Number 6

I'm a little concerned about the president this sets though. When a buyer pays me via PayPal I never actually open the payment e-mail I receive and read it. I just see the e-mail in my In Box, know that payment has been made, and begin preping the item for shipment. I would assume many sellers, if not most, do thee same. But the above makes it sounds like the seller, by accepting the PayPal payment, binds himself to whatever conditions the buyer stipulates in the comment section. In effect, the payment becomes part of the transaction negotiations. So is it incumbent on the seller to open and read those payment e-mail to make sure the buyer hasn't unilaterally changed the terms of the transaction? Not commenting on this specific situation so much as asking in a general sense. Leave the president out of this. I screwed up a quote AND I let auto-correct get the best of me.

Interesting. I hadn't considered that.

I'm a little concerned about the president this sets though. When a buyer pays me via PayPal I never actually open the payment e-mail I receive and read it. I just see the e-mail in my In Box, know that payment has been made, and begin preping the item for shipment. I would assume many sellers, if not most, do thee same. But the above makes it sounds like the seller, by accepting the PayPal payment, binds himself to whatever conditions the buyer stipulates in the comment section. In effect, the payment becomes part of the transaction negotiations. So is it incumbent on the seller to open and read those payment e-mail to make sure the buyer hasn't unilaterally changed the terms of the transaction? Not commenting on this specific situation so much as asking in a general sense. Number 6, totally understand your point, and agree with you. In and of itself the note should mean nothing. My point was not that it incorporated new terms into the deal, but rather showed the mindset of one of the parties. Sorry, I screwed up the quote. I was actually quoting what Ditch said.

I'm a little concerned about the president this sets though. When a buyer pays me via PayPal I never actually open the payment e-mail I receive and read it. I just see the e-mail in my In Box, know that payment has been made, and begin preping the item for shipment. I would assume many sellers, if not most, do thee same. But the above makes it sounds like the seller, by accepting the PayPal payment, binds himself to whatever conditions the buyer stipulates in the comment section. In effect, the payment becomes part of the transaction negotiations. So is it incumbent on the seller to open and read those payment e-mail to make sure the buyer hasn't unilaterally changed the terms of the transaction? Not commenting on this specific situation so much as asking in a general sense.

+1 I've never understood why the #227 story has a reputation for being such a dog. Granted, the Irv Novick art is a bit of a let-down when compared to the Adams cover, but even then some of the art fairly decent. The story's about as gothic as you can get: Batman takes on a Satanic cult trying to unleash a demon, and is aided by the spirit of one of their previous sacrificial victims. Take out Batman and the story would have fit in nicely with one of DC's gothic romance books. I guess it's tame and a bit silly by today's writing standards, but considering that public perception of Batman at the time was shaped largely by Adam West and Hanna Barbara, this is pretty intense stuff. No question there's some 70's turds wrapped in a cool Neal Adams cover, but #227 isn't one of them.

Thanks to Hank Pym for getting this done for me!

I was 40

If someone is only perusing keys, I could see why they would have a hard time wrapping their head around the idea of someone cracking their slabs. But I'm trying to put together a runs of minor Silver DC titles. Vast majority of the issues aren't key. I'm happy with 8.0-9.0 copies and CGC copies in those grades sell for about the same as raws. And sometimes a graded copy comes available before/more often than a comparable raw. Besides, I have limited space for my collection. So I can't wrap my head around the amount of space it would take to have all the issues in those runs graded. And considering the above, I really don't see any justification for it. Plus, I personally find it more aesthetically pleasing to have my books in Mylars. But I grew up buying comics off the spinner rack, CGC grading is a relatively new development for me.

Yes. For me, any book that becomes worth or is worth more than $200 gets slabbed. And I won't even touch a "key" that isn't in a slab already. It's just too expensive of a gamble. (thumbs u -J. +1 The $200 neighborhood and/or key seems to be about where I feel the need to slab or re-slab books I've cracked out. There's some exceptions. Been able to pick some nice CGC 9.4/9.6 copies of Wrightson Swamp Things for around $100, sometimes quite a bit less. But it seems like no matter how high grade, when cracked out they become practically worthless. So I just keep them slabbed. Neal Adams Batman and Detective's get slabbed regardless of whether they're worth $200 or not. So the line of demarcation is kind of arbitrary. It's hard to draw that line sometimes because one of the main reasons I crack my books is because I like having all my books together. Bad enough I have to separate the pre-'72 books from the rest because of mylar size, now I have to have a separate box for slabs as well. But again, I guess there will have to exceptions. Most of my cracked-out Silver Aquaman books were in the 8.0-9.0 range, doesn't seem to be a big hit on those in terms of value. But I did purchase a couple of 9.2s to complete my run. I like having them with the others but in terms of value they probably should be re-slabbed.

Thanks for the tip. We were watching the first one last night to get my wife up to speed before watching Winter Soldier and we were having the same problem with the dialogue. My sons had to keep adjusting the volume up and down, really irritating.

Perhaps part of the appeal is that it's the lead-in for Batman #400. If I remember right, this is still when stories began in Detective and were concluded in Batman, essentially making Batman a bi-monthly title. Seems like I remember reading that it was part of an effort to boost Detective's lagging sales. And I think - but correct me if I'm wrong - that Detective #566/Batman #400 was the last of those two-part stories. From that point on the stories in the two titles were independent of each other. Or it could just be the cool cover. I actually need a copy of this issue too.

Steven Spielberg and Harrison Ford returned for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. I wasn't real impressed with the result. While a director and star returning does provide a nice bit of continuity, it doesn't guarantee quality. That's the thing: I don't know of anybody who was actually waiting on pins and needles for a sequel to Blade Runner. I think everyone assumed it was one and done and was pretty happy with that. My point is Blade Runner is too much of a moneymaker to not do a sequel. ...... I just don`t see Hollywood leaving all the money on the table that a Blade Runner sequel would make. In what way is Blade Runner a "moneymaker"? From what I remember, the original movie was a box office disappointment. It's a cult movie. They have managed to squeeze more money out of it by releasing numerous cuts of the movie, but I can't imagine that's generated enough money to justify the budget of a new movie. And I'm still not getting where the demand is that would make a sequel a "moneymaker". As it's been pointed out here, fans of the original are leery of a sequel, the younger generation think the original is boring and have no interest. From what I gather they wouldn`t have made so many different versions on Blu-Ray and DVDS if they didn`t sell. It's a cult movie, it has a small but rabid following. I suspect Blade Runner fans are like Star Trek and Star Wars fans: they'll repeatedly buy the same thing over and over just because it has a new bell or whistle. They know they're being played by the studio and they hate the studio for it but they can't help themselves. And there's a world of difference between generating revenue from DVD sales and making a successful blockbuster movie. Since the original was a box-office dud, that's not much of a prediction. The new Tron movie grossed more than the original but I don't think it's considered a success either. Critics panned it, fans of the original were disappointed and I don't think the new audience was converted to die-hard Tron fans either. I disagree that there's a groundswell of new Blade Runner fans. The consensus from the comments here is that the younger generation think it's a boring fringe movie from the 80's that they can't even sit through. But I guess that's a difference of opinion, only time will bear out which is true.

Steven Spielberg and Harrison Ford returned for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. I wasn't real impressed with the result. While a director and star returning does provide a nice bit of continuity, it doesn't guarantee quality. That's the thing: I don't know of anybody who was actually waiting on pins and needles for a sequel to Blade Runner. I think everyone assumed it was one and done and was pretty happy with that. My point is Blade Runner is too much of a moneymaker to not do a sequel. ...... I just don`t see Hollywood leaving all the money on the table that a Blade Runner sequel would make. In what way is Blade Runner a "moneymaker"? From what I remember, the original movie was a box office disappointment. It's a cult movie. They have managed to squeeze more money out of it by releasing numerous cuts of the movie, but I can't imagine that's generated enough money to justify the budget of a new movie. And I'm still not getting where the demand is that would make a sequel a "moneymaker". As it's been pointed out here, fans of the original are leery of a sequel, the younger generation think the original is boring and have no interest.

Steven Spielberg and Harrison Ford returned for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. I wasn't real impressed with the result. While a director and star returning does provide a nice bit of continuity, it doesn't guarantee quality. That's the thing: I don't know of anybody who was actually waiting on pins and needles for a sequel to Blade Runner. I think everyone assumed it was one and done and was pretty happy with that.

Perhaps before resorting to a FDQ exit, a little introspection might be in order. You may not have intended it that way, but the phrasing of the question - "so there won't be any more updates this year" - could be read to suggest that MedicAR is slacking off on the job of updating the list. Since MedicAR is volunteering what is undoubtedly a considerable amount of time and energy to update that list, it's understandable that some might take exception to the question as it was presented.

To the original topic point: I must admit, when I saw the thread title I instantly thought "oh cool!" but with a moments pause, I really can't see how a sequel would be a good idea. The movie stands on it's own. It presents a theme and questions for the audience to ponder on their own. To have a sequel try and answer those questions for the audience would undermine the original (2010 is an apt comparison); for a sequel to raise more of the same questions would be redundant. For those who weren't there when this was released, it's hard to describe what a radical departure Blade Runner's depiction of the future was. I don't think it sat well with the general audience at the time. But it was ahead of it's time because the vast majority of science fiction movies have tried to copy Blade Runner's look to one degree or another. Even the the '89 Batman movie's Gotham was channeling Blade Runner. So if a sequel were made now - after all those imitators - I don't think it would stand out as cutting edge like the original. The general audience reaction would be "ho-hum, been there, done that".

One of the problems with Blade Runner is there is now, what? 6 different cuts of the movie. I have a soft spot for the original U.S. Theatrical cut because that's what the movie was when I was growing up. But the voice-over, while giving a noir 30's detective movie feel, tends to dumb the movie down a bit. And the ending feels exactly like what it is: tacked on. I haven't seen the Final Cut, but the digital restoration on Blu-Ray is supposed to be amazing. But I have seen the Director's Cut, and I actually think I prefer it to the original release. Just a word to prep you: the Director's Cut (and from what I've read of the Final Cut) are subtle films. There's several almost subliminal shots and not everything is spelled out. It requires the audience to think about what they're seeing. While the movie varies quite a bit from the book, if you've read the book and are familiar with it's themes it will help you understand the movie. When watching it for the first time, give it your undivided attention. It's an artful movie, meant to provoke thought and discussion. And it looks awesome!

I believe they turned off that functionality in one of the latest "upgrades". So they took away a feature that would help me as a seller determine whether a buyer is blowing sunshine up my bum? Sounds like typical eBay. Thanks for the info anyway.

How do I find what a buyer is currently bidding on and what he's won recently? I tried to search "by buyer" in the Advanced Search but all it's showing me is his feedback, his collections, his followers....everything except his bidding history - including the item he just won from me. I have a potential problem bidder so that's why I'm asking.

What happened in that sales thread was completely out of line. It's especially choice that one member is trying to take somebody to task for what he perceives is an "inappropriate" post while in the midst of performing a complete threadkrap himself.

For those who missed it: brownchikano has to explain why he has more than one eBay account

I assume you enjoyed it in the ironic pot-calling-the-kettle-black sort of way since brownchikano also got caught with his hand in the shilling cookie jar.

Just curious: now that the slab is in a 2 mil Mylar (which dimensions look a tad bigger than the slab) will the slab still fit in a CGC box?

I owe a belated kudos to both A-DONIS and jonjesper. A-DONIS helped me get my Nick Cardy signature on Aquaman #23 and jonjesper helped with Shatner's sig on Star Trek #5. In both cases, there was something that came up with either acquiring or prepping the book that caused me to rush and forget something. In each case they overcame my deficiencies without complaint, got the books done and both books look great! Both are total pros and would highly recommend their services to anyone!

That's not a plot, that's a release strategy.