Ryan.

Scans don't always exactly replicate what a book looks like in hand, for good or bad.

Not sure if anyone has seen the news but Dark Horse will be releasing omnibus editions of the Mirage and DH series' starting this October. These editions will be called The Usagi Yojimbo Saga and it looks as though each book will collect roughly 3 of the previously released DH TPBs.

Stan Sakai wrote this on his website last Thursday:

After reading all the details... I stand with the other Ryan (or am I the other Ryan )

You know what, I changed my mind. Quadman won the book. The probation list still feels a little extreme considering this seems borne more out of misunderstanding than malicious intent or incompetence.

It did not show up in the posted p.m. exchange...but according to quadman...the first p.m. sent was the sign. After that...they were just ironing out the details and quadman simply asked if the seller was willing to used a mutually known third party as a middleman. quadman never said he would not take the book if one wasn't used...he was simply asking if it was ok to use one. I'm just not really seeing much fault with the seller here. We are all supposing a lot about his intentions when taking Rick's unconditional takeit but it's entirely up to the seller to accept or reject extraneous after-the-fact conditions when he states his requirements in the very first post. There were no after-the-fact "conditions" stated. The buyer simply asked a question. "I was thinking with such a large purchase maybe we can use reputable board member as a middle man? Maybe Filter or GAtor?" The seller did not want to use a third party and that was ok with the buyer...as was noted in his next p.m reply to the seller. "I'll send a cheque straight up then " I guess. It seems like the tenor of this whole conversation is leading towards demonizing the seller for choosing the deal he was most comfortable with. The "on hold" is a monkeywrench but the deal was never finalized. It wasn't finalized because the seller chose, voluntarily, to ignore the "On Hold" that he offered and created himself, again voluntarily. It's a monkeywrench because it created a duty. Once created, it gave Quadman an expectation that it would be respected and honored. It wasn't. That would be a problem in any business setting. Do you think the seller should now be obligated to sell to quadman? And if he refuses, should the seller be placed on the probation list?

It did not show up in the posted p.m. exchange...but according to quadman...the first p.m. sent was the sign. After that...they were just ironing out the details and quadman simply asked if the seller was willing to used a mutually known third party as a middleman. quadman never said he would not take the book if one wasn't used...he was simply asking if it was ok to use one. I'm just not really seeing much fault with the seller here. We are all supposing a lot about his intentions when taking Rick's unconditional takeit but it's entirely up to the seller to accept or reject extraneous after-the-fact conditions when he states his requirements in the very first post. There were no after-the-fact "conditions" stated. The buyer simply asked a question. "I was thinking with such a large purchase maybe we can use reputable board member as a middle man? Maybe Filter or GAtor?" The seller did not want to use a third party and that was ok with the buyer...as was noted in his next p.m reply to the seller. "I'll send a cheque straight up then " I guess. It seems like the tenor of this whole conversation is leading towards demonizing the seller for choosing the deal he was most comfortable with. The "on hold" is a monkeywrench but the deal was never finalized.

It did not show up in the posted p.m. exchange...but according to quadman...the first p.m. sent was the sign. After that...they were just ironing out the details and quadman simply asked if the seller was willing to used a mutually known third party as a middleman. quadman never said he would not take the book if one wasn't used...he was simply asking if it was ok to use one. I'm just not really seeing much fault with the seller here. We are all supposing a lot about his intentions when taking Rick's unconditional takeit but it's entirely up to the seller to accept or reject extraneous after-the-fact conditions when he states his requirements in the very first post.

Didn't the seller put the book on hold because it was not, at that point, sold? The seller pretty clearly states that he will ship to the US only in his first post and nothing about that PM conversation suggests a done deal.

I ran into this cutie whilst wandering through Hollywood this past weekend. It's the back wall outside of Meltdown Comics.

Someone's adding more books..... There's a rumor that the initial print run was 3250 and not the widely accepted 3000.

I hold the book in my hand and it's an obvious 9.2. I had it as a 9.0/9.2 before sending it in. I look at the scan and it looks like a 7.5. Incidentally, I <3 The Crow.

The scan makes the spine look awful. In hand it looks way better. Either way, whatevs. I like it.

Picked these up at a local LCS. Can't hate the grades that came back.

Andrew made a purchase with me and the transaction couldn't have gone better. Thanks again!

Got this in the mail today:

Q: why won't they slab these? The L&R and the Gobbledygooks were printed and hand-stapled by the creators so counterfeiting them is extremely easy. There's really nothing stopping someone from running to Kinkos and making copies of either the authentics or the counterfeits. CGC officially recognizes certain counterfeits (TMNT 1 and 2, Cry for Dawn 1, Cerebus 1) due to historical value and easy-to-identify markings. Other counterfeits they won't slab.

I'm horrible with this. I always intend to fire off a PM after receiving a book but seem to never get around to it. Incidentally, thanks Sean!

I feel like Option A is the most probable reflection of reality.

Can't decide which one works better....the old standard: or the more nuanced approach. Option A.

:sumo:

You may want to include a ban on putting "Singer" and "Underage Members" in the same sentence. Or, really, any discussion about "underage members". Oh, and Hulk 180

I believe this is what's known as "begging the question".