SOTIcollector

It happens to me regularly. I resolve it by signing out, and then signing back in. I have not yet had to close all browsers and clear cookies. You may want to try just signing out and then back in first, just because it’s easier. If that doesn’t do it, then clearing cookies and closing browsers should do it.

No, because that list would go on to infinity. As others have stated, the list of grades that CGC currently assigns is here. https://www.cgccomics.com/grading/grading-scale/ There are a few 9.5’s out there as well, but CGC no longer uses 9.5. So now you know all legitimate CGC grade numbers. All other numbers are fake/don’t exist.

Below 9.0, you’ll see only increments of 0.5: 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, etc., because those are the grades CGC gives. Above 9.0, CGC gives 9.2, 9.4, 9.6, 9.8, 9.9, and 10.0. I was not aware that there was an experiment that allowed some 9.5’s, but I am confident that Shadroch knows what he’s talking about.

I use completed sales to estimate a fair market value. For common books, you can look at eBay completed sales and Heritage Auctions completed sales. Those are free. For something more extensive, it’s worth paying a few bucks a month for GPAnalysis. That gets you records of completed sales for a wide range of CGC graded books, over a period of years.

What you have displayed is a poorly done reproduction, probably a photocopy, of the cover to Action Comics number 23. If it were an original comic book and original cover, in that condition, it would sell for tens of thousands of dollars. Given that the cover is a reproduction, I am guessing that the interior is a reproduction as well. If that’s the case, a willing collector might offer to pay $10 or $20 for it.

I wanted to make sure everybody else had a crack at this, since I got the other copy. If nobody else wants it, I'll be happy to purchase a second copy.

Hi, Les, The question of whether the comics will be worth more as a set is easy to answer. The answer is no. There is a common misperception among people who don’t collect, that a full set is worth more than the sum of his parts. However, I have never seen that actually happen in my nearly five decades of collecting. When a full set is offered for sale, it is typically offered at some sort of a discount off the prices that the books would sell for individually. I believe what you really want to know is how to maximize the money you make from selling these books. The answer to that hinges on how much effort you want to put into selling them. You could individually grade and price every book, and then try to sell them individually to collectors. Key issues (such as the number ones) would sell first, and you would spend a long time and a lot of effort trying to find willing buyers for the others. That would make you the most money, and it would take the most time and effort. On the other extreme, you could put almost no effort in by offering them to several dealers and accepting the highest offer they make. You would get a fraction of their “value”, but it would require very little effort on your part. There are lots of approaches, requiring varying levels of effort, that are somewhere between those two extremes, If I owned such a run, I would probably have the number one issues cleaned, pressed, and graded, then list them here of on another free online platform. The remainder, I would bundle up into groups of perhaps 5 to 10, and put them on eBay in a no reserve auction.

Actually, I don't have one. This is the only one I've seen. eccomic did make me a generous offer, but I declined. I'm glad to see this awesome collectible found a new home.

It depends on how much you can improve the look of the book. Without more info, I would expect the value to stay the same or drop. Here’s why. A restored book will typically sell for half (or less) the price of the same grade unrestored. If you have a magician doing restoration, and they bump the grade from 2.0 unrestored to 9.0 restored (which is NOT a likely scenario, to say the least), then you’ll have a book that has increased in value. However, you say the pages are “dark”. If they are already brown and maybe even brittle, restoration won’t fix that. It sounds to me like you have a book that can’t be improved much beyond the 2.0 it has now. If you restore it to a 3.0, you will have lost value.

If it is, or if it becomes, available I will gladly take it!

Hi, James, I agree with others that giving negative feedback is completely inappropriate for a buyer who sent you exactly what you ordered and who also offers returns. Are you aware that your negative feedback can have a significant impact on a seller's ability to sell on eBay? Would you be willing to disclose your eBay username? As I seller, I strive to make sure my customers are happy. As a human, I have been known to make mistakes. I'd rather not sell to people who have demonstrated that they would rather damage my ability to sell than give me an opportunity to fix my mistake, so I intend to block you if I can find out your username, from you or from the seller. To be clear, I'm not saying that the seller made a mistake here. I'm just saying that your behavior as a buyer seems to indicate an unwillingness to allow for mistakes, and that's a risk I prefer not to take on as a seller. Thanks! Steve

I’d just return in on principle. If the seller keeps losing money due to poor packing and having to accept returns of damaged books, they will either up their packing game or go bankrupt.

I’ll be there… incognito, with shopping list in hand. It’s a great show!

By strange coincidence, I just happened to be going through a seldom-visited box this week... my early Conans. And there was no #7. I don't remember that #7 was missing, but, hey, for $10 I can't pass up completing the run.

Yes, the most common way to identify a reprint is to look in the indicia (fine-print publication information) at the bottom of the first page. The indicia will usually tell you the title, issue number, date, and printing. However, in rare cases that indicia information is wrong, and this happens to be one of those cases. Off the top of my head, I can come up with a couple prominent examples of a reprinted indicia that does not give the correct publication date or printing. 1) Famous First Editions. These were oversized reprints of DC comics, published in the mid-1970's, which reprinted almost exactly Action Comics #1, Detective Comics #27, and some other historic comics. The reprints had an outer cover added to a faithful (but oversized) reproduction of the original, which included and exact reproduction of the original 1930's or 40's indicia. There have been reports over the years of people removing the outer cover and trying to pass off these reprints as original. Some people have been tempted to fall for the deception because the indicia, usually a reliable source of information, seems to indicate they are original. 2) The JC Penney reprints from the 1990's, which were sold as part of the JC Penney "vintage packs". Each reprint included all of the story content from the original, with a copy of the original indicia at the bottom of page 1, plus the original front cover including price. If memory serves, there may have been some of the JC Penney books that indicated in the indicia that they were second prints. However, a good number of the JC Penney books had a reproduced indicia that made no mention of the fact that the books was a reprint. The way to distinguish the Penney's reprints is from the 1990's-era ads in them, such as the Stridex ad. For more information than you probably want about the JC Penney vintage packs, see this article. Marvel Vintage Pack - Heroes Galaxy

Okay, now how can I pass up a boob hunt? Especially at 20% off! Does the winner get a booby prize?

Too cool to pass up!

The Forbes article is cited in the Wikipedia article on Mr. Halperin. https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2004/1227/156.html?sh=168bfa62e074

From the Wikipedia entry on Hetitage’s chair and co-founder James Halperin: “He and his businesses have been sued by federal agencies (including the FTC) multiple times for fraud, among other allegations, where he was ordered to pay substantial fees.[2]” I personally would be shocked if there were NOT sketchy dealings at Heritage. Exactly what independent oversight is there to ensure that shill bidding and related shenanigans don’t happen at Heritage, ComicLink, ComicConnect, or eBay? Pretty much none.

Um… if you think there are significant correlations between having a baby and getting a comic book slabbed, I’m afraid you will be rather disappointed with what you get from CGC.

I'm thrilled that this week I've added a new recreation by Chris Kohler to my collection. If you're not familiar with Chris's recreations, you should be. He does incredible work reproducing old comic art, and he'll do each piece only once. When choosing a recreation for a commission, it's so hard to pick. But my primary focus is SOTI and I love EC, so this one was an easy choice. Plus, the cover to HOF 19 is a perfect companion to another piece I comissioned from Chris a while back: the splash to Foul Play from HOF 19.

Thanks to all who provided feedback. The ultimate winner was the Taschen Spider-man book, purchased with some holiday gift money, which arrived this week. It is indeed a beautiful book. The size is just right. It's huge, but not as unwieldy as the Artist Editions. Don't get me wrong... those artist editions are luscious! They're just really difficult to hold and read. I feel that this book is ideal size-wise for manageability while reading. I love that the book includes entire interior and exterior front and back covers, plus all of the letters pages and house ads. I had forgotten (if I ever knew it) that GB Love rated a mention on the letters page of ASM #1. I love that Taschen attempted to preserve the original coloring, and correct the registration. Some of the things they got wrong jumped out on my initial reading. The word "WHAT" in the panel below is illegible, but is clear in the original art (pictured below for reference). Was the word actually illegible in the original book? Similarly, "UMPTEENTH" seems to have problems in the printed version that weren't on the original art. It looks as if somebody scribbled in corrections to the word. Do you know if the original had those funky corrections? Or is it just a natural result of heavy black inks on the printing plate? For a book that doesn't have a huge amount of text, I was surprised to see a paragraph with two significant errors. The "preceding pages" refers to pages that follow, or "succeding pages." The same paragraph refers to a 14-page story that is actually an 11 page story. Since Taschen went out of their way to re-register the color plates, I would have thought maybe they would have found fixes for some printing anomalies like the one below. I've read a bit about how comics were printed at the time, but I'm admittedly no expert in this at all. I'm probably complaining about something that can't be fixed, but... When I see the panel below, I see variations in the light blue background. The blue seems denser and darker above the window (is that a window?) than below it. Given that there were very few color choices available at the time, it seems to me that the original colorist's intention was to have that entire light blue background printed the same color. Let's say this was intended as 50% saturation, but came out with this variation because, well, the source material is a comic book that was printed rather crudely many decades ago. Is there not a digital solution that will look at this field, identify that it's intended to be made up of dots that represent 50% color saturation, and repoduce those dots? To me it seems pretty straightforward, at least in theory. I have to assume that people who know what they are doing have found that it's nowhere as easy as I make it sound, and if this could have been fixed easily, it would have been. This probably seems like a lot of complaining, but the positives FAR outweigh the negatives with this thing. I really do love this book and I think that overall they did a great job with it.

Hey! A SOTI book I don't already have!

No. in order for a book to qualify for gold label, CGC must retain possession of a book from signing to encapsulation. CGC doesn’t verify signatures that they didn’t witness, and the moment you walked away with the book it became, in their eyes, unwitnessed.

Meeting in the parking lot (or lobby) of a police station is a great idea in cases where you have no other protection. This can work well for a Facebook, Craigslist or Instagram transaction. However, the police station approach doesn't give you the assurance that eBay does. If you pay through eBay and there's a problem, you can file a dispute and get your $ back. However, if you make the swap in a police station parking lot and then later find out that there's a problem, you're screwed. How could that happen? I'm thinking of things like undisclosed restoration, missing or married pages, a tampered slab or an entirely counterfeit book. These things may not be evident until after the transaction is complete and the seller has your money. I can't stand eBay for many reasons, but one thing that they do well is protect buyers to assure that you get what was advertised.