Ryan.

Don't know if anyone has checked out the VCC but I have a couple sorta-kinda-semi-rarish TMNT variants listed. http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7814997Post7814997

Frisket

For issue 2, the inside cover would state that it is a second printing. If it doesn't say that then you have a first print. If it's a third print it would have the cover listed here: https://www.mycomicshop.com/search?TID=183361 For issues 3 and 4, second printings have different covers than first prints. See here: https://www.mycomicshop.com/search?TID=157081

Agreed. I'll be at my LCS bright-eyed and bushy-tailed the two Wednesdays when issues 25 and 26 show up. Everything else is preamble. I have been wanting an omnibus-type collection of the entire series for a loooonnngggg time so I'm okay with waiting a little bit longer. I am curious, though, to see how they muck with the color on Totleben's issues. I hope they don't screw it up too badly.

That's a new one. Requesting a refund on an item that wasn't purchased. I wonder if he's ever gotten anyone to bite on that.

Nice!

So the nomination is because he stopped replying to you? No actual deal was made, correct?

He never responded to my email but he did drop the price from $2500 to $750. I've discussed deals with the seller before (with myself both as buyer and seller). We never came to agreement on terms. From seeing his history as a flipper I have an opinion on which of Adam's scenarios this falls under. I won't say which but you can probably guess. Amendment: I do not think the seller bleached out the wording himself or was scammed by someone else. My opinion is that he bought a third print with the wording bleached out and is passing it off as a counterfeit.

There's a third print with the printing indicia bleached out being sold on ebay as a counterfeit: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=261511633251 I already contacted the seller with the message below. We'll see what he says. "Hi. This isn't actually a countefeit of a first print. It's a third print with the printing indicia bleached out. 1st print counterfeits still retain the Gobbledygook ad on the inside back cover, the Dover NH address notation on the inside front cover, and the blood on the second "T" in the logo is consistent with third prints."

It was at $4999 very briefly and then...wasn't. Something weird happened.

You're not.

Kurtis, are you going to San Diego this year?

It's on the buyer now to provide evidence of these interactions beyond the snippets we've seen.

You've changed. Just because I think many of these PL nominations have shaky foundations doesn't mean I want to bro hug the people involved.

This seems like (yet another) PL nomination where both buyer and seller come out looking like mess.

I won't buy from him again, but the problem is that he doesn't want to refund me and I've lost $30. As much as I agree with your case you did not LOSE $30. Agreed.

Calling someone pathetic is an insult. At least you used "you're" correctly.

I'll assume this was a typo... Insulting someone doesn't normally lead to quick dispute resolutions. If he was insulting you then you should have let him dig that hole and when he nominated you for the PL his case would have garnered little support, in all likelihood.

Got this nice surprise in the mail today. Thanks, Sean of NY Comics. Love those sig placements.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

The issue isn't really about the ease with which someone falls off the PL but whether or not he should have been on it in the first place.

I think this sequence of events could be massaged a different way: --Possibly closed sales thread meanders towards oblivion --Insistent buyer tries to force a sale --Seller chooses not to be bullied Not saying this is the way things are but maybe the initial nomination isn't so black and white.

There's hardly a consensus on this so why would the default be to add to the PL?