sfcityduck

One other thought: The facts associated with the Mezzopera brothers appear consistent with Heritage's marketing story in one important respect. I have been perplexed by the marketing story's assertion that the younger brother voluntarily enlisted in order to protect his older brother who was drafted. Younger brother Armand's enlistment date was 5 January 1951. He would have been 21, one week short of turning 22. Older brother Louis Robert would have been 24 and a half years old when he entered the military, assuming his enlistment date was around the same date as Armand's, as Heritage has asserted. Back then, the draft did favor older men. The two brothers' respective draft cards reveal that older brother Louis Robert was quite small. When Louis Robert registered for the draft on 7 August 1944, he was 5' 3" and weighed 110 lbs. In contrast, when younger brother Armand turned 18 and registered for the draft on 15 January 1947, Armand was a strapping 5' 7" and 170 lbs. Both brothers probably worked in blue collar jobs (Louis at Columbia Rubber Mold Co. and Armand at Pepsi-Cola when they were respectively 18) and Armand undoubtedly gained size before entering the military for the Korean War some six years later. Still, the discrepancy in their size suggests that the counter-intuitive notion that the younger brother was motivated to volunteer for the Army to "look after" his older brother is plausible . It is plausible that Armand might have had a history of protecting his brother Louis Robert that carried over into his decision to volunteer for the Army when his brother was drafted. Only the family would know. Still, Armand Mezzopera died at 22.5 years of age, not 21 as Heritage has asserted. So the stories don't perfectly align. And, again, I've seen no evidence of a tie to comic books yet.

Yep. I immediately searched the 1940 census when I saw "John Hobby" on the CA 3, and a "John Hobby" lived only a block and a half from Louis Robert and Armand Mezzopera of Cleveland and even on the same side of the street. John and Armand were at most a year apart in age. Not proof of anything, but suggestive that John Hobby traded or gave the book to Armand as the CA 3 came out in 1941. That's why I edited the first post to put up a warning several hours ago. The only other names on the books are (1) "Jean _" on the Batman 3 which could be "Jean H" and "John Hobby" had a sister "Jean" (but I'm not sure of that reading), (2) Stange, a last name, and there are Stange families in Cleveland, and (3) Armand. The goal has always been to find the true owners and the true story, and that has not quite been nailed down yet.

That would be a brilliant name!

So long as Heritage will acknowledge pedigrees that are not recognized by CGC, I think that is right. Where I would have a problem is if Heritage refused to recognize pedigrees that CGC does not recognize. I'm told above that is not the case because Heritage recognized CBCS designated peds before CGC recognized those peds. So if CGC is just one of many market players who can recognize pedigrees, than that's no big deal. The most interesting test case would be whether Heritage would recognize a "pedigree" that clearly qualified if no grading service had yet recognized it, especially if the pedigree name and designation originated with a Heritage competitor. As a hypothetical example: If Bangzoom's "WTG" collection of 2,000 OO books that has numerous high grade big early GA keys showed up for sale on Metro's website unencapsulated (let's assume BZ is so old school he refused to encapsulate his books) as the "WTG Pedigree," would Heritage allow one of those books to subsequently be auctioned on its site raw as a "WTG Pedigree" book? If they said, nope, not unless CGC or CBCS recognizes the pedigree, that would appear arbitrary and inappropriate.

Glad to see Heritage is a neutral player! Often the most effective policing of markets is conducted by customers, not law enforcement. That can take many forms, sometimes as simple as praising sellers when they act right and criticizing when they do not. Here, I am glad that the answer to my question about pedigree recognition is a response that merits praise for Heritage. We all should be happy and appreciative when tent pole businesses in the comic collecting infrastructure do the right things.

Good questions. Shilling should be illegal. After all, the seller could put on a reserve to protect a minimum price. Shilling is fake bidding to drive up a price as high as a buyer will go. So it does not reflect a true unmanipulated market price. Shilling causes immediate harm to the buyer, who is paying more than they would with a real underbidder. Shilling is illegal in many states. Texas has a lot of backwards laws. Perhaps a reason auction companies might want to hold auctions there. Fraudulent misrepresentation applies in almost all contexts. For example, if someone tells you a book is resto free and it turns out that was a knowing misrepresentation, you might learn to appreciate that body of law. Generally, most schemes to ladder up prices do not cause damage until prices correct. But most schemes ultimately collapse. A false sales scheme using fake transactions likely would be actionable only by people who bought from the schemers at inflated prices.

Uh ... the whole law of fraudulent misrepresentation is that people get to an over inflated price because they have been given incorrect information. When the correct information comes to light, prices often plummet. That's the whole foundation of securities fraud. So how prices get to where they are does matter ... quite a lot actually. Having said that, I'm not saying anything untoward has happened with the Promise Collection. Just that your philosophy is out of step with our civil and criminal laws.

Agree with above. The bigger question, for me, is why does CGC think it gets to determine what comic collections qualify as "pedigrees" and which do not? The pedigree concept pre-existed CGC. Key pedigrees pre-existed CGC. CGC has no right to be the arbiter of what is or is not a pedigree. It holds no trademark on the term "pedigree," has not trademarked the previously recognized pedigrees, and has no right to be the sole arbiter. For example, if a competing company were to label as a pedigree books not presently recognized by Heritage, but previously recognized by the comic collecting community as a pedigree, would Heritage honor that designation? If a competing company were to recognize a previously unknown pedigree, would Heritage honor that pedigree designation? I would hope the answer to both questions would be "yes." If not, Heritage and CGC might end up facing claims for anti-competitive behavior.

Only very few of the books appear to have been obtained in trade. Possibly only three or four. The MH Collection includes books bought second hand, so hard to see a few books obtained in trade as disqualifying. I suspect that other major pedigrees include books obtained in trade or in the secondary market. It was just part of the culture of the time. The key to pedigree status is that the collection as a whole must overwhelmingly be OO, and it appears that is the case with the Promise Collection.

I disagree. I believe it is a single OO collection. The evidence supports that the CA 3 was obtained by the OO in trade. I am still attempting to ascertain the full story on the collection. To this effect, I want to emphasize that throughout this thread I have repeatedly stated my speculation regarding the Dumas brothers could be wrong. I also have also repeatedly noted that Heritage/CGC should squash this speculation if it is incorrect. They certainly are not precluded from doing so by any "confidentiality agreement." They have not done so. To be clear, I would hate to see anyone relying upon the notion that the Dumas brothers were the brothers who compiled the collection because, as I've said before, that has not been proven. It is speculation that I'd like to have confirmed or squashed by Heritage. I can only speculate as to why they would not do that. In the absence of them taking action, I'm continuing my own investigation. Hopefully, confirmation of the OO's identity will be established shortly.

Yet another item that deserves a different collector. A Golden Age Classics Illustrated rack sign that would look great in a comic room. Could also be married to a signless rack (which are not that hard to find). Paint is bright and vibrant. No cleaning has been attempted. Back of rack has a light rust, almost dust like, that would clean off and I think poses no threat to the structural integrity of the rack sign: A steal for the right collector at $150 (again offers considered).

As anyone who has read Dean Mullaney's "King of the Comics: One Hundred Years of King Features Syndicate" knows, King Features Syndicate had the coolest newspaper comics of them all. They also had some really cool promo items and merchandising. One such item is this: The complete "Popular Comics" set of Christmas cards with their original envelopes. These really deserve a home where someone will frame them up and hang them on the wall during the Yuletide Season. eBay sellers price these for from $10 to $63 per card (depending upon image). THIS IS A COMPLETE SET OF ALL 16 CARDS! The cards present beautifully on the front cover and inside illustrations (almost never pictured by anyone trying to sell these things): The box looks fantastic head on, but each corner does have a rip, with this being the worst: And this being representative of the other three corners: The back of some cards have a bit of envelope glue transfer in evidence but that does not impact the art one iota: If you like classic newspaper cartoons, this is a must have set. I'm only selling because I don't have a way to incorporate these into my (wife mandated) Christmas decorations. They deserve a better home! $300 (less than $20 per card for a COMPLETE set) but I will consider offers.

Since SOTIcollector scored the last "take," I'll list something rare that he has no interest in (since he's already got the only other one I know of). Frederic Wertham was an academic. When academics write articles for academic journals, the journals give individually printed (and often bound) copies of their article for the academic's distribution as they see fit. Old Fred wrote a decent amount in academic journals and various of his articles have surfaced. Most recently, four of these Wertham articles came for sale at an auction of a very impressive PCH collection at a regional auction house (which also included incredibly rare ECs) and sold for between $160 to $500 dollars. They were Wertham's articles entitled "Psychopathology of Comics" (1948), "What are Comic Books?" (1949), "Are They Cleaning Up Comics? (1955), and "Comic Books and Education" (1958). (Heritage sold long ago "The Comics ... Very Funny" for less than a $100 and in the last few years "What Parents Don't Know About Comics" (1953) for $900 to $1050. Never auctioned by anyone is this pamphlet, of which as far as I can tell only two copies survive - SOTIcollector's copy signed by Wertham with handwritten interlineation (correction), and this copy also with the same interlineation by Wertham: In it, Wertham attempts to thread the needle between his anti-comics tirade and calls for censorship. I think he fails. But a great bit of comic history! This is rarer than rare. If you want to run with the big dogs in the SOTI arena, its time to start looking for items like this sought out by the advanced SOTI collectors: $300 but will entertain offers.

More to come in an hour or two.

Sold!

Sold! You scored my friend! PM me so we can nail down the details.

Peanuts collectors, and it sure seems like there are more and more Peanuts cover chasers, are largely unaware of this special cover Schulz did to honor Yellow Kid (the only color cover in the run) for Inks: Cartoon and Comic Art Studies. Inks is not a fanzine but an official publication of the Ohio State University cartoon library (Inks was funded by a generous donation of Charles and Jeannie Schulz): Calvin & Hobbes collectors can't chase many C&H covers on comic related publications because there aren't that many, but of the ones that exist this may be the grail they most want to locate (but usually can't): And Bone collectors, who don't mind B&W at all, probably have no idea this cover exists: They are part of the complete run from v. 1 no. 1 to v. 4 no. 3 (12 total issues) of Inks: Cartoon and Comic Art Studies I'm offering here today (plus a bonus exhibit catalogue). There is a grand total of one copy of an issue of Inks on the CGC Census, not surprisingly the v.1 no. 1 Calvin & Hobbes cover. Does anyone here have a run of these? These are loaded with articles on comic and cartoon history, academic books reviews, etc. Best for someone who really likes to dig deep into comic history and knows you'll never see a set like this again (or for a dealer who wants to be out in front of the still growing tsunami of nostalgia C&H and Peanuts which is going to make rare covers like these increasingly desirable as people realize they exist). I'm calling condition on average "fine." As you can see in photos, there is some minor yellow spotting on some issues. No rips or folds. Grade would quickly go up if you hired someone, like the paper conservator I use for woodblock prints, to eliminate the spots - a surprisingly inexpensive undertaking for something like this which is printed with standard inks in b&w. $300 (inclusive of postage) or I will consider offers.

How often do you see this? Our Navy, Mid-April 1945 (during WWII). The article the "Gyp Joint" is about stores on ships. And, lo and behold, the cover features a pricelessly cool pic of a sailor reading an awesome Shadow Comics skull cover with Young Allies, Startling Comics, Air Ace, etc. in the background. I'd call this a "Good" because this particular magazine is prone to some color flaking (does not go through the page) on the covers (true for every copy I've seen or own). But how often do you see a cool WWII magazine photo cover of a sailor or soldier reading a comic, especially in glorious full color!?! Rare, cool, and perfect for framing on the wall of your comic room or office! Seriously, someone need to hang this great bit of history up as it's a conversation piece. $75 (shipping inclusive) or best offer.

All the usual rules apply. Shipping included. I desire payment by check, so keep that in mind if you are trying to make a time sensitive purchase (e.g. no last minute shoppers for birthdays!). Went through some boxes and found some stuff that deserves a good home outside of my storage. No "big" or trendy books, just stuff for collectors who really dig this hobby, including its history and fringes. First "take" wins. Then PM me for payment and shipping arrangements. I will be rolling stuff out slowly over the weekend, so check back as items will spool out as I'm doing this on short breaks from other things. Returns allowed (at your return shipping cost unless I'm reasonably convinced the fault is mine) as I am collector hoping to spread happiness, not a dealer concerned about future biz.

Sold, thanks!

And I'm sure that you've found other things to collect given the diverse stuff in your sig line and your talk of cars, guitars, and music.

I think Shadroch got this right, the market for refinancing is robust when interest rates are declining.

Apparently, that was just the tip of the iceberg: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/04/us/maus-banned-books-tennessee.html

There are benefits to inflation. For example, let's say you took out a $1M fixed rate loan at a 3.1% interest rate to buy a house or fund your comic purchases, then inflation is financially helpful. When inflation increases, the fixed-interest rate financing you took out costs you less than when you took out the loan since the dollar has lost some of its value. You’re essentially paying the lender back money that’s worth less than what it was when you took out the loan. In addition, wages and revenues tend to rise during periods of high inflation. So, if you’re making more money but your monthly payments for your fixed rate financing stay the same, then the payments take up a smaller percentage of your working capital. Those of us who took advantage of the historically low interest rates during the pandemic will benefit from this effect.

Because they know that "socialism" is far different than communism. The U.S. and all western democracies are in the middle ground between unrestrained capitalism and all encompassing communism in which capitalism is regulated to one degree or another (e.g., it becomes a form of a socialist economy). Getting stuck on the labels just confuses things. The question is always: How much regulation is a good idea. The answer is always NOT "none" or "full." The irony is that Russia went from a kleptocratic oligarchy pretending to be communist to a kleptocratic oligarchy pretending to be unrestrained capitalism.