buttock

Yes, 9.0 or 9.2.

Have you had someone check this for restoration? That top edge looks iffy.

I had a nice copy of this book a while ago that I let go in a trade. I've regretted it ever since, so when I saw this copy last week I had to buy it. Of course it was the first book I saw when I walked into the room. The Everett story inside is a real gem.

Reluctant to sell, reticent to say so. I'll show myself out.

Flippers go everywhere. They're like roaches. I'm running into the same thing where my want list is dwindling, especially when you factor in prices. But that's part of the reasons I go to shows, I always find new cool stuff I didn't know about. Especially by flipping through the books. The last 3 Cal Comic Con's I've gone to I've been over budget within 5 minutes of the doors opening. Usually before the show even starts.

1) pre-2000 2) post-2000 Problem solved. But other descriptors are basically by decades, no? 30s/platinum 40s/GA 50s/Atomic 60s/SA 70s/BA 80s/CA 90s plus TBD That's less clear to a newbie than plain old numbers.

Golden age and Silver age make sense. Everything else should be defined by the decade in which it was printed. Except 1993 which was garbage.

I'm happy to pay a premium to good dealers. That premium pays for their work finding these books and bringing them to me. To nickel and dime someone seems petty. But I'm almost always buying something for my collection, which means that I don't mind paying a bit more for the pleasure of owning the book. If I were a flipper, I would assume that I would be more picky, but that's not what I'm in this for. Same principle applies when I'm selling books to a dealer. I recognize they have a margin and I try to price things fairly. I'm not going to get taken, but if it's not something that I want in my collection, I'd rather have the money and turn it into something I do want. Even if I lose a few bucks.

It's the Schrodinger's cat of comic sales. He simultaneously sold out too early and too late.

I'm pretty sure Berk's collection would have done well any time.

He did it so well, but there's a USS Stevens out there where Glanzman nailed it too.

That's a lousy purchase if you want to get your money back. However, if you want the best CGC certified collection of Iron Man, it's a great purchase. It's not on me to judge what someone spends their money on. That's the great thing about this HOBBY. It's not rational, and you get to buy what you like. If it increases in value, that's gravy.

Shame that Joker didn't do well.

Better get out while you can.

You're contradicting yourself here, or at least only focusing on one aspect of the supply:demand ratio. Yes, the supply is much higher, but the demand is at least equally high, and growing. The growth is fueled by increased presence of the characters in mass media, but it's also growing due to the target demographic getting to the age where they have disposable income to spend on the books. It wouldn't surprise me to see another bump in growth 20 years from now as the kids growing up in the MCU want something to blow their excess cash on.

Nope. 10% of the bid price.

She doesn't need any weapons, she can cut glass with her chest

40? 10% of the bid plus 20% BP does not equal 40. Have you ever bought a book from heritage?

The growth of the SA collector base has exceeded the supply, so while the books are more common, they have more potential. There's also an interesting phenomenon of a second wave of nostalgia where kids growing up buying Image, Valiant, McFarlane, etc., now have the disposable income to buy those mega keys they wanted, but couldn't afford. That being said, I wouldn't "invest" explicitly in comics. But I will continue to buy like a madman because I love the books.

I've seen that defect on other Atlas books, but that doesn't explain how it got there. It does seem production related, but there's no way to tell.

Same here. Charlton was in the grocery store only. Convenience stores had Marvel & DC. Later in the 80s bookstores like B Dalton had some indie stuff, I explicitly remember Continuity and Eclipse.

Just a letter and a date for the RCs. I've never heard how people came to the conclusion about the extra number on Church books, deciding that it notes the number of each book received. If you sold through, then you wouldn't be able to review that information. Maybe, and this is complete conjecture, since the Church collection was so complete, he was getting them from somewhere before they hit the newsstand, and that person used the number for inventory reference?

Really great colors for that issue. Congrats!

It wouldn't be the distributor who coded the books, but rather the vendor. It would be in their best interest to code every book if it was necessary for returns, or if they were tracking numbers for sales data. I'm speculating a bit here, I don't know if that would be the reason. But if you look at collections like the River City where there were multiple copies of some books, they were all hand coded so presumptively every book that came in was coded. Now why wouldn't you get a stamp?