namisgr

I thought the discussion revolved around product sales. A proper comparison of indirect relevance to product sales would be for copies of non-key ordinary run comics from titles of each publisher, include both multiple issues per title and multiple titles per publisher, and span multiple years post-1964. Another would be to compare dealer's stock numbers of raw comics between the two publishers for that same 1965-1975 time period, as one indication of what is still in circulation.

If you've attended any comic convention and observed more raw post-1964 SA and BA DC for sale than Marvels of the same time period, let everybody know. The prevalence of Marvel slabs in the census for that time period, even for books of comparable market value, is merely independent evidence supportive of the incontrovertible from comic show after comic show and dealer after dealer. Simply put, there are many more Marvel comics than DCs in circulation this millennium from that time period. It was true as early as the mid-1970s, when I began attending comic shows. The rest of your blather about 'science' (which this matter is most assuredly not) and being 'irresponsible' and demanding 'proof' and the like miss the mark, which the multiple layers of evidence provide. Your argument doesn't meet any of what you've demanded of others. I was 11 years old in 1965, and by then all the kids I knew who read comics were no longer buying Archie and Harvey and only getting the occasional DC, with Marvel comics transcendent. The characters were more human, the stories built a universe rather than being erased at the end of an issue as an imaginary tale, the art was more dynamic, and the vibe of the bullpen and letters pages more fun. A lot of that was Stan's doing, and explains some of the love those of my generation who became regular Marvel buyers and readers feel for the man's work then and there.

The comparison between the numbers of certified books from Marvel and DC in a particular time period is informative, as they go beyond any sales figures that you believe may be corrupted by their recording practices. And the fact is that from the 1965-1969 period when Stan and colleagues collaboratively made Marvel more appealing to older adolescents and teens there are more Marvels in the census than DCs. It also holds true for the early to mid 1970s. And finally, someone attending multiple conventions likely sees that among the dealers selling their vintage material, there are more boxes of back issue unslabbed Marvels than there are of DCs overall. It strongly suggests that, in these particular time periods, Marvel sold more comics than DC.

If only there were census data that could provide evidence whether there were substantial differences between the numbers of particular titles in circulation during the times comparing sales of Kirby titles at Marvel and then a year or two later at DC, or between the two major publishers as a whole during any time period between the early 1960s through the mid 1970s....

It looks to me like one of the clouds of the cover art.

To a different Thor:

I began collecting undergrounds featuring my favorite creators in the 1970s, and continued sporadically for decades not for their investment potential but for the love and appreciation of the storytelling, points of view, and art, all of which are distinctly different from books from the major comics publishers. In 2021 I sold the bulk of the collection here on the boards. The price appreciation for these books was modest, but there's a dedicated group of collectors and the sell through from my thread was outstanding:

The grade of the book doesn't seem to match the grade on the label. Add to that the label can't be verified in the CGC database and there are enough red flags that I would choose to stay away.

The audit rate for taxpayers earning less than $500,000 in annual income is below 0.2%. And there are plenty of common mistakes that can trigger audits, making submission of a few thousand dollars worth of collectibles sales with a rough good-faith estimate of cost basis and so net profit extremely unlikely to trigger one. As the IRS loses billions in legally owed taxes from compliance failures, that's a lot of lost revenue the agency would like to at least partially recapture. And, as mentioned already, they're getting increased resources to go after the major contributors to compliance failure, the top income earners and the large and highly profitable corporations that pay single digit tax on their profits, no tax at all, or in some cases no tax accompanied by a refund such as Tesla.

Gross income must be at least $13,850 for a single filer and $27,700 for married filing jointly in order for a tax return to be required for persons under age 65. https://www.hrblock.com/tax-center/income/other-income/how-much-do-you-have-to-make-to-file-taxes/

Actually, the IRS just this fiscal year received an infusion of money in order to upgrade their digital systems and provide resources to enforce legally owed taxes on the wealthiest individuals. It's estimated that the IRS loses hundreds of billion dollars a year in compliance failures on legally owed taxes by the top 1% of income earners.

Winner for the most black picture frame issues. Monster titles were published bi-monthly, and had surprisingly few black covers.

Nobody thinks this is a game, excepting perhaps people who only reveal new e-mail accounts with satirical names like mariafartaroma.hotmail.com and give out cloak and dagger in place of straightforward and useful information. The concerns here include being led down a primrose path that turns out to be worthtless, or worse still, costly, by people whose actions are not the most direct and likely to achieve successful resolution of the multiple thefts. In this regard, real full names and contact information that facilitate due diligence by the aggrieved would be a good start.

Catalina and Flake. Has a kind of Starsky and Hutch, Cagney and Lacy, Abbott and Costello kind of vibe. Continued good luck to all those having had their comics stolen getting satisfactory and fair resolution, in the form of the books being returned or receiving compensation in full for their value.

Yes, it is possible to have a FedEx delivery routed to your local hub for pickup.

Grading is done expeditiously, and the logging of graders notes is thought to be a very short process that's neither comprehensive nor done with perfection. As far as this particular comic goes, the assigned grade looks appropriate based on the generally very sharp appearance but the slight corner wear visible on the scans provided.

Maybe like this:

That brings back a lot of memories, as the Phil Seuling NYC show in '75 was my first big comic con. While I still have that program, it doesn't have the cool collection of autographs yours does - instead, I had creators sign comics of theirs that I brought with for the occasion or purchased at the show. I remember that none of them charged to autograph a book, and they universally seemed happy to do so, soaking in the joy expressed for their work by those who talked to them. Being a show in New York, where the publishers were based, there was a head-spinning number of creators at the show, all willing to sign pieces the fans brought: Kirby, Steranko, Stan, Neal Adams, Barry Smith, Wrightson, George Perez, Claremont, Sinnott, Giacoia, and on and on. I also had Bill Gaines sign my copy of Mad #100. Several of my books autographed at that show have been posted here before. Here's two of them that spent over 40 years as special pieces in my collection, now sold off along with the rest of my SA and magazine collections:

I don't think it's that much of a fall. Looking in the Heritage archives, they auctioned an 8.0 last June. It sported a 'CVA exceptional' sticker. Sold for $312,000.

Heritage will collect 20% (or whatever their going rate is now) from the buyer. I'd expect the seller to lose that juice, but not anything more. And with a book this valuable, the seller might also negotiate for a percentage of the buyer's fee. So I'm with you that something on the order of between 5 and 10% of the hammer price is likely. Being the only 9.8 in the CGC census, there's no telling what the book might fetch on Heritage, even though it sold last September on another auction site.

Music to musical Monkees

Monsters to Munsters

This ish is frequently miswrapped with the front cover going onto the back. Yours has really sweet cover alignment.

Actually, this thread would be where everyone else who's not you tries to post their opinions on Stan Lee's contributions to Marvel. And having been a comic book reader since the early '60s, mine are both well formed and informed about that era. As for 1978 and beyond, I had nothing to say about it. As for Kirby and Ditko, I had nothing to add about them, either, my opinion being concentrated on Stan's vital role in giving Marvel comics a unique and popular personality as it became the most popular comics publisher with young adults in the '60s and early '70s. That impact is still felt today, as among collectors over the past three decades it's been Marvel comics that have dominated the Silver Age collecting hobby, as the CGC census and time spent at any comic convention can attest. As for your opinion, it's well articulated elsewhere already through dozens if not hundreds of posts. That contradicts your mention of being suppressed from posting. Here, a place for other posters with differing opinions and the space to voice them would be respectful.