Jaydogrules

9 new 9.8's were been added between January 6 and February 17, 2015. That's an average of nearly 2 a week. And that's even before the fake price spike. This common book is neither "rare" nor "tough" in a 9.8. -J.

VenoMJ was a 1:50, on an under-ordered 50,000 print run book. The few variants that do stick are the ones nobody saw coming. Not so much the case here. -J.

That isn't even close to correct. That print is including the x retailer variants at 3000/1500 (plus whatever Midtown orders on those variants/10k/5k?) per store. Subtract those out and you have a general idea of the 1:25/1:100 variants. Furthermore, if a shop orders 74 copies, then they get 2 Ankas and 0 Hughes. The print run might be 100k in real orders, but only 500 or so Hughes and 3000 Ankas because of the way each shop orders. It isn't like Marvel just prints that amount because of the print run. I think people forget that a lot. This is incorrect. The variants' print run is indeed based on the print run of the main book. So 2000 for the Hughes is not out of the ballpark, as for every smaller mom and pop shop that didn't order enough to get even one, there are just as many big guys that order 200++ copies or more to get multiple variant copies. A book with a 200,000++ print run will have waaaaaaay more than 500 copies of a 1:100 variant out there, come on. There are what, 100+ on ebay alone right now? And at the end of the day, the print run of the variant is only part of what affects value. Scarcity on the market is the other. (thumbs u -J.

I sent him an email asking for condition on the books, but he has yet to respond. From the looks of it both the 667 and 678 have a couple tiny colour breaking spine ticks, but yes it is a rare (spidey) variant collector's dream. -J.

There's another one in an auction, mated with a 667 dell'otto and a superman. Only been seeing a 667 once very 3-4 months the last year or so. http://www.ebay.com/itm/331488977358?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT -J.

It's working! -J.

Jaydogrules, a buyer most certainly does have to have a relationship with the seller in order to be shilling an auction. You should pick a different word for what you are trying to accuse these two bidders of doing. http://ebay.about.com/od/glossaryofebayterms/g/gl_shill.htm Shilling breaks federal law. What you are accusing these 2 of doing is not breaking any such law. I did. I also said they were "conspiring" with each other to artificially inflate the price of the book. Which they were. I'm not trying to debate the "legality" of their actions or the technical terms of what they are doing. "Shilling" is generally understood (at least in ebay/auction parlance) as an auction with sketchy bids placed (by someone, regardless of whether or not the seller in that particular auction is in on it) to manipulate the price/increase the desirability of an item. This is also consistent with eBay's own policy on the matter. I also consider it "shilling" when someone clicks a "buy-it-now" with an exorbitantly high price tag with no intention of paying, for the sole reason of GPA spiking/market manipulation. (thumbs u -J.

I think even most casual shoppers know when auctions/prices have been manipulated on ebay at this point. And comparing this book to BA 12- another one with heavy market manipulation and false data being reported to GPA through bogus ebay transactions- is probably about right. -J. J, as you might remember, I am collecting the run. Since your prior post, I have kept my eye on e***3 on my other auctions as he purchased two of the 9.8 #1's you had the most trouble with. He has been active in several of my mid run, non key issues in Star Wars. He is currently outbidding me for issue #48 and jumped on the annual #3 at $140 on a 9.6 that I thought was over priced and never bid. This bidder looked very suspicious to me as well but they have continued to stay active in what I would consider very low interest issues in the Star Wars run that would have little value in shilling and continues to bid for some of those issues. At the same time, he is absent from several other issues. So it is somewhat selective as if they were filling a run. Don't get me wrong. I totally agree with you this was a large jump on #1 outside of the market trend and perhaps not sustainable. However, if you continued to monitor this bidder, it looks like a collector is going for a run here from the other auctions I have seen and the continued activity this same bidder has had across a set of low interest issues. I've actually watched both of those bidders from those sketchy auctions in a few other auctions as well. I saw them both participating in (and running up) auctions for #1 9.6's in addition to the 9.8's. Nobody has iron clad proof of their intentions either way, but IMO it does appear that those two bidders are attempting to steer the SW comic book market (mostly the #1's). -J. I do not really track the 9.6 auctions so I am not sure what is happening in those. Here is the summary of the current Star Wars 9.8 eBay auctions and e***3 participation: Return of Jedi #3 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #13 - 9.8 - bid - but not winning Star Wars #3 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #40 - 9.8 - not bidding at all Star Wars #43 - 9.8 - not bidding at all Star Wars #24 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #28 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #29 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #48 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #21 - 9.8 - current winning bidder These have multiple different sellers (some have the same seller). Many of these have a current diverse bidder list - so they are outbidding different people in different auctions. Clearly, they are very active in the Star Wars run. And yet it's interesting that neither one of them one-bidded any of the auctions for a 9.8, #1 that was more than $125 less than any of the other other auctions that they themselves ran up the bids on just a few days earlier. -J. J, to be fair, I think you could have taken the data either way (if they had purchased it or had not purchased it) and used it to support your theory that these people are illegally manipulating the market. I would add one word of caution. Shilling, as you know, is an illegal activity. It is also very specific. It is done to improve the outcome for the sellers. The buyer is a stooge. The seller is the lead criminal when you call something "shilling". In this case, here are the four active sellers involved with this person's current auction activity for Star Wars comics: ****(3033) 100% positive feedback ****(18484) 100% positive feedback ****(1038) 100 % positive feedback ****(617) 100% positive feedback I did not include the eBay names out of courtesy. In two of these cases, they are long standing comic shops selling on eBay with outstanding reputations across a very broad set of comics. The other two also have perfect reputations for selling comics (just not as long). I would be very leery to accuse such people of a crime with no other data then someone paid too much for a book - twice - and happens to be bidding on their items. I do not believe any of these sellers even sold the #1. Given this person's continued activity across a broad set of reputable sellers and issues in the Star Wars run, I think calling them "shills" is just not appropriate because it accuses a lot of innocent sellers of a crime there is simply no evidence to support. I think you are left with people trying to manipulate a market without a strong connection to the underlying, current sellers. To me, that does not make much sense. I appreciate your point of view, but the buyers do not need to have any specific connections to the sellers to shill an auction. Oftentimes those buyers shilling those auctions have copies of the books themselves they are intending to sell and are attempting to spike the market in advance. This is why you see so many sellers cancelling bids from sketchy buyers. -J.

I think even most casual shoppers know when auctions/prices have been manipulated on ebay at this point. And comparing this book to BA 12- another one with heavy market manipulation and false data being reported to GPA through bogus ebay transactions- is probably about right. -J. J, as you might remember, I am collecting the run. Since your prior post, I have kept my eye on e***3 on my other auctions as he purchased two of the 9.8 #1's you had the most trouble with. He has been active in several of my mid run, non key issues in Star Wars. He is currently outbidding me for issue #48 and jumped on the annual #3 at $140 on a 9.6 that I thought was over priced and never bid. This bidder looked very suspicious to me as well but they have continued to stay active in what I would consider very low interest issues in the Star Wars run that would have little value in shilling and continues to bid for some of those issues. At the same time, he is absent from several other issues. So it is somewhat selective as if they were filling a run. Don't get me wrong. I totally agree with you this was a large jump on #1 outside of the market trend and perhaps not sustainable. However, if you continued to monitor this bidder, it looks like a collector is going for a run here from the other auctions I have seen and the continued activity this same bidder has had across a set of low interest issues. I've actually watched both of those bidders from those sketchy auctions in a few other auctions as well. I saw them both participating in (and running up) auctions for #1 9.6's in addition to the 9.8's. Nobody has iron clad proof of their intentions either way, but IMO it does appear that those two bidders are attempting to steer the SW comic book market (mostly the #1's). -J. I do not really track the 9.6 auctions so I am not sure what is happening in those. Here is the summary of the current Star Wars 9.8 eBay auctions and e***3 participation: Return of Jedi #3 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #13 - 9.8 - bid - but not winning Star Wars #3 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #40 - 9.8 - not bidding at all Star Wars #43 - 9.8 - not bidding at all Star Wars #24 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #28 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #29 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #48 - 9.8 - current winning bidder Star Wars #21 - 9.8 - current winning bidder These have multiple different sellers (some have the same seller). Many of these have a current diverse bidder list - so they are outbidding different people in different auctions. Clearly, they are very active in the Star Wars run. And yet it's interesting that neither one of them one-bidded any of the auctions for a 9.8, #1 that was more than $125 less than any of the other other auctions that they themselves ran up the bids on just a few days earlier. -J.

I think even most casual shoppers know when auctions/prices have been manipulated on ebay at this point. And comparing this book to BA 12- another one with heavy market manipulation and false data being reported to GPA through bogus ebay transactions- is probably about right. -J. J, as you might remember, I am collecting the run. Since your prior post, I have kept my eye on e***3 on my other auctions as he purchased two of the 9.8 #1's you had the most trouble with. He has been active in several of my mid run, non key issues in Star Wars. He is currently outbidding me for issue #48 and jumped on the annual #3 at $140 on a 9.6 that I thought was over priced and never bid. This bidder looked very suspicious to me as well but they have continued to stay active in what I would consider very low interest issues in the Star Wars run that would have little value in shilling and continues to bid for some of those issues. At the same time, he is absent from several other issues. So it is somewhat selective as if they were filling a run. Don't get me wrong. I totally agree with you this was a large jump on #1 outside of the market trend and perhaps not sustainable. However, if you continued to monitor this bidder, it looks like a collector is going for a run here from the other auctions I have seen and the continued activity this same bidder has had across a set of low interest issues. I've actually watched both of those bidders from those sketchy auctions in a few other auctions as well. I saw them both participating in (and running up) auctions for #1 9.6's in addition to the 9.8's. Nobody has iron clad proof of their intentions either way, but IMO it does appear that those two bidders are attempting to steer the SW comic book market (mostly the #1's). -J.

Cap 1 does have the official first mention of the Inhumans' ancestral home, Attilan. Lots of neat nuggets in that book. -J.

It's working ! -J.

I think even most casual shoppers know when auctions/prices have been manipulated on ebay at this point. And comparing this book to BA 12- another one with heavy market manipulation and false data being reported to GPA through bogus ebay transactions- is probably about right. -J.

Agreed. But let the kids have their fun. And FWIW, Marvel getting Peter Parker/Spider-Man back is all the shot in the arm the franchise needs. That's why it's news. (thumbs u -J.

+1, Well said. Miles Morales is not happening. -J.

Congratulations ! Welcome (officially) to the club! -J.

So.... EoSV #2 is now "like" Action Comics #1, Showcase #4, et al? And not like, say What-if #105 or Marvel Spotlight #32? Or Ultimate Spider-Man #1? Not even AF 15? You know, the storyline it actually copy and pasted? And after exactly 1 storyline, four months, and 0 months of in-title appearances? I think we may have officially jumped the shark. And if not, the Ski-Doo is definitely revving. -J. It's a matter of time before the EOSV Grail is in your sig line now Jay -J.

So.... EoSV #2 is now "like" Action Comics #1, Showcase #4, et al? And not like, say What-if #105 or Marvel Spotlight #32? Or Ultimate Spider-Man #1? Not even AF 15? You know, the storyline it actually copy and pasted? And after exactly 1 storyline, four months, and 0 months of in-title appearances? I think we may have officially jumped the shark. And if not, the Ski-Doo is definitely revving. -J.

+1 Though with people trying to turn books with Brother Voodoo's, Rocket Raccoon's, Black Adam's etc. first appearances into "keys", I can't blame some for now mistaking Avengers 4 as a "mega key". -J.

Interesting that the same site had this to say over the weekend: http://www.comicbookmovie.com/spider-man/news/?a=115589 It also says to take it with a grain of salt. Especially since we know Feige is also producing the next solo spidey movie for Sony as well. They will not be dropping this unknown character with the name "Spider-man" into the next 4, 5 movies over the next ten years or so. Even in the Ultimate title they eventually brought Peter back. They brought him back out of Superior just in time for Amazing 2. Peter Parker is, and will always be Spider-Man. And he will be in the movies. I don't know how anyone could possibly or reasonably expect otherwise. (thumbs u -J.

Here's the original article: http://www.latino-review.com/news/marvel-no-more-origin-stories-starting-with-doctor-strange -J.

Found the article where I first saw that news: http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/nailbiter111/news/?a=106149 -J.

+1 Peter Parker is Spider-Man. Marvel didn't go through all this trouble to use a largely unknown miles morales. They've been champing at the bit to get Peter in their movies. And that's who Spider-Man will continue to be. Anyone who seriously tries to suggest otherwise has copies of UF 4 they're trying to sell. -J. Looks like the AF 15 club has made its way to the modern forum Nah I like Miles too. In the Ultimate title. Marvel has already said they're not doing "origin stories" in the movies anymore so they can (and will) easily drop a new Peter Parker into the movies without even skipping a beat. He's their top selling solo character in comics, and has carried at least one solo title for the past 50+ years. I think we'll see Miles Morales in a cartoon on TV long, long before we see him as "Spider-Man" in a movie. (thumbs u -J. So Ms Marvel, Black Panther, Deadpool and Dr Strange are just going to drop out of thin air? Can't speak on fox's plans for deadpool, but marvel has said they are just jumping right into the action from now on, as the "origin story" movies have become redundant. Whether or not they backtrack on that, who knows, but they do seem headed in that direction with Ant-Man even (at least judging from the trailers). -J.

+1 Peter Parker is Spider-Man. Marvel didn't go through all this trouble to use a largely unknown miles morales. They've been champing at the bit to get Peter in their movies. And that's who Spider-Man will continue to be. Anyone who seriously tries to suggest otherwise has copies of UF 4 they're trying to sell. -J. Looks like the AF 15 club has made its way to the modern forum Nah I like Miles too. In the Ultimate title. Marvel has already said they're not doing "origin stories" in the movies anymore so they can (and will) easily drop a new Peter Parker into the movies without even skipping a beat. He's their top selling solo character in comics, and has carried at least one solo title for the past 50+ years. I think we'll see Miles Morales in a cartoon on TV long, long before we see him as "Spider-Man" in a movie. (thumbs u -J.

+1 Peter Parker is Spider-Man. Marvel didn't go through all this trouble to use a largely unknown miles morales. They've been champing at the bit to get Peter in their movies. And that's who Spider-Man will continue to be. Anyone who seriously tries to suggest otherwise has copies of UF 4 they're trying to sell. -J.