Jaydogrules

Thank you. -J.

Does he even do commissions anymore ? -J.

I've been keeping up. And I deliberately didn't quote your post directly because I didn't want you to think I was singling you out on it. But...... the one biggest problem with folks who constantly talk about "bubbles"- and this is in any investment class, mind you- is that they have the luxury of screaming "bubble bubble bubble" for weeks, months, years even, often with little to no context, and then get to say how "right", "smart", and "prescient" they were when or if the "bubble" ever bursts (or even just deflates). So it puts those folks in a very comfortable position of being able to claim being "right" at some possible indeterminate point in the distant future, whilst cloaking themselves in a self righteous "I'm just telling everyone to be careful" taint before hand, and even more annoying "see, look I told you so" afterwards (assuming it ever happened). At the end of the day, things will play out how they play out, and no one, not even people who have been in the hobby for 80 years, can say even what a "bubble" would constitute, let alone whether or not there is one. Hell there are many chicken littles running around out there who think the entire hobby is in a "bubble" and they have been saying that constantly for at least seven or eight years now. And here we still are, them being wrong for seven years now, probably rooting for a "crash" deep down inside just so they can finally say, not only were they "right", but "right" along. As ludicrous as that sounds. It really is all quite silly when you think about. "Collect and let collect" is my new official philosophy. -J.

That marvel chipping is actually pretty minor, that book, all other things considered, should still do pretty well. Maybe $45k-ish? And I don't know what an "artificial bubble" even is. That just smells like another made up "hater term". Demand is either present or it is not. When demand spikes, prices spikes. If demand wanes, prices will wane. Markets are cyclical and AF 15 is in a bullish one right now. Just like pre Robin Tecs are. Just like lots of GA Wonder Woman is (though, perhaps, for different reasons). None of this is rocket science. -J.

+1 This. *(Full disclosure, I own both in a 6.0, not that I thought people had to actually own a book in order to talk about it or have an opinion on it.)

Whoa. Raw copy breaks $1000. http://www.ebay.com/itm/AMAZING-SPIDER-MAN-300-NM-ORIGIN-1ST-APP-VENOM-HIGH-GRADE-WHITE-PGS-/302342940902?hash=item46650b28e6:g:yYcAAOSw1~JZOCNS -J.

Notice how his signature is in blood in the bottom right hand corner. Pretty awesome. -J.

The detail on that is sick. You can tell he's put some time in this one. -J.

-J.

-J.

By any and all accepted publishing standards and terms it's officially a second printing (regardless of whatever "narrative" you want to believe in). -J.

Yes you could add the plates if Goodman already had 800,000 covers printed (I find that unlikely, since the narrative he was surprised by the quick sell outs of the first prints and it would be senseless to pre print a million copies of an untested book with "oct" on it to then only release a fraction of them "just to see what happens"). But changing the plates around (the date of release, no less) and doing another printing still means you are doing a second printing. See "#5" here for more info. http://www.travelinlibrarian.info/writing/editions/ -J.

Exactly what "machine" would they have been re-run through ? That's not how printing presses work. Sorry. And even if they were re-run through some mysterious 1930s magical machine that specifically prints black stamps and changes the date of release to a later date, the November copies would still not be considered "first printings". -J.

This is contrary to the accepted narrative (and the most likely scenario). Plus, 80,000 printed copies which were then released and distributed are far too many to constitute a "mistake". The fact that the date of release was what changed (not a "minor" or non-substantive change by any stretch of the imagination in the world of publishing) to a month later kills your argument every single time. It is literally the difference between a "first print" and a second print. -J.

Damn. That legit looks painful. -J.

I agree, prices will likely settle, doubtful before the movie though, and also depending on well it is received. Venom is experiencing something of a renaissance in comics too right now, so even $2000 could end up being the new floor, with or without a perfect movie. Speaking of which, another 9.8 popped for $2500: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Amazing-Spider-Man-300-CGC-9-8-New-case-Rare-White-pages-1st-Venom-Hottest-book-/222530146607?hash=item33cfd4912f:g:DZ8AAOSwDiBZLqls And 9.6's are breaking $800 now: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Amazing-Spiderman-300-CGC-9-6-White-Origin-1st-Appearance-VENOM-NEW-/322544344206?hash=item4b19241c8e:g:aYAAAOSwY3BZNiAN -J.

Goodman didn't need to put "second printing" on there. Changing the publication date on the front cover was sufficient. Superman 1 reprints don't all say "reprint" either. Does the Batman 1? I doubt that was a "thing" back then in the hobby's infancy. Also, adding a different interior indicia would have required producing a different plate just for that. Making a whole new one. And Goodman was cheap , remember ? As far as when comics going back to press, and there being no differences, so who could tell or no either way, again, what does that have to do with this discussion? Marvel 1 went back to press and it does have differences. It's second printing is easy to identify. It doesn't matter if it was the next day or next week or next year. It doesn't matter how or where the first printings were distributed compared to how the second printings were distributed. Obviously the second printings of Marvel 1 were not designed to be construed as "part of the same print run". Goodman changed them. Again, the different publication dates kill you every time. Somebody changed (added) printing plates in between print runs, printed a second batch of copies and then distributed them after the first printings. -J.

This is just another way of saying "first print" and "second print". The fact that one has a later publication date will forever be the biggest stumbling block to anyone reasonably trying to call the November copies "first state" copies. They are not. -J.

If that was printed and distributed at the same time it could be considered a "variant". Is the cover date the same as the 10 cent version? I'm assuming so. If it was printed and distributed a month later, with its month of release altered to reflect its second printing date and release then it's a reprint like the November marvel 1. And no, the black slug would not have necessarily "obliterated" the October date on the plate. Comic books have all kinds of shades and nuances and layering of colour. Why can you see through some black slugs ? Simple- the plate needed to be re-inked on some copies that made it out anyway. I'm sure quality control was not more important to Goodman than speed at the time. -J.

Yes, you are correct. A printing press is not like a Xerox machine. You can't put your thumb on the glass to black out something on something you're copying. The plates are what they are and will print the same way every time. I m not sure how expensive it would be to print a black dot. It's Certainly more cost effective than ordering an entirely new plate and reprinting it that way. If goodman was as cheap as history says, what I am describing to you is in fact the cheapest and fastest way for him to achieve what he was trying to do. And again, either way, even running 800,000 pre printed covers back through a printer (something that would have been extremely difficult and also, very cost ineffective) would still relegate the November copies to "second state". You simply cannot add or change plates around, then print it again, and still call it a first state document. -J.

Nope. The plates are the plates. The October date was still there. So it still got printed. The black slug, being added to the press later after the fact, was also printed. Technically, even if what you originally said was true, that would still make the November copies "second state". Once you "stop the presses", change the plates around, add something, or take it away and print something again, it is no longer considered a "first state" document. -J.

Again , how a printing press works is not an "opinion". Or debatable. Here let me make this analogy to make it really crystal clear. Classic artists used to create etchings in copper plates. They would then forward those plates to be printed. Those etchings are considered original, first state pieces of art. Oftentimes the artist would instruct the printer to destroy the copper plate after running off however many were ordered. They would do this in order to prevent any subsequent "states" of the piece from being produced, thus increasing the demand for that one first state. Sometimes however they would not order the copper plate be destroyed. Any subsequent striking of that plate would be a second state, third state, etc. Obviously the first state strikes will always be the most valuable and desired. Goodman obviously still had the cover plates of Marvel 1 and simply ordered a re-strike when he saw how well the first prints were received. But the november copies are quite plainly second printings. It really is just common sense and the most likely explanation, even removing the explanation of how printers work. Should the reprints be worth less than the first prints with marvel 1? Yes of course. Do you think by saying that I'm saying the second prints should be worthless ? I'm assuming this is why you insist on believing in this baffling idea that a million copies of an untested book were printed, specifically with an October release date for some reason, only then not release all of them, wait a month, and then manually change 800,000 covers after the fact, to release a month later. Not to mention why you feel the need to try to personally insult me. Resorting to attacking the arguer and not the argument is bush league, and yeah, you're better than that. I'm happy you have a copy of the November printing of Marvel Comics 1. I gave props to Ameri as well. I can assure you that I am not bummed by any book anyone owns. That's just silly . If I thought an action 1 was worth what they sell for I would buy one tomorrow. That has nothing to do with this conversation. But and own what you like is what I always say. -J.

Fair enough. I just have a problem with someone calling someone else a "troll" simply because that other person is saying something they disagree with, not to mention also backing it up with a knowledge and understanding of the printing process. Until that comment, followed up by (natch) in typical juvenile pile on schoolyard fashion by Mr. Bedrock, the discussion was indeed generally quite civil. -J.

Gator, with due respect, again, that's not how the printing process works. The plates for the cover already existed. Goodman placed the black slug over the existing plates on the reprint. He placed a small "nov" plate above it to keep the book current for its November second printing. It really is quite simple and not the least bit convoluted. -J.

So....no actual facts from you then. Got it. I'm annoyed with "butt-hurt" passing for a valid response that anyone expects to be taken seriously. Guess we all have our little annoyances on these boards from time to time. -J.