Jaydogrules

Yes, plenty of those. Those always come back with "white pages". -J.

You don't know how many books I have submitted. -J.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. -J.

Nope. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxing "Although unsightly and a negative factor in the value of the paper item for collectors, foxing does not affect the actual integrity of the paper." And I didn't say foxing "causes" dust or sun shadows. I said those three things can (and do) cause the appearance of edge tanning, which has nothing to do with the alleged "PQ" (paper suppleness) cited on the label. -J.

This must be why a couple people are acting as though I'm kicking their dog by pointing out that the book is actually a reprint. I didn't originally realize it either until another boardie pointed it out to me in the modern variant thread. -J.

CGC doesn't dictate the market or reality with their labels. You can't be serious with that. I don't work for Image but I read their press release about the book. Here it is again for you: https://summits.diamondcomics.com/Home/1/1/54/787?articleID=118463 And here's how you read UPC symbols on the back of the books to know which printing is which: 00111 March - First Print 00112 March - Second Print 00113 April - Third Print 00123 April - Diamond Retailer Summit Reprint (third print, second cover) First digit is issue number, second digit is cover version, third digit is the printing number. Here is a link to the blue lettered title third printing: http://www.ebay.com/itm/SAGA-1-3rd-printing-VF-/122727333986?epid=2169601782&hash=item1c931e8062:g:6h0AAOSwjL5ZD9bh Here is a link to the "RRP" cover of the third printing: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Saga-1-Cgc-9-8-Retailer-Incentive-Edition-Image-Comics-RRP-Signature-Series-/222633618952?hash=item33d5ff6e08:g:Q18AAOSwOMdZXWpJ Notice they both have the "3" (third printing) as the third digit. You can of course choose to believe in whatever you want, just don't mind that the facts disagree with you. -J

THIRD PRINTING, publishing date 4/12: -J.

This isn't a matter of an opinion, and yes, they do (as does Image, who released it): First printing, publishing date 3/12: -J.

The "RRP" is not a "variant" of the first printing, first issue. It is a third printing with a different cover that was sent out to attendees (ie, the "retailers") who attended the summit. If you want to call this third printing a "variant" of the other third printing with the blue lettered title, well I suppose that would be technically accurate. But the book itself is still officially a reprint. The fact that it has a LATER PUBLISHING DATE than the first prints alone tell you it is a REPRINT, no matter what kind of linguistic gymnastics you try to perform to contort it into something that it is not. And guess what, now that I think about it, the later publishing date also means that it is GUARANTEED the book has a different interior indicia from the first printing (otherwise CGC would not have separated it from the first printing and paired it with the third printing with the other cover on the census), so that answers that question. One last thing, the book wasn't "available" anywhere, it was sent out to the retailers who elected to attend the summit after the fact, it was mailed out to them. Try actually reading the link on the subject. You are literally creating a false narrative that is directly contradicting Diamond, Image, CGC, and the book itself because you don't like that this book is a reprint for some reason. Sorry, but it is what it is. -J.

Yes, I am quoting and linking all the authorized promotional materials pertaining to the book, calling it exactly what it is (a THIRD PRINTING) but I need to admit I'm "wrong". Got it. But did you notice how CGC pairs the "RRP" reprint with the third printing on the census ? That's not a coincidence. I was also going to go into how the completely made up print number of "500 copies" is easily disproved by that same public advertisement for the book, but at this point I think it might physically pain you, so I'll let you see if you can find it in the solicit yourself. Because it's in there. -J.

https://summits.diamondcomics.com/Home/1/1/54/787?articleID=118463 Image Comics: Saga #1 Third Printing (Special Retailer Cover) -J.

These guys kind of like the cover too. http://screenrant.com/greatest-batman-comic-book-covers/ -J.

I don't need to read the indicia, the UPC on the cover calls it a THIRD PRINTING. You know how to tell the difference between printings/covers by the UPC codes right ? Image called it a THIRD PRINTING in its solicitation via Diamond for the summit that it was advertised for. The cover to this THIRD PRINTING was special for the summit. Not complicated. That's why it has a different, later, publishing date. That's why CGC separates it on the census. It is a THIRD PRINTING. This is neither debatable nor deniable, though I'm sure you will continue to do so anyway. You will do so alone. Toodles! -J.

Who has told anybody to "invest" in comics, and outside of what I decide to put in a sig line, you don't know what I own. This is a hobby, one that's supposed to be fun. You sound way too angry to be having fun. -J.

Keep living the dream dude. -J.

Here's the press release from Diamond about your third printing comic: https://summits.diamondcomics.com/Home/1/1/54/787?articleID=118463 -J.

^^^ You kind of sound like a guy who regrets selling his hard to come by 9.8 Tec 880 too soon. This is why I never sell anything. -J.

+1 And last I checked, striking, standout Joker covers were kind of a thing in this hobby. -J.

Hmmmm.... debatable. -J.

People who collect the Tec run and Joker cover collectors are holding this book- at least the 9.8 slabs. That's why you always see so few available (if any). And it will be tough to find them in the raw in 9.8 condition, as it is, less than 1 out of there on the census has pulled a 9.8, which is a very low percentage for a modern. -J.

After the first 15 minutes or so I really liked it. Not anywhere near enough to pay extra to see it, but I suspect CBS will cry uncle on that sooner or later. My only real complaint about the show is the design of the bridge is completely impractical, with a bunch of open, empty space. No one would ever design something like this. It looks more like the lobby of a fancy hotel than the bridge of a vessel. -J.

Not as big of a milestone as some of the other recent ones, but Homecoming will pass GOTG1's domestic box office by the end of the week. That will move it up to #6 on all time MCU domestic grosses, and it's already at #5 all time worldwide behind the Avengers movies and Iron Man 3. And in other news, Homecoming is Sony's fourth highest grossing film of all time, behind only the first three Spider-Man movies. Well done, Spidey. -J.

Which is why shilling, very unfortunately, works, and why people keep trying it. Fake auctions with fake prices on a TV property with a cult following created a buzz in the comic book community, even though the series itself does not sell particularly well. Then bandwagon picked up some steam which led to some legitimate sales that enshrined the earlier fake ones. I don't think there is a single legitimate auction of any issue of this book on eBay that has closed for over $500. Sure you have a couple convenient "buy-it-now's" on there but those are easier to fake than auctions. At some point though there will have to be enough real buyers to sustain these artificially inflated prices. That's when we'll find out how popular this property really is, or whether it was simply propped up by pump and dumpers. -J.

I know that that "can" happen. Not so sure that did happen here though. I suppose it's just bad luck that all of the major tell-tale signs of blatant and rampant market manipulation all seem to be conspiring at once to make this series look bad. Even the Ryan variant looks to have had the same two 9.6 copies sell four times in three months earlier this year as well. If it was just one thing (a couple of duplicate listings on GPA) okay that can often be explained. If it's two things (multiple duplicate listings on GPA), that might be a coincidence. If it's three things (multiple books with multiple duplicate listings on GPA), that is suspicious. If it's four things (a couple of shilled auctions of raw copies on ebay), that is scandalous. If it's five things (every auction of every raw copy coordinated and shilled by the same group of people in a 30 day period) then that is not only market manipulation, but wire fraud, and possibly a RICO violation. -J.

Just looking at one of these other books with sufficient sales data on GPA, I am seeing the same kind of sketchy "sales" activity I do on the 1:50 (as I suspected I would). That Four Color Grails variant has had the same two 9.8 copies "sell" seven times since late May. Unfortunately this is just reinforcing my thoughts on what's going on with this title. -J.