showcase22gr1959

An incredibly cool set Rich. (thumbs u Your Action Comics #7 is my favorite out of the bunch (possibly the greatest Superman cover of all-time). Thanks. (thumbs u Thinking about keeping this set and pulling it from the market.

Rick, had a thread called "It's a bird...a plane.."

Here's my set.

Marvel Zombies rule in the SA forum. I was surprised how BB28 got knock off so quickly with SC22.

Hope it does well.

Going to be really low grade...maybe a 1.0-1.8 ish. Go for it. Although, you really do need an Action #1 to complete your early Supes cover set............ With how prices are these days...I'll be content of what I already own.

Going to be really low grade...maybe a 1.0-1.8 ish.

A nice 6.0 for you. and a nice Batman for me.

I like the square white box with "Kid Flash"...looks like a sticker on it . I wonder if something else was originally written there on the original art, before it was blocked out because of a mistake.

That 6.0 for 2500$ had me worried a little a couple months back but I still think it was an anomaly rather than a trend as evidenced by a 5.0 selling for close to 4000$ last month Yeah, the 6.0 at $2500 is an anomaly. Here's some 5.0's sales the last 18 months. 5.0 crm Ebay $3700 2/2/11 ($3960 on GPA) 5.0 ow Heritage 2/25/10 $3107.00 5.0 ow Comic Connect 9/26/09 $3100 5.0 ow boardie $3000 8/5/10 5.0 crm/ow Quality Comics $2875 8/22/10 5.0 crm Ebay 5/19/10 $2800 5.0 Quality Comics crm/ow 10/5/09 $2751 On another note. 5.0+ are investment grade and considered upper mid-grade for SC22. 6.0-7.0 are considered high grade and 7.5-9.0 are upper high grade. Unless many show up in 9.2+ and will invalidate this theory.

But Showcase 22 was never produced with chips like the early Marvels.

Now, only if a 5.0 with average eye appeal can sell under $3K, which has not happen this year.

This copy has a chip and which hurt the price. Yeah, the image is poor quality.

It's the same copy which has been up for the last few months. As you mention, the OW pages is a plus.

The pause that refreshes. (thumbs u

Too much attention on the MOTU, not enough on Darkhawk. That is a sweet cover. I always liked Darkhawk. (thumbs u Darkhawk I checked the census and was surprise there is only five graded copy of the last issue. I was astounded to get a 9.8.

Here's a cool Spiderman.

Sweet book Jason.

The smell of vintage paper and all those cool ads. Don't have the luxury of all those nice raw GL stuff you have.

Nice books, but it looks like CGC screwed up the label on this one. The publisher stated is DC but it's a Marvel comic. Nice catch, Claudio! I would bet the submission form was filled out wrong on this one. I could be wrong about the form being right or wrong, but there is a D.C. #1 MOTU published 12/82. The Marvel/Star MOTU was published in 1986. I just submitted the same book and almost made the same mistake on my form. Good point you brought this up. It was entered correctly. An oversight on CGC, but mistakes do happen and nothing free of error I guess.

Same here...I got the hard cover. Don't have to many raw GL's...so the earlier reprints would do.

Nice books, but it looks like CGC screwed up the label on this one. The publisher stated is DC but it's a Marvel comic. Nice catch, Claudio! Nice catch! I wonder if CGC is careless in labeling moderns. In the same batch my GI Joe 26 2nd print was label as first print. Yeah, I think we need to start a bashing thread of how The CGC standards are waning... oh wait. I sure hope this is not the case. Nah, just kidding. Mistakes are made and I'm sure they can make good on correcting it if you so desire. Just call them up and I hear they would be happy to oblige or maybe take it to a con where they have a booth and take care of it there. Sounds like an idea, I might just keep it as a novelty.

Nice books, but it looks like CGC screwed up the label on this one. The publisher stated is DC but it's a Marvel comic. Nice catch, Claudio! Nice catch! I wonder if CGC is careless in labeling moderns. In the same batch my GI Joe 26 2nd print was label as first print. Yeah, I think we need to start a bashing thread of how The CGC standards are waning... oh wait. I sure hope this is not the case.