Tom473

Okay, why wait until tomorrow for the next RAK? The bourbon is setting in and rather than dwell on all the negativity from last night, why not counteract some of it? Free shipping to CONUS (first $10 elsewhere) Ultimate Avengers Omnibus (Mark Millar)

Sorry, didn't see this while putting together my 'I'll take it', I'll still put together a RAK just the same.

if still available. I'm more of a DD fan than Spidey, but I see it is the same team that did DD Yellow so I'm intrigued. While I understand it is not necessary, I'll put together a RAK for tomorrow. PS - I'm getting drunk too.

About 2 years ago I committed to reading all Marvel comics starting from 1961 in continuity by month of release. What I don't have on hand in actual books, or in omnibus form, I read digitally. Kirby's output and quality is astounding in this period (I am up to April 67). As cliche as it sounds, Kirby's work truly crackles with black dot electricity, he was a futurist to rival all others in his detailed vision of the future world(s). Despite backseat quarterbacking on his style that many engage in, there are many more serious comic artists who recognize his pioneering vision and lasting contributions to the continued success of Marvel and the comics medium itself to this day.

I recently received my copy of the New Gods Artists Edition from IDW, I always loved him, but he is even more incredible than I ever realized looking at the beautiful pages in the 'raw'. Apologies in advance for being giving tree OT.

Correct. Chip gets a book off me for being scammed by some cokehead, and I am offering another to claim the brilliant statue from before! (thumbs u

Chip, after reading your Craiglist thread and some of your other posts, you were exactly the kind of good-hearted blue collar non-opportunist that came to mind, they do exist even if in the minority. My only hope is that threads like this can work for folks like you as well as all other honest boardies.

I hear you Harvey and I like the idea of PIF and giving tree, but if every offer is scrutinized on dollar value, to me, it misses the point and spirit of the thread. If every subsequent offer must be of equal or greater value, then how long before every thread like this eventually devolves into a high end circle jerk, instead of, 'oh I always wanted to read or have that in my collection, I'll take it' like a true giveaway? There needs to be some balance between the bottom feeder opportunists and the high end judgmental attitudes that sometimes come to bear.

You have to factor in the number of SS books being offered is probably going to come up a couple times in a month and while you wait the quick fingers grabbers may eclipse their month and grab the SS you wanted. As long as you see something that interested you I'd grab it and you will be back in the game in a month. I think the new rule to outlaw mystery boxes will keep things moving a lot quicker since people don't like a mystery when they are putting up a comparable book. So, for some people it's all about how much you can take and not at all what you can give. I see. I thought the intent was to post up equal or more than you take? People still want a really cool book so they can post up a even cooler book. Here in lies the dilemma. If this is truly about 'giving' then no one should care about which offer follows, but most do. The rub is that what is valuable varies, to a construction worker barely scraping up enough to put food on the table and still collect, putting up a $50 offer is no small potatoes, while to a lawyer that wouldn't bat an eye at posting a $300 slab, the $50 offer is . Is this thread truly about giving or outdoing the next guy? Both types of people are on this board and legitimately passionate about collecting, but can both coexist in a thread like this without it devolving into base accusation and name calling? Odds are against it. I've been lurking through the PIF thread and this one and I can't believe how difficult some boardies are when it comes to claiming and offering things. Practice common sense. If you claim something expensive offer something close to it. You know damn well what "something close to it" is so stop playing games. Can't offer something close to it? Don't claim it then. Want to cry about the notion that this should just be about "giving" and singing cumbaya around a campfire, well here you go then That's my point, if you have to offer something of similar value to it, then it is not 'giving' is it. I'm not poor, nor rich, I have some good stuff to offer, but if I am truly into giving, I would take great joy from the fact that somebody got something that they may not ever be able to afford on their own, why would I 'expect' that they offer something of similar value (beyond their means) on their own? I am not naive, and I am sure that bottom feeders exist, but I am not so cynical to assume that there are not good-hearted lower middle class (or lower) boardies that could receive the gift of a lifetime (in their eyes) and I kind of like that idea. I have seen every offer here and haven't grabbed any of them. I'm not posting out of self interest, just openly asking if this is truly a 'giving tree' or a 'reciprocating tree', if it is the latter, then the name of the thread should be updated accordingly.

You have to factor in the number of SS books being offered is probably going to come up a couple times in a month and while you wait the quick fingers grabbers may eclipse their month and grab the SS you wanted. As long as you see something that interested you I'd grab it and you will be back in the game in a month. I think the new rule to outlaw mystery boxes will keep things moving a lot quicker since people don't like a mystery when they are putting up a comparable book. So, for some people it's all about how much you can take and not at all what you can give. I see. I thought the intent was to post up equal or more than you take? People still want a really cool book so they can post up a even cooler book. Here in lies the dilemma. If this is truly about 'giving' then no one should care about which offer follows, but most do. The rub is that what is valuable varies, to a construction worker barely scraping up enough to put food on the table and still collect, putting up a $50 offer is no small potatoes, while to a lawyer that wouldn't bat an eye at posting a $300 slab, the $50 offer is . Is this thread truly about giving or outdoing the next guy? Both types of people are on this board and legitimately passionate about collecting, but can both coexist in a thread like this without it devolving into base accusation and name calling? Odds are against it.

This. If a company can't deliver on TATs, then they should offer a partial refund or some kind of credit on future submissions. It's the right thing to do.

For clarity, the user to be blocked is: mcooley2984 You can read Mike's thread for specifics, but the user is most certainly block worthy.

I stopped reading at the beginning when you decided to make a deal outside of eBay, pretty sure I know the ending.

How ironic, I nominate brownchikano and his shill account lachik509 for the blocked list, for inadvertently outing himself as a shill bidder in this gem: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=7797001&fpart=1

The 4 most recent eBay 'sold' auctions went for between $295 - $360.

My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic #12 Commemorative variant (celebrating 1,000,000 MLP comics sold), limited to a total print run of 12 copies. I only know because my daughter won it in the IDW coloring contest (seriously it's for my daughter).

Most of the Don/Maggie Thompson Collection being auctioned on Heritage was out of my price range. I was able to add this to my Frank Miller DD run last night. Very glad to have at least one book from this pedigree. (previous post deleted due to wrong picture)

The choice has more to do with Marvel selling its flagship properties to Fox (X-Men, FF) and Sony (Spidey) to avoid bankruptcy. Now they are left to work with what remains. Although, I wouldn't count them out no matter which IP they put on the screen, if you told me 10 years ago that they would develop the Avengers and surrounding characters into the cinematic powerhouses and interwoven universe they have created today, I would not have believed it. They have done a masterful job, and earned my price of admission until they prove otherwise.

I could be wrong, but I think you will be in the minority. I was a skeptic walking in. I didn't care for the first 3 films (enjoyed First Class) but DOPF was shockingly well done and entertaining beginning to end, light years better than all that came before. Great film,and a nice save by Fox.

Some of the recent posts here have been encouraging, so I'm going to give CGC another go and will let everyone know what comes back. I sent a large number of books to Joey a couple weeks ago, and I'm looking forward to his pressing service based on all the great reviews. I'm hoping CGC has finally made headway on the puddling issue.

I don't think anyone is saying the defect is anyone's responsibility other than CGC's. The fact is that CGC's decision to lower quality standards (even temporarily) can have second order effects for those who deal in CGC's product. Therefore, ethically, CGC should have been upfront with that decision. The impact to resellers could come in the form of decreased sales or resale value as awareness of the rampant defect grows, exacerbated by CGC's disinterested and defensive response to the concerns of collectors. Another impact to resellers could be, since most are not aware, unknowingly passing on defective cases to valued customers, then those equally unaware customers asking resellers for refunds/returns. Again, not something I advocate, just stating a potential consequence as each buyer is different. Yes, the reseller could then ban that buyer, so essentially they get doubly screwed by CGC, loss of a customer and defective merchandise. Bottom line, all parties (collectors, resellers, etc) have an interest in registering displeasure with the way CGC has handled the defect, lack of company transparency in notifying its customers of the problem it is experiencing, and not (apparently) aggressively pursuing the restoral of pre 2011 quality standards. Yes, resellers could ignore the problem by saying its all on CGC, but I doubt that would garner an effective resolution faster than by contacting CGC and asking what is being done to ensure quality now and in the future. The latter approach (especially by major resellers) is better for the health of the comic collecting, buying, and selling community as a whole. Minor grammar edit

I agree that the problem is CGC's to fix. However, when you essentially have a monopoly there is very little incentive to solve the problem. Third parties (major dealers) do not have a monopoly, and can potentially be impacted by CGC's decision to lower QC standards in the interim, while they work towards a solution (as far as we know - any updates?). The only way I see that will result in resolving the situation is for those third parties to make CGC aware that quality matters to them as much as the little guy. Sure, they could block their customer base, but that's a poor business model in the long run. Another thing to consider, I don't mind doing a reholder from time to time, and have never held a third party accountable for case condition, unless shipped in a negligent fashion (something you don't have to worry about from pros like HA and SC), but with the defect now impacting a majority of new slabs (over 70% on my recent submission) a reholder is not a serious option for those receiving a defective product from CGC directly or from a third party. The ball is undoubtedly in CGC's court, but unless customer displeasure is registered (both big and small) resolution may take much longer (if ever). I base this on CGC not being upfront with its customer base on the issue. No sellers were aware of it, and submitters are only told about the problem after the fact, and only upon requesting and being denied a reholder.

I contacted HA. To be clear, I had no intention of requesting a return, only to request back scans for more recently slabbed books (or those that have cratering). Like most sellers, they were unaware of the issue but very interested in learning about the defect and specifically asked what CGC's response to customers have been on the matter. I pointed them to the thread. There is no intention to penalize any third parties, merely to raise awareness of the issue - especially since CGC has been mum on the matter on the official website. It would be good to at least have a status update of where the troubleshooting stands. If larger customer bases query CGC on the issue, it may provide a greater business incentive for CGC to take the defects seriously, and work quickly to restore quality standards.

I received a slab from Heritage auctions today that was cratered (first time from HA, and I'm a regular.) I'm going to ask them to start providing images of the backs for books they're auctioning that have the CGC crater defect evident and point them to this thread. It was a Bronze Age book, but probably slabbed recently. I know it was probably just an optical illusion, but it made the ads on the back of the comic look wavy itself, almost akin to water damage (on an otherwise beautiful 9.8). Presentation matters, hope HA will agree. Most sellers I have asked about the defect were unaware, but very interested in learning more. If other members start asking other Ebay sellers and major dealers if the back of their books suffer from CGC crater problem, it may prompt a more professional response from CGC on the problem.

OK, I inspected the10 additional books I received back from CGC today. They were slabbed during the same week as my previous 20, but spent about 4 weeks in QC status instead of the 2 days for my other submission. Both were modern tier, and I believe the delay was due to the busy SDCC onrush. Of the10: 4 have smooth backs (inner wells) 6 have indentation defect evident. 2 of the 6 are not too bad, evident, but not overly pronounced. 4 are clearly "O"'d (puddled?), we should probably come up with a standard nomenclature. I vote cratered. I'm not sure why the Head grader described the defect as outward only, because they are clearly dents, not protrusions. I'm not going to bother calling CGC because they have made their stance on the issue clear, and I am going to trust that they are trying to isolate and resolve the problem. None of my older slabs (pre-2011) have this issue, so there has clearly been a change to the initial or boundary conditions in the sealing process. Whether it is material, equipment, personnel, or a combination thereof, I will leave to CGC to determine. I hope they can get their hands around it because it really does take away from the presentation of the books, and what is otherwise a very professional rep CGC has earned through the years. I do have one other concern beyond the presentation. If the original CGC position that the books themselves are not being harmed is based on a faulty assumption that the defect consists of protrusions and not dents, then CGC clearly needs to rethink its position. They are dents toward the book itself, not humps or bubbles that leave the rest of the well flat.