• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

oakman29

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    49,767

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by oakman29

  1. oakman29
    Bob's looking good these days.😎
  2. oakman29
    It might just be a bit of "all of the above" when it comes to Jim Warren. 🤔
  3. oakman29
    I would just be happy with what I got.
  4. oakman29
    I recognize that painting from somewhere.🤔 Just an awesome run. Congrats on completing it.
  5. oakman29
    It's even more relevant today than ever.
  6. oakman29
    Well that's a good looking set, for sure.
  7. oakman29
    I only have 47 more criteria for you.🤔
  8. oakman29
    Deal!😁 Are the pages evenly cut , or a little off? I dont know, more and more I'm thinking you have an original one.
  9. oakman29
    Solarboy I'm thinking you have an original one, just tough to tell in pictures. In hand would be easier, so just send it to me and I will inspect it and send you a copy...... oops! I mean send you YOU'RE copy. Whew.......😉
  10. oakman29
    Yep.
  11. oakman29
    It does look a bit broken doesnt it. Then again blown up hard to look at clearly.
  12. oakman29
    Here's my copy. It has all the "second" print points. See the Eerie on the back has heavy set ink. And the tell tale blue stripe on the staple.
  13. oakman29
    Yes, yes it is! 😎
  14. oakman29
    Yep, but there are other copies that aren't listed.
  15. oakman29
    I've even seen copies on Ebay . They do say they are copies, but there are quite a few out there.
  16. oakman29
    Yeah it's a tough book.
  17. oakman29
    That makes it priceless, regardless!
  18. oakman29
    I hope you're not getting upset, and I'm sure your friend was truthful to you. It's just so darn hard to "officially " tell the difference in pictures. Kudos to you for even having one.
  19. oakman29
    Maybe shiny isn't the right word. More like a sheen to the black ink.
  20. oakman29
    I realize yours is absolutely not a 2nd edition. No blue staple, bald man is not visible etc. What I'm worried is that it may just be a copy of an original.
  21. oakman29
    Then I would tend to believe your friend.
  22. oakman29
    Then that's awesome. This is why CGC doesnt encapsulate these books . It's just too hard to tell. You have all the makings of the first print, yet the ink on back isn't shiny. So this is where speculation comes in.
  23. oakman29
    Wait , I have 60 more criteria. Lol This where it gets hard to decipher. The black ink on the back should have been shinier than the paper its printed on.
  24. oakman29
    The black ink isn't predominantly shiny, so it's the same texture as the white on the paper?
  25. oakman29