masterlogan2000

Another eBay seller just dropped some Australian price variants, including some Conan magazines. @Get Marwood & I, I don't know if you posted the full list of those magazines, so I'm not sure if any of these are new or if you already had them documented. Savage Sword of Conan #207, 208, 213 https://www.ebay.com/itm/Savage-Sword-of-Conan-207-Marvel-comics-Australian-price-variant-RARE/193088428227?hash=item2cf4f798c3:g:m2UAAOSwOTddctKI https://www.ebay.com/itm/Savage-Sword-of-Conan-208-Marvel-comics-Australian-price-variant-RARE/193088427106?hash=item2cf4f79462:g:~owAAOSws~ldctI4 https://www.ebay.com/itm/Savage-Sword-of-Conan-213-Marvel-comics-Australian-price-variant-RARE/193088424731?hash=item2cf4f78b1b:g:xgoAAOSwmLFdctHZ Conan Saga #78, 79 https://www.ebay.com/itm/Conan-Saga-78-Marvel-comics-Australian-price-variant-RARE/193088423258?hash=item2cf4f7855a:g:T7kAAOSw74ZdctEI https://www.ebay.com/itm/Conan-Saga-79-Marvel-comics-Australian-price-variant-RARE/193088423843?hash=item2cf4f787a3:g:3-oAAOSwsJddctFe Also listed were Spectacular Spider-man #204 and 205 and a Wolverine/Punisher Damaging Evidence #1, all three of which were already listed out.

I've had probably a hundred Wolverine #10s pass in and out of my personal collection over the years. I estimate that I've probably seen over ten thousand copies in total between conventions and general browsing on eBay. This is the first time I've ever seen anything like this. Right now on eBay there are about 200 Wolverine #10 auctions listed. Of those, there are over 25 Newsstand copies. Not a single one has marks like this. I don't buy the explanation that it may be a "common variant". It's possible that they didn't deduct for what they may have considered a manufacturing defect, but... man... what an ugly mark! I think something was just outright missed, as I thought a manufacturer's defect that large would have disqualified the book from getting a Blue label. Any chance for a closer shot of the UPC box?

A different seller on eBay just dropped another load of Australian price variants, including what appears to be a new title! @Get Marwood & I, do you mind posting the full, updated list of titles and issues you've recorded? Below are the books I think can be added: Nightstalkers #1 https://www.ebay.com/itm/NIGHTSTALKERS-1-BLADE-MIDNIGHT-SONS-HULU-RARE-AUSTRALIAN-PRICE-VARIANT/193031270741?hash=item2cf18f7155:g:88MAAOSwdVpdR3Th X-Force #6, 10 https://www.ebay.com/itm/X-Force-6-RARE-AUSTRALIAN-PRICE-VARIANT/193031266528?hash=item2cf18f60e0:g:pJkAAOSwd8hdR3Jk https://www.ebay.com/itm/X-Force-10-3rd-DEADPOOL-RARE-AUSTRALIAN-PRICE-VARIANT/193031272096?hash=item2cf18f76a0:g:Rv8AAOSwmUhdR3Xn Web of Spider-man #97 https://www.ebay.com/itm/WEB-OF-SPIDER-MAN-97-1st-KEVIN-TRENCH-NIGHTWATCH-RARE-AUSTRALIAN-PRICE-VARIANT/193031225379?hash=item2cf18ec023:g:kJwAAOSw0lldR2h- Marvel Tales #272, 276 https://www.ebay.com/itm/Marvel-Tales-272-Ron-Lim-Symbiote-Cover-RARE-AUSTRALIAN-PRICE-VARIANT/193031359415?hash=item2cf190cbb7:g:gigAAOSw4lldR49D https://www.ebay.com/itm/Marvel-Tales-276-SPIDER-KID-RARE-AUSTRALIAN-PRICE-VARIANT/192952528998?hash=item2cecddf066:g:SrQAAOSwkgZdBaUV

And then you can buy them back from the mother when she sells them again the next garage sale!

I read this from a different angle actually, though I see exactly where you're coming from too. I think a lot of people question whether this is the first offense to see if there is a pattern of abuse. If there is such a pattern, then that may sway the vote against the seller, REGARDLESS of the evidence in the current case. To analogize this similar to your examples... Let's say a man was convicted of theft last year. There was a recent robbery and this same man was arrested due to the crime being similar to what he was convicted of previously. Should we automatically assume this man is guilty? Should we punish him for the second crime because he was simply convicted of the first? That's at least how I read the inquiries into whether this was a first offense or not. Then again, I can see it your way as well. Regardless, asking whether this is a first offense only invites biases to the table. IMO, each case should stand on its own based on the evidence at hand.

You think someone has been reading this thread?

Hey, @Get Marwood & I... another person showing interest in the thread! @redsox1946, thanks for sharing! Do you have cover scans of those issues you can post? Not only would a number of us like to see those scans, but that is the current criteria for getting them added to the full list.

I wouldn't recommend going this route ever. What happens if/when the buyer doesn't win any other books? How will you collect the additional shipping charges? As far as eBay is concerned, they think that the buyer has paid in full. Afterall, the invoice was updated and the buyer sent in payment. In that case, you'd be out shipping and would either need to ship at a loss or cancel the order entirely (which counts against you as a seller when it comes to your seller ratings). In a rare instance, I'm going to agree with @RockMyAmadeus here. Putting myself in the buyer's shoes, the part where you state that he "must not have been around eBay for very long" would really have ticked me off. On top of the case already being filed against him, this is likely what set him off. I think this was both the point of escalation and no return.

@01TheDude, all sound advice. I wanted to point out that for everyone else, YMMV. My post office is great! Then again, I go there enough where the workers all know me and we're on friendly terms. Not all Post Offices have an area to place their boxes. During the holiday season, mine usually has a rack or bin sitting out to collect the prepaid boxes. However, most of the time this is not the case. Regardless, I always go up to the counter and get my boxes scanned in. I don't need a receipt necessarily, but I NEED that scan, especially if I'm selling on eBay. The policy on eBay these days is that all packages MUST be scanned in within the stated handling time (this is in addition to having the tracking number uploaded). This affects not only the criteria for Top Rated and Power Seller status, but they also hint that it can affect any open cases and your qualification for their Seller Protection money back guarantee. In any case, as long as I get my packages scanned in at the counter, I know they are put into the USPS system, and therefore I meet the requirement set by the very strict eBay rules.

Figured I'd give everyone the heads up, since I already own a copy. Hulk #8 $2.49 edition for a modest price. Condition is a little rough, but this would make a great placeholder. https://www.ebay.com/itm/Incredible-Hulk-8-Marvel-Nov-1999-Wolverine-vs-Hulk/254302925548?hash=item3b35a2b2ec:g:MpcAAOSwWnpdMeSg

That's a VERY interesting read. Thanks for sharing! @Get Marwood & I, looks like you have some covers to pull from their APE list variant page.

Thanks for posting this! I checked my store earlier today, and it didn't carry any of these packs. It's almost like WalMart (or the vendor) is repacking their comic repacks. I don't think it's much of a coincidence how similar the sticker for "Marvel Comics 7 for $10" is to the "DC Comics 10 for $10" that I posted earlier (and above for reference). I bet a lot of the unsold stock (for both the Marvel and DC packs) went back for further repacking and distribution. If these truly are "pay for scan" as discussed earlier on in the thread, then WalMart doesn't really have much to lose (just shelf space), and the vendor likely wants to move the product any way they can.

And I no longer have it... a deal was made for that copy.

A seller on eBay just dropped a number of Australian editions. There are a few that are needed for your list: Wolverine #67 https://www.ebay.com/itm/Wolverine-67-RARE-AUSTRALIAN-VARIANT-COVER-MARVEL-COMICS/163771273155?hash=item2621874fc3:g:TIUAAOSw495dJT7H Morbius #4, 7, 9 https://www.ebay.com/itm/Morbius-4-RARE-AUSTRALIAN-VARIANT-COVER-MARVEL-COMICS/163771276208?hash=item2621875bb0:g:ZlQAAOSwyn5c7Inz https://www.ebay.com/itm/Morbius-7-RARE-AUSTRALIAN-VARIANT-COVER-MARVEL-COMICS/163771276476?hash=item2621875cbc:g:pCIAAOSwpftc7ImL https://www.ebay.com/itm/Morbius-9-RARE-AUSTRALIAN-VARIANT-COVER-MARVEL-COMICS/163771277033?hash=item2621875ee9:g:7oAAAOSwOyxcz5lk

Do you care about condition much? Is VF acceptable, or do they all need to be minty fresh?

That's really interesting! I'm also not seeing any difference here. If that's the case, then this would be the very first Walmart 3-pack that didn't contain an exclusive and was simply just a repack of three already printed books. Then again, all the other books that have been released should be reviewed to see if we've missed anything. (If we pool all our info, maybe we could/should start a master list of sorts). I wonder if this was intentional on the Star Wars book, or if something got mixed up or a deadline missed to commission/modify the cover. It's also of note that this particular Star Wars comic seemed to be only 1 per case (whereas all the other packs were a minimum of 2).

I'd be very interested to see what this is. I had not noticed it myself, but hadn't made another trip to WalMart since my last post here.

This was discussed a bit earlier in the thread. For convenience, below is a link to a post I made in April addressing this same thing. Hopefully it helps. I'm not sure if I agree with this necessarily. I think we've established that all of the visible issues are WalMart exclusives. Most of them are current issues, released within the last month or two. I would bet that these actually have a very similar print date, but the distribution to WalMart stores (due to repacking and other logistics) is what causes any perceived delay in release. With that said, I would NOT consider these later printings, and would indeed consider them as variants. I like to think of these as store exclusives (i.e. Midtown, Unknown Comics, IG Comic Store, etc.), just that WalMart is a much bigger distributor. The closest thing we'd seen to this in the past was Hastings.

Technically he'd be out the cost of shipping plus the books he sent out.

In all of these Walmart packs, the two hidden issues are always random comics. They differ in every single pack, but generally contain 2nd printings. In other words, you never know what you're gonna get in any of these packs outside of the comic that is shown.

In all fairness, this was all laid out in the initial terms when he announced this. I don't think there's anything new here.

Don't worry... it's coming. (And only $14.99!) https://www.chimerascomics.com/product/the-great-comic-shop-giveaway/

Stopped by the local WalMart tonight to fill up some water and found that there are some new Marvel releases. What's interesting is that my store had more than a quantity of 2 of a couple of the issues (denoted below). So, don't believe all the eBay misinformation that these are limited to 2 per store. I'm not sure if someone got to these first or if they were just put out. I'm just listing the quantity of what remained. 2x Tony Stark: Iron Man #12 2x Fantastic Four #10 3x Symbiote Spider-man #1 3x Black Cat #1 1x Star Wars: Galaxy's Edge #1 2x Thanos #1 2x Guardians of the Galaxy Annual #1 2x Incredible Hulk #1 I didn't pick any of these up, as 1) none fit my collecting habits, and 2) at $9 each it's too much of a speculation risk for me. Small quantities of the Black Cat have sold well thus far on eBay, but I expect the market to be flooded by Friday with a race to the bottom on pricing. Granted, if anyone wants me to pick anything up (and it's still available), I'm open to that idea and can work something out. Below are some pics. I also included a photo of the new DC packs, which I think contain a bundle of four 100 Page Giant issues for $10.

Just a quick point of clarification... The current proposal suggests that the board member is already on the Probation List and that, if a nominator decides against the removal of a board member from that list, the community can decide to overrule the nominator and remove the member from probation with a 2/3rd majority vote. All very good points here, especially noting that the PL was created to warn (and therefore help protect) the community. It sounds like we're all in agreement that the community should have some say here. No single member should have 100% voting power over any other individual members on the PL. The nominator is free to voice their opinions, concerns, and reasoning as to why the nominee should be kept ON the PL, but those thoughts should only server to defend their case to the voting community (just as the nominee is given the opportunity to state their own case and defend themselves). The current discussion regarding the most recent failed transaction is the side-story here, but does illustrate the point that many people have differing opinions as to how this should be handled. Ultimately, the decision should be left to the community, and we just need to hammer out the details.