revat

I always wondered about the first appearance of Omaha the Cat Dancer. Mystery solved.

Nice Chinese stuff! Any chance they were 'official' marvel or dc or related to American stories?

I'd be good w those too. Do they exist for marvel or dc?

Its been awhile since I asked... any Chinese comics yet? I know of one rumored comic, but failed in my attempts to acquire.

Your mix of nerdy/talent/money belong on the West coast.

These guys are giving N.C. a really good name. reported

I think I'm going to be selling some Upper Deck VS Holofoil Exclusives. I've got two "Thing Cards" signed by Michael Chiklis (who played the Thing in the movies).

I'm one of those people who might buy an Overstreet every five years, so if a seller mentions the year then there is probably no intent to mislead anyone. If there has been a large value drop then I think the community should treat it the same as they do someone who picks & chooses GPA data to support an inflated ask price. Any sales/guide data provided by the seller but appears to be misleading or inaccurate is fair game for "data sharing" IMHO - I don't consider that threadcrapping. I've seen a fair amount of misleading sales data used in sales threads, but I've never posted anything in the threads. I have PMed sellers a couple of times; one responded with changes, one didn't. I'm not convinced that the mods won't consider such a posting threadcrapping if the seller complains. Misleading sales data are in the eyes of the beholder and I doubt the mods will want to get into the thickets of deciding what's misleading and what isn't. If you know someone has got a fact wrong (and won't correct it after a PM), I think you can kindly correct it in thread Like "I think you may have made an error with the OSPG price, mine says the price is XXXXX" But if they seem to be intentionally misleading, I think you can ask polite questions in the thread to get other potential buyers to think about things from a more 'skeptical' mindset "Can you provide larger scans?" "What guarantees if any are there against restoration?" "I love this book, I just bought a great copy off of ebay/clink/etc" This will automatically remind people to look at completed sales to get an idea.

I want a steranko wall so bad!

Got me ☔

I got some of this too, i'm hoping for the arrival in the next two weeks

Are u cereal?

You guys are essentially trying to convince the other person that there SHOULD/Shouldn't be a rule for these boards telling people who they can or cannot sell to. And also the raison d'etre for the PL, and how it should be used and what it should be used for. These aren't bad topics for debate, but the arguments have gone so far beyond opinions, facts, and points, and have become interlaced with semantics, personal attacks, and argumentativeness about the way the other person argues that I would say the useful life of the conversation has expired to most people. The odds of you guys agreeing or even seeing the other POV have gone way past the point of "who gives an eff". Honestly, the world needs people on both sides of the spectrum, people who fight to preserve order and enforce rules, and those who (lawfully) question them from time and ask why the rule exists to begin. And those people will naturally be at odds with each other on some (or many issues). People are right to question why a person would sell to people on the PL. But there is no rule against it, he's not automatically in the wrong for doing it, and certainly doesn't owe anyone an explanation for it, save maybe his family if loses money as a result, or a judge if later tries to sue that PL person for a bad deal. The risk is his and his alone. He knows there's a risk that that will turn off other potential buyers/sellers, but he's an adult (I assume) and accepted the risk, and the risk of the deal going bad. Maybe he needs the money more than some, and doesn't want to limit his market. Maybe others have given him a second/third/fourth chance before, and he wants to pay it forward. Maybe he just likes to eff with the establishment (without technically breaking rules). There's no harm in asking, but he doesn't owe anyone an explanation. There's a debate to be had, but I swear not nearly as grand or noble or entertaining (in its current form) as both of you seem to think it is. I think that's why some people have kindly requested a move to PM's for you guys.

did someone answer jimmy L's question? I actually was hoping for an answer? A strike for threadkrapping for pointing out PL status? Maybe if its done politely its ok?

ANy chance we agree that all issues have been beaten to death here, including who is/isn't instigating, RMA didn't/did use the PL in an unintended way. Doesn't sound like minds are changing, seems like a fine place to agree to disagree, and then agree that while not on the PL the buyer will likely have a tough time doing business here in the future.

also some advice for any buyers in the future, if you need a FULL month to pay for a comic that is less than $150, you should consider realigning your priorities, either in comic collecting, or life. Nothing wrong with spending tons of money on comics, but no one is forcing you to either. While I'm here, if you can't send out Pay-it-forwards in a timely manner because you CANNOT AFFORD SHIPPING, you probably shouldn't claim a Pay-it-Forward. Also, you should consider realigning your priorities, either in comic collecting, or life.

I think the issue is that you didn't send payment when you said you would and then when questioned about it, you still didn't send payment, but instead answered with 'attitude'. He's not lying when he says you didn't send payment. You didn't. You could have at any point, but didn't. You could have right after claiming it, but you didn't. You could have at the agreed upon 'end of month', but you didn't. You could have when Comic-Con ended, you didn't. You could have apologized and sent payment when told about the PL list, but you didn't. You could have been gracious and apologetic, but you weren't. And now you get to keep your money and your name off the PL list. I would be happy with that if I were you.

lets say anyone of us bought a book of the boards, then asks the seller to give me to the end of the month (I've gotta take the gf out for her birthday). He gives me til the end of the month and gives me the paypal info. so one month passes, and I don't pay - things happen, I got busy, forgot, etc. 2 weeks AFTER the deadline the guy checks back with me, no name calling, no insults, but tells me to pay or get put on the PL. Do I A) pay immediately and apologize given that I already have your paypal info? B) Do I ask if I can pay AFTER COMIC-CON? (Where its at least possible that I'll spend a ton more of the money I should be paying you with?) C) Do I give you some attitude and tell you I'll pay at a future time and ask you IF YOU STILL WANT TO SELL IT? D) Do I eat some ice cream? If your answers are B and/or C, doesn't the seller have the right to say "You know what? nevermind, forget the PL, forget this sale." Yes I know the facts aren't EXACTLY these, but its pretty dam close. And pretty dam reasonable IMO.

That's exactly what should have happened here. Otherwise, why threaten the buyer with the PL and then back out? It doesn't make any sense at all other than to bring his name up on here. I think the problem is, the buyer did not apologize or give money. He gave snark and a statement that he WOULD pay in the future. If the buyer paid immediately and apologized immediately, I have no doubt the deal would have gone through. Instead the seller is left to believe the word of someone who he no longer trusts and is already frustrated with over a deal that happened more than a month ago. He was already probably on the edge of 'this probably isn't worth it' and was pushed over to 'this definitely isn't worth it'. I can understand that not everyone shares this opinion, but is it that unreasonable to think this is a possibility? Or that some of the rest of us may act in the same fashion? Is it the absolute best and kindest reaction in the history of the world? debatable. But seemingly reasonable and well within his rights.

To me it sounds like he still wanted to sell the book to this guy and was using the PL as a mechanism to do so 'at the time'. BUT as a response he got 'attitude' and not payment, but a 'claim that he would pay'. And the buyer had made promises to pay before and not done so. So as a potential seller, he looked at his facts, and decided, "not worth it to sell to this guy based on his bad attitude and seeming inability to pay (after I've been relatively nice and patient), i'm out" Seems ok to me.

Is it that cut and dry at this point. He pays RMA, and RMA mails the book? I agree there's a lot of chaff around this one. But at the core its a book was supposed to be bought by end of June. on July 1 the 30 day clock ticks down until he can be nominated for the PL. Gun was jumped with a PL nomination notice (in my opinion) because there was a request for additional time. Right now I think the buyer is still within his window. (again, Im not saying he did this any which way close to kosher or right, but by the letter of the PL and marketplace rules he's still within his window to complete the transaction) I know RMA's not thrilled with him for reasons both specific to the transaction and to the poor communication. But there's nothing so egregious that the situation should supersede the current marketplace guidelines, I dont think (but hey, I'm easily swayed, correct me if I'm wrong). Got it. Thanks for clarifying. So end of July, do RMA and the buyer need to either complete the transaction or walk away? It feels that way if the buyer has offered to purchase the book, but RMA doesn't want to sell it to him. You can't just insert someone on the PL because you then ended up not liking them due to poor communication skills. Otherwise, our little list would explode. sounds like RMA has decided to forgo PL proceedings for Kitsune, and not sell him the book. As Kitsune did not pay for the book by the agreed upon time (and well after), RMA appears to be well within his rights to do so. It would appear that as it relates to the PL, there is no other issue at hand regarding the PL and the RMA/Kitsune situation. THere's a lot of other stuff about semantics and timing that people can debate as it may relate to hypotheticals for a future occurrence, but it sounds like this one is over.

yes the probation list isn't perfect. But I think the point of it is honestly to help agreed upon deals made on these boards GET DONE (or make things right when they don't). IF/WHEN those deals don't/can't get done, the offending parties are listed here as a warning to other prospective buyers/sellers. There is already a TON of confusion, misunderstandings, arguments, etc associated with the probation list and discussion thread. IF this thread included this 'seller/buyer was kind of an D-bag' or 'paid/shipped a few days later than agreed upon' or 'I got overcharged 75 cents for shipping' or 'they didn't package it well but I got the comic in described condition', then the entire cgc boards would be taken over by just the 'Semi Complaint thread (and accompanying arguments)'. CGC doesn't want this, the moderators don't want it, and they don't think the community does either.

reported to ebay! its easy and fun! everyone should!

had some bronze/copper up here before. Just switched it to sketch covers. will rotate periodically

http://outside-affiliatelinksnotallowed.ebay.com/outside-affiliatelinksnotallowed/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?campid=5337214861&toolid=10001&customid=CGCForum&mpre=http://www.ebay.com/itm/Batman-16-CGC-SS-9-8-Signed-Scott-Snyder-DC-Death-of-the-Family-NM-Mint-Joker-/261244015904?pt=US_Comic_Books&hash=item3cd35b5520 Batman 16 cgc ss 9.8 signed by Snyder ends tonight 10 pm est