Jaydogrules

Yes a terrible looking Voldy 4.0 sold for more than an even worse looking (and probably over-graded) CGC sold for a month later during the holidays. I didn't say Voldy "always" sells for less. I said it regularly does. Which it does. And I'm flattered you think my opinions can dramatically impact the hobby so much. Maybe you should PM me the talking points that you think I should be covering. -J.

So putting aside the fact that the Voldemort 3.0 only sold for $650 more than a CGC 2.5 and that Voldy regularly sells for a 10-25% discount to comparable CGC, are you saying that you believe there is only about a $750-$1750 bump from a CGC 2.5 to 3.0? (Not asking in a sarcastic way, I'm genuinely interested if that's what you are saying. ). -J. Yeah, I wouldn't say that's an unreasonable gap, but, of course, we have to throw in all the usual provisos about how the strengths and weaknesses of a particular book can affect prices. There was a recent sale of a 3.5 OW-W for $11,353. I don't remember that book and perhaps it has some shortcomings that explain the low price. Still I would be surprised if the op couldn't find a 3.0 he would be happy with well below $12K. Not to venture into forbidden territory, but I don't see the other company's 3.0 as having been overgraded -- but I'm going entirely on the look of the front cover. -J.

So putting aside the fact that the Voldemort 3.0 only sold for $650 more than a CGC 2.5 and that Voldy regularly sells for a 10-25% discount to comparable CGC, are you saying that you believe there is only about a $750-$1750 bump from a CGC 2.5 to 3.0? (Not asking in a sarcastic way, I'm genuinely interested if that's what you are saying. ). -J.

I missed that too and can't find it. Linky? -J. ASM 688 9.8 SALE Thanks! That was listed and sold so fast I didn't even get a chance to get a notification from ebay. Makes one wonder if the seller left some money on the table. -J. 1K over last sale would make me bust a nut.. True dat. But in fairness, that last sale was a year and a half ago. -J.

I missed that too and can't find it. Linky? -J. ASM 688 9.8 SALE Thanks! That was listed and sold so fast I didn't even get a chance to get a notification from ebay. Makes one wonder if the seller left some money on the table. -J.

I thought this conversation would be over since GPA has chimed in. My "argument", such as it is, was actually an opinion in response to a direct question from the OP to me. Sqeggs also offered an opinion referencing GPA which I pointed out was missing a sale, for whatever reason. You decided to offer your opinion (also based on incomplete data) while also attacking me (again) for whatever reason. Now that GPA will be updated to reflect that missing 3.0 sale of $13.5K, and taken together with the sale of the 2.5 for $10,250 yesterday, do you still stand by your current value estimate of a CGC 3.0 of $10k-$10.5k? -J. Yes, I 100% stand behind my statements, though you've (go figure) misrepresented them. I said MV was likely $10.5-$12.5K and encouraged the OP to shoot for $10.0K-$10.5K, sparing the seller some fees in the process. Now, back to this sale you keep touting.... THAT SALE DID NOT HAPPEN. Note that GPA would have ultimately caught this anyways, because the regular data feeds will reverse sales that are cancelled or don't complete for any reason (I suppose the exception is if the seller is a shill and chooses not to cancel the deal and get his fees returned). This particular AF15 did NOT close, just as I've asserted from the beginning. When a sale doesn't show up under sold listings under a global search (within the appropriate window of time), then that's a pretty good clue. BUT, because I'm sure you'll just keep arguing, I emailed the seller asking about the book. He noted the book was still available and is still trying to sell it. Perhaps I'll see if I can negotiate a price for he OP on it (OP - shoot me a PM and I'll see what can be done). I've shared all this with George @GPA too, and he has ultimate decision of course....but I trust their judgement, and think they do a fine job, managing the data in this (not-so-easy) space. Yes, ComicLink data would be nice to be in the database, but that has been discussed ad nauseoum and Its not GPA's fault. Jay, Ive seen you blast others time and time again for promoting their agenda, arguing price increases for particular books......you hear that sound? That's the hypocrisy meter chiming a new record.......you're doing exactly the same thing (with AFs) and have been forever. Hmmmm, isn't AF15 you're top 2-3 most valuable book? In case you have forgotten let me repeat myself one more time... I DONT SELL BOOKS HAVE NEVER SOLD BOOKS AND PORBABLY NEVER WILL, God willing. THEREFORE I DON'T CARE WHAT THEY ARE "WORTH". I have pointed out numerous books that were artificially raised in value because of shilling. I have pointed out AF 15 scams. You seem determined to discredit this one sale for some reason to be "right". What exactly does it prove? It proves nothing. Because the fact remains that you did not see the sale. GPA did not pick up the sale (for the reasons George stated). Their algorithms don't pick up every ebay sale (for the reasons George stated). You stated that if it is not in GPA it did not happen. And that is still a patently incorrect statement. If you decided to take the time to further investigate this one sale (after I alerted you to it), then good for you man. I didn't do that. I simply reported in good faith one apparent ebay sale that nobody else (included GPA) seemed to catch in response to the OP who specifically asked "me" what "I" thought about a CGC 3.0. Recognizing that sale seemed "high" I said $12k-$13k. You evidently at least partly agree with that range. So what exactly is the point of all the petty sniping? -J.

I missed that too and can't find it. Linky? -J.

GPA doesn't. GoCollect.com does. GoCollect's data is relatively recent though, while GPA goes back over a decade. How much does GPA charge for their monthly membership? Looks like GoCollect only has data going back to 2014. Hopefully, GPA will add in the data for Voldemort's sales results, otherwise they would be capturing an even more limited picture going forward as compared to before. They don't data mine for PGX either and that doesn't seem to make much of a difference. I'd be happy if they collected CGC data from ComicLink and some of the larger private dealers though .... -J.

Thanks Jay - as you'll note, the 3.0 listing wasn't identified as a CGC book in its title (not even the grade was mentioned). Hence why it wasn't picked up. I'll get it into GPA shortly. Does anybody know if they also collect the slabbed sales for the Voldemort graded books? GPA does not at this time. -J.

I thought this conversation would be over since GPA has chimed in. My "argument", such as it is, was actually an opinion in response to a direct question from the OP to me. Sqeggs also offered an opinion referencing GPA which I pointed out was missing a sale, for whatever reason. You decided to offer your opinion (also based on incomplete data) while also attacking me (again) for whatever reason. Now that GPA will be updated to reflect that missing 3.0 sale of $13.5K, and taken together with the sale of the 2.5 for $10,250 yesterday, do you still stand by your current value estimate of a CGC 3.0 of $10k-$10.5k? -J.

That is utterly false. And good luck trying to find any CGC 3.0 slab for $300-$850 less than what a Voldemort slab just went for. -J. This sale you're trying to promote as gospel doesn't even appear on ebay ain any sold listing.....FYI. And your last statement is just silly, because the last sale is not the only data point that matters....... for example, a cgc 4.0 sold for $13K recently and a Voldy 4.0 sold for $17.0K. Now I agree that on balance the cgc market price is higher, but that's irrelevant to my point; that there are a whole lot more (data) points to be looked at. And since you're apparently so knowledgable on GPA (without a subscription, no less), then show us some sales that actually closed on ebay that GPA doesn't capture. would be happy to engage George to join this conversation. George will be the first to tell you that they don't capture everything. In fact, he gladly welcomes and new or different data to be brought to his attention if it was missed or was incorrect from any of the sources they receive their points from. Also, this 2.5 sale just happened yesterday: http://item.ebay.co.uk/252259773839?item_hash4=965bc96a&LH_Complete=1&LH_BIN=1&LH_BO=1&_ipg=200&_pgn=1&rc=nt&rmvSB=true And here's the 3.0 sale from earlier: http://item.ebay.co.uk/221929147545?item_hash4=8447b353&LH_Complete=1&LH_BIN=1&LH_BO=1&_ipg=200&_pgn=1&rc=nt&rmvSB=true So even accounting to the standard market fluctuations, and considering that a 2.5 just went for $10,250 (only $600 less than what a Voldemort 3.0 just went for), I doubt any CGC 3.0 could be had for less than the $12k-$13k. Just my opinion of course. -J. Thanks Jay - as you'll note, the UK listing wasn't identified as a CGC book in its title (not even the grade was mentioned). Hence why it wasn't picked up. I'll get it into GPA shortly. Happy new year by the way George. -J.

That is utterly false. And good luck trying to find any CGC 3.0 slab for $300-$850 less than what a Voldemort slab just went for. -J. This sale you're trying to promote as gospel doesn't even appear on ebay ain any sold listing.....FYI. And your last statement is just silly, because the last sale is not the only data point that matters....... for example, a cgc 4.0 sold for $13K recently and a Voldy 4.0 sold for $17.0K. Now I agree that on balance the cgc market price is higher, but that's irrelevant to my point; that there are a whole lot more (data) points to be looked at. And since you're apparently so knowledgable on GPA (without a subscription, no less), then show us some sales that actually closed on ebay that GPA doesn't capture. would be happy to engage George to join this conversation. George will be the first to tell you that they don't capture everything. In fact, he gladly welcomes any new or different data to be brought to his attention if it was missed or was incorrect from any of the sources they receive their points from. Also, this 2.5 sale just happened yesterday: http://item.ebay.co.uk/252259773839?item_hash4=965bc96a&LH_Complete=1&LH_BIN=1&LH_BO=1&_ipg=200&_pgn=1&rc=nt&rmvSB=true And here's the 3.0 sale from earlier: http://item.ebay.co.uk/221929147545?item_hash4=8447b353&LH_Complete=1&LH_BIN=1&LH_BO=1&_ipg=200&_pgn=1&rc=nt&rmvSB=true So even accounting to the standard market fluctuations, and considering that a 2.5 just went for $10,250 (only $600 less than what a Voldemort 3.0 just went for), I doubt any CGC 3.0 could be had for less than the $12k-$13k. Just my opinion of course. -J.

That is utterly false. And good luck trying to find any CGC 3.0 slab for $300-$850 less than what a Voldemort slab just went for. -J.

Funny that it's not on GPA. It happens. I used to alert them to the occasional mistakes and oversights but I have since let my membership lapse. I suppose I should re-up for another year. -J. Or maybe the transaction price was below the BIN price? I double checked watchcount. $13.5k looks to be the price. -J.

Funny that it's not on GPA. It happens. I used to alert them to the occasional mistakes and oversights but I have since let my membership lapse. I suppose I should re-up for another year. -J.

Last ebay sale was for $13,500. That was a BIN and right before the holidays. Realistically if you can get one for $12k-$13k right now you're probably doing well. -J.

The balls are heavy with this one, they are. -J.

Yeah most are ugly. But just like other books that are hard to find people will chase them. Spider nuts mostly. -J.

No it is a competitor slab that typically sells for less than CGC in comparable grades. -J.

GPA says .... about $11K. Only in a Voldemort slab these days. -J.

I think I mentioned that earlier. If I didn't, then I should have. ....so just don't buy any of them then...? -J.

Flippity-do-dah! http://www.ebay.com/itm/AMAZING-SPIDER-MAN-688-PGX-9-2-J-SCOTT-CAMPBELL-1-50-LIZARD-VARIANT-RARE-/252266664793?hash=item3abc43d359:g:mzQAAOSw-zxWppX8 -J.

The covers are pretty clearly mostly conceptual. I never fault a publisher for trying something different , plus as Lonzilla said, they were in commemoration of Venom's 25th anniversary. People love them some Venom. -J.

+1 These guys (or really just the one guy posting under his various accounts) don't (doesn't) even realize how ridiculous what they (he) are (is) saying truly is. -J.

+1 Thank you for pointing this out (as obvious as it may seem). Sorry, no facts, just worthless opinion. Why did you create this shill account? Am I doing it right? If that's how you think then feel free to stop constantly trolling my posts. -J.