• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Marbleman3

Member
  • Posts

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Marbleman3

  1. If it was printed that way by marvel (or some other comic publisher), why is it designated as a coverless book and not designated as either an (i) error print or (ii) a variant print?  

    It’s not like a customer or store took the book and then removed the cover on purpose post-distribution or even as a fraud. This came from the publisher and they manufactured it that way.  Let me know if I’m thinking about this wrong, but isn’t an NG an indication that something was altered after the printing and once it was in the public’s hands?

    Would CGC designate a blank sketch cover variant (wrapped over the same comic as a cover A) that came straight from marvel, as an added cover green label?  If it applies one way shouldn’t it apply the other way? This reasoning is unusual to me.

  2. ...you really don’t let up.  I do see your point of view and you’ve already called me out. Do I need to be an expert in the industry or a heavy board commenter to know when a conversation is veering off track? I sincerely apologize for inserting what I had thought was a helpful nudge for the thread and it’s clear it wasn’t taken that well. Lesson learned and I intend for my next posts to be more positive and add to the discussion. And you are right, this thread does always find its way back to the main topic.  

    “Now is the time to pony up”? If I can’t contribute in a certain way, am I not allowed to read this thread? I am a collector (not a store owner, industry person or large online seller), and I don’t use this thread to make money as you implied. I just enjoy reading all of your thoughts on hot books (especially if it’s about a book I’ve recently picked up that’s picking up steam) and it’s a shame that my comment is having the opposite effect on the thread than I intended.  Can we please move on?  

     

  3. Below is a link to another recent reference online to the silver print being a type of second print (scroll down a bit to find it, below the image of storm and senator Kelly).  

    http://www.therealgentlemenofleisure.com/2016/04/x-amining-uncanny-x-men-281.html?m=1

    It would be nice if there would be some way to confirm whether this is a fake or an actual second printing.  Anyone have any ideas other than speculating that the covers were switched?  

     

  4. Regarding the xmen 281 silver variant - someone mentioned that it could be a direct market version of the 2nd print, with the red logo a newsstand version.  Could this be possible?

    For the stapling theory, since my issue's indicia says 281: do you think someone took the cover off of issue 282, reversed it, took the cover off of 281, and then stapled the 282 reversed cover to 281? 

  5. Does anyone have any information on the X-Men 281 silver variant? I have a copy that has a silver logo and writing, and the cover and the indicia says xmen 281.  The inside back cover of the comic is the gold cover of xmen 282.  I can't find any information at all online other than people speculating that some people undid the cover and re stapled it.  But then why would it say issue 281 on the indicia?