Jaydogrules

First RAW copy of a Dell'otto 667 to hit Ebay in years. And this one is real: https://www.ebay.com/itm/The-Amazing-Spider-Man-667-DellOtto-Variant/153375873930?hash=item23b5ea1b8a:g:4B0AAOSwHOlcYxUH&autorefresh=true Anyone care to hazard a guess on potential grade? -J.

Dun and Dunner. Thank you! Cool books by the way.^^ Looks like CGC has notated the inserts, at least intermittently, from nearly the beginning. -J.

Especially in high grade. There was a 9.4 IH 181 with an MJI five years ago that was being charged at a significant premium even then that I kind of wish I had picked up now. Oh well. I would hazard that it is more likely that the early '70's NDS/MJI's have a greater likelihood of having been torn out, greater likelihood of being sold overseas, which may also explain their greater rarity. -J.

Yeah I noticed that typo too. Is it possible to correct the subject line after the fact? -J.

Yes $1100. If you go to watchcount.com and enter the item number you'll see. It was best offer accepted. -J.

It sold for $1100. -J.

1971-1973 with a couple months gap in there where they weren't used. -J.

Oh yes most definitely. The NDS inserts only ran for 2 years, before MJ's, with even a gap of non-production in there, whereas MJ's ran for two decades. http://www.awe4one.com/NDS-MJ Inserts/Insert webpage.html -J.

Daaaaaamn. These are impressive and the framing really does them justice! -J.

The one and only piece of OA in my collection. Still feel really blessed to have been able to pick it up directly from a boardie. -J.

The other one in the middle. -J.

Try again, sport. But congrats for real to Amber Heard for her actual nomination for one for London Fields. -J.

About $150MM-$175MM all in. -J.

Wow excellent haul. And oh, I believe I see one of my personal favourites in there towards the middle. -J.

-J.

Much like everything else beyond the standard, industry-wide accepted and utilized 50/40/25 studio split, the lot of these self-styled "industry insiders" are pretty much just pulling random-butt info out of the clear blue sky to make this movie "appear" more profitable than it really is. But it really is quite entertaining. -J.

You guys still describing Aquaman in here? Headlined by the the illustrious Jason Momoa and Amber Heard? #bigdumbbudgetandstillnettedlessthanVenom -J.

I think I'll stick to the industry-wide accepted formulae that is widely used for every movie to assess profitability. But thanks, and welcome to the boards. -J.

Oh yes that site is gangbusters. You'll find yourself using it on a daily basis. -J.

Oh damn for a minute there I thought you were describing Aquaman, lol, which also cost $200MM more to make twice the bad movie and profit half the money. -J.

I don't know. Why don't you just tell me what your point was when you cited two sales results that were days apart and ignored results that were hours apart? -J.

Lol I refuted your outlandish statement by citing the easily verifiable acting bona fides of the cast, I have nothing to reflect over. As to the first part of your comment, Yes I do. This movie is Part One of a trilogy. They did what they needed to do and while i didn't love every minute of it, i eagerly await to see where they take it with the talent they have in place. -J.

Uh no. A quick perusal of any of Deadline's film profitability charts immediately demonstrates otherwise. But yeah sure, every country in the world decided to give WB a sweetheart deal on Aquaman upfront because everyone was so sure it was going to flop its way to a billion ahead of time (despite all pre-release tracking). And frankly your assumptions about China simply sound patently absurd on their face. -J. PS: And none of this would change the fact that this big, dumb movie had a big, dumb budget.

"Turds"? Four time academy award nominee Michelle Williams? Three time academy award nominee and Emmy winner woody Harrelson? Emmy award winner riz ahmed? Your comments are so out of left field and ridiculous I can't even muster a response (other than this one, that is lol). -J.

Nothing. Like I said. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. -J.