comix4fun

I agree that no new rule is needed. The items I placed in bold above, they aren’t just your personal feelings, they are basic black letter contract and transactional law. Nothing in stated “ no returns “ terms exculpate a seller from negligence. More than that sellers, regardless of “as is” “no returns” or other terms, must deliver the items purchased in the same quality and condition as they were when they induced sale and accepted payment. There’s no extra diligence required of buyers. Performance of the contracted behavior is what’s required of both parties. Buyers to pay in a timely manner and Sellers to deliver the items in the same condition as they were at moment of sale. A “no returns” policy doesn’t remove the performance responsibility on either party. Until the item is in the hands of the buyer in the condition promised, it’s on the seller. Lots of online sellers desire to have it be not their problem once it is in the hands of the post office or shipper, and I want a solid gold unicorn….we are both going to be disappointed. So, you’re correct, no new rule is needed…but for a different reason. Your personal feelings on transactional responsibly are actually global contractual requirements in the parties. It’s already covered. Sellers have to deliver what they promised, and if they fail, they haven’t performed their duties under the deal, and no policy regarding returns will shield them…especially in a case of negligent packaging or handling.

Same here. I used to pick up copies of the publication for everything, but that can turn into a lot of books, posters, t shirts, etc. So, I also stick with the oddball stuff. One was the Comic Shop News Winter 90 Preview that featured an O’Barr Crow cover. I’ve seen only two or three copies pop up online in the last five years. So, I made sure to get one. It was before the series became popular and not a lot of people kept the csn issues or collected them I guess.

I would have gone with “ doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing “

In 2024…megalomania has a very low bar for entry.

If I didn't have a cast signed book I'd be tempted. This is a great one!

😳 💩 👖

Thanks.

It should read "from one of the writers of the The Dark Knight trilogy who wishes this would get deleted from his resume."

Based on those pics, that exchange, his defiance, that packaging and his attitude....this guy shouldn't be selling anything through the mail, much less something as fragile and in need of care in shipping as comics.

Sellers.... regardless of protestations, thoughts to the contrary, or declarations in a sales thread otherwise...have the responsibility to deliver the item to their buyers in the same material condition as they sold it and the buyer bought it. If it becomes damaged in shipment due to seller's negligence or faulty packing and protection it is 100% up to them to take the item back at their cost, or at whatever level of compensation overall for the item and the shipping the buyer agrees to.

On the pile it goes.

all

I heard he's either funding a private island, or launching a national soft-serve chain that caters only to gingers.

When it comes to Fingh, No one else has Moorcock.

The clink one was a prelim.

I think I only included one pic …I’ll double check

Nice choices overall. I dig them all. And it's a fun thing, that doesn't cost a ton, with some nice history behind it. I like this one the best, probably because I know where the original is....

It's like those contests they used to have at Toys R' Us when we were kids...to get the DREAM SHOPPING SPREE.... I picture David...running down the aisle, filling his cart.... "X-Wing? Gotta have it" , "Trooper Costume? No brainer"......turns down the James Bond Aisle by accident... "Thunderball? Well, while I'm here, might as well...."

The Prop Sale Through Heritage..... https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/star-wars-x-wing-fighter-sells-for-3-million-auction-1235618361/ These were two of the pieces that he's publicly confirmed he picked up: https://entertainment.ha.com/itm/movie-tv-memorabilia/props/screen-matched-hero-red-leader-red-one-x-wing-starfighter-filming-miniature-with-articulating-servo-controlled-wings-and/a/7278-89464.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515 https://entertainment.ha.com/itm/movie-tv-memorabilia/costumes/original-screen-matched-complete-hero-imperial-stormtrooper-costume-from-star-wars-episode-iv-a-new-hope/a/7278-89463.s?ic4=GalleryView-ShortDescription-071515

Dear Lord....35 pages. Who's covering my hourly? Nobody? Well I can fly in without reading the first 32 pages, so I apologize if anyone hit these points. To get to where we can even attempt to discern who's on the hook for what, we'd need to know: 1) the full chain of custody of both the legitimate Hulk 181 and the MVS-amputated Hulk 181 from the time they sold on eBay (as a timeline benchmark to the last time they were in proper holders publicly documented) 2) the full time-line of the purchase of each book and if they changed hands at all in the time from the eBay sale to the time the MVS-less 181 went to CGC. 3) if this is all same person or parties engaging in this behavior, or unrelated parties. 4) that may help us to determine if there are two books still out there with the same serial number (i.e. the label and holo were faked) or this is the same original label placed with the incomplete book. THIS ONE is important as it opens a can of worms and adds dozens of questions. What I don't know if anyone mentioned is if the person who submitted the MVS-shorn Hulk 181 did so knowingly with the intent and mental state to create a falsely graded item, they have likely committed criminal fraud (of course), but they also have run afoul of the law on a federal level no less, it matters little that CGC wasn't the ultimate financial "victim" of their fraud. If (and it's a BIG "if" given how many links in the chain have to be confirmed) they committed an intentional action of deception, in order to induce another to act in a manner they would not have sans the deception, and they did so with an ultimate goal of financial gain with the deception as a necessary and indelible manner to reach that financial gain, and they used a telephone, the internet, the US mail system, or any commercial parcel carrier to carry out these actions they would be guilty of a separate count of wire and/or mail fraud for each call, communication, transaction, submission, shipment, or return shipment induced by their original action. This is likely far more serious a set of circumstances, dependent on the full fact pattern, than just the simple act of the person they eventually duped into buying the wrongly graded book. Again, apologies if this has already been covered. There's a lot we don't know but I see this as incredibly serious and, if the facts bear it out, criminal on a wide-range of offenses.

I WASN'T READY!

I WILL find that original art one day.

You've unfortunately stumbled into the "conversation piece/freudian double entendre" wing of my collection: