you're making it seem.

:smile:

I'll be traveling on the road then. :frown:

Of the 5 books I bought, one I felt was right on, grade-wise, while the others were either 1.0 or 1.5 off (except one that was 2.0 off). I could be wrong, but the scans on mine weren't red flags to me. It was when I received them and examined them closely that the defect here and there made 4 of the 5 less than advertised.

We're clode friends, right? I think it'd depend on what clode means. Damn spelling errors. To err is human but to beaver is dam. :shrug: This bit of nonsense or stream-of-consciousness (take your pick) brings my mind to two things: Joe Walsh's sweet album entitled "The Smoker You Drink the Player You Get" and also that I need to get back to doing final grades for my class and thwart further procrastination.

We're clode friends, right? I think it'd depend on what clode means. Damn spelling errors. To err is human but to beaver is dam. :shrug:

We're clode friends, right? I think it'd depend on what clode means.

I actually got my books although 4 of the 5 were 1.0 to 2.0 off, I'd say. But it looks like getting one's books from his/her sale thread is the first challenge. :think: Webster's College Dictionary from 1991... "Henchman" #1: an unscrupulous and ruthless subordinate, esp. a member of a criminal gang. #2: a political supporter or adherent, esp. one motivated by the hope of personal gain. #3: a trusted supporter attendant, supporter, or follower. #4: a squire or page. possible amendment for the 2009 Webster's update: #5: a Pasadena-based husband and wife team known for Ray Charles-like grading while working the boards.

:frown:

Alright, it's time for the Rodney King card from '92: Can we all just get along?

:laugh:

:frown:

Pricing should not matter. If a book is advertized a certain grade, it should be very close to the advertized grade. Pricing be damned,. You're right on that; I'll act differently next time.

I bought 5 books--and 1 of the 5 I thought was right on, grading wise. In my case, the (relatively) small amount of total money paid--and his low prices--led me to not hassle with a follow up. The difference in grade was about 1.5 (more substantial than I thought originally).