sfcityduck

Nah, I'm not overhyped. 180 is a first appearance and 181 is a second appearance. And that is the literal truth, all hype eliminated.

"First full appearance" is puffery when you are talking about a character with an earlier appearance that includes some character backstory, full costumed appearance of the character in a large panel (not hidden in shadows, head on tv monitor, etc.), the character announcing his name, and the publisher stating "Well now you know what ... er .... who Weapon X is, faithful one!"

You can call it what you want, but its not a first appearance. It's just a more desirable issue.

I wish I looked that good! I'm much thinner on top. Sincerely, SFcitycynic

The debate is not about which comic is the first appearance of Wolverine 180 clearly is. After all, he appears in a big panel saying "here I am!," not on a screen in the background or lurking in shadows: And, more importantly, we learn a lot about his backstory before that panel, including his "Weapon X" codename, a huge clue that he is a mutant!: No. The debate between 180 and 181 is about one thing: What matters more, the cover or the interior? And its clear that the answer these days is that the cover is often going to win. After all, why else would Action 7 be worth more than Action 2? It has nothing to do with order of appearances. Anyone who says Hulk 181 is a first appearance, or even uses the marketing term "first full appearance" is engaging in serious puffery.

Easy choice on which is better ... by far.

You're just not being assertive enough in your negotiations. CGC agreed with me that this book was "manufactured with hole punch." You just need to convince cgc these books come from a special batch manufactured for war vets who had lost their hands and been outfitted with the experimental "three prong" prosthetic (sadly, the experiment failed). Be creative!

The vast majority of pedigree stories don't really matter to me. At their core, they boil down to X person saved X number of comics with an average condition of X for X years. And for most of the pedigrees, we don't even know what the X's are. Even when we do, for most its just boring info that is true for pretty much every comic on the market: The Billy Wright backstory, for example, is pretty typical: Billy Wright saved 340 comics purchased from 1936 to 1941 that remained neatly stacked in a basement closet until discovered by a family member and sold on Heritage. It's the comics that were exciting! Not the back story. So right now, I'm not sitting on pins and needles wanting to know the "backstory" on this collection. The fact they chose to call it the "Promise" collection suggests that the info will be limited, probably not revealing the original owner's name, and therefore might be unverifiable. Someone up thread speculated that this was a collection kept for a soldier who "promised" to come back from war. Guess what? We already got that story for the "Tom Reilly" or "San Francisco" pedigree, and it has never been verified. Some of the tactics used to hype comics just don't move the needle for me.

Here's a 9.6 I sold on Heritage, one of three census topping 9.6s, the only one with a well-placed date stamp: One of the others:

I would be surprised if they put all 5,000 books up in one auction. That would not be how I would do it if I were the seller.

Tell me about it. My books are sitting on Scheduled for Grading going on three weeks.

Sarcasm alert?

Maybe he's referring to the paper quality. My impression is that "modern" comics, have heavier cover stock (as well as non-newsprint interiors) which should protect them more against tanning, bending, and other defects that strike the lighter cover stock and newsprint interior books that were the standard into the 1980s.

I'll take a well placed stamp showing when the book hit the stands any day.

CCS work was probably done because it appears the cover was rotated a bit towards the back. Staples have moved and there's less cover on the "after" picture. CCS doesn't bother me one iota. But, I've had some great looking GA books get 9.4 and 9.6 at Heritage, with equally rich colors and white pages, and they were superior to this because of the much nicer corners and staple areas. Irrational exuberance may be at play a bit. Before: After:

The difference, I hope, is volume. I'm happy to let folks battle over the "keys" and the trendy books. I'll be seeking the books that are a bit more off the beaten path. The kind the speculators, "key" pursuers, attention seekers, and trend followers are likely to overlook. With 5,000 books (if true), I'm pretty sure more than a few will escape the clutches of the usual suspects.

They sure seem that way to me. Those are flat flat flat books.

Here's my conspiracy theory: I now understand why I've had books stuck on "Scheduled for Grading" for the past two weeks.

Sarcasm?

They look like newstand or distributor marks to me, not "codes" or writing by the original owner. If so, they don't help identify the pedigree, but I'm with you on not hammering the grade.

As a footnote, these ads for free single issues of the Atomic Revolution comic book ran in 1957 and 1958 magazines:

Nope, it was a new seller discount. Earned them my good will. Smart business.

As a seller, I was very pleased with the outcome of the few books I've sold in event auctions (never sold in a lesser auction), including that they gave me a discount. As a buyer, I find the Heritage interface, searchability, layout, and records as extremely helpful for finding the books I want. Because of that, I tend to think that buyers may be more inclined to buy an off the beaten path book on Heritage than some of the other sites where finding books is much much more cumberson, especially if you are just browsing to see if there is anything you want.

Yeah, but we don't know anything important - genres, issues, grades, and the backstory. I, for one, can't wait! This pedigree looks to be venturing into some late 40s early 50s territory that really interests me.

and no glue.