01TheDude

I rate this trash as a 7.5 purple label Crisp smell, good can gloss, minor blunting to lower left of the bin. minor amateur color touch used to inscribe "CGC" on both can cover and front panel.

was it you who threw up the picture of the Oscar Goldman doll, proposing we send that around instead?

Kind of glad I read all that stuff before it got scrubbed, though it did confirm some suspicions I have had for some time now.

not to mention pretty smart as the guy is more likely to trust you for the future sales.

The first time I found this the OCD kids are gonna flip out over the cabinets being out of sequence

that guy is going to need a really big tube of aloe vera

Love me some silver age drek!

those are awesome. what do you mean by "new cover"? Is it a reproduction cover?

cool I only have that one and the number 2 I bought off the rack. IIRC I also bought the Machine Man #2 at the same time. Never did see the #1 of either of those come out where I lived/bought comics-- could have been one of those issues that sell out fast because at the time everyone was so into finding #1s. Anyway-- so trying to read the story without the first issue was annoying. I recall getting halfway through and saying-- who is the monkey boy (moon boy)? What the heck is going on here? Sadly-- I still haven't finished reading either one since getting your copy. I barely started getting through a similar predecessor (Kamandi). But they are part of the Kirby collection that are the last things I intend to sell off if that day comes. It amazes me that the reboot with some moon-girl (Marvel is really stretching that character -- so innovative ) is pushing the original series. I also have a Machine Man #1 - but only one of them, so..... This "Marvelous" idea of retooling old Marvel characters with hip-new-diverse people is really getting old - already. Yawn. I picked up all the Kirby Machine Man copies that I needed (even wound up with a second #2 because it was in a lot). Have all the relevant 2001s as well-- those I actually had a decent amount of from the racks but somehow missed the first 5 issues. Took care of all that stuff while I was scooping up the DC Kirby stuff too. While I did get decent copies in general, I bought them more to read than as some sort of investment. I don't bother with the whole investing side of comics. It seems so random. I have used some under copies though got hot to help fill in runs of these books. Not sure what my main objective was there. I kind of dismissed the Devil Dinosaur and Machine Man when they came out other than a two single copies. Wish I had bothered as it would have saved me some time and money - 35 cents sounds like a bargain these days. It is some sort of reliving my youth phase or something. As for the reboot characters-- I have no desire to get anything not bronze or silver save the occasional copper important book that fits one of my favorite character runs.

ahh-- that must have been what happened to all the copies from my 7-11. Some other kid/adult came in and bought out the store before I got there. Oh well. jcjames hooked me up some 36 years later

cool I only have that one and the number 2 I bought off the rack. IIRC I also bought the Machine Man #2 at the same time. Never did see the #1 of either of those come out where I lived/bought comics-- could have been one of those issues that sell out fast because at the time everyone was so into finding #1s. Anyway-- so trying to read the story without the first issue was annoying. I recall getting halfway through and saying-- who is the monkey boy (moon boy)? What the heck is going on here? Sadly-- I still haven't finished reading either one since getting your copy. I barely started getting through a similar predecessor (Kamandi). But they are part of the Kirby collection that are the last things I intend to sell off if that day comes. It amazes me that the reboot with some moon-girl (Marvel is really stretching that character -- so innovative ) is pushing the original series.

are you talking about the one I bought or another one?

he still is using the word CGC and worst yet, took the phrase I had in my response to him and used it in all his title. what a sneak. Still gets the search hits for the CGC in the title. Maybe CGC will tell him to stop using their name in his title completely. I give up-- not worth the time to try to get someone to stop throwing that word around as if he OWNS IT.

My response: You cannot seem to understand that CGC is a grading brand name and you are representing the item you are selling as being associated with that brand name. That is not accurate. If I list some knockoff Zippo lighters as NOT ZIPPO in the title-- those ads still get pulled. You cannot use the name of the company if they didn't process the books and grade them-- you can not represent yourself as "using CGC grading standards" because frankly-- your titles do not say that. They imply these items are CGC and give a grade. You are not CGC and are inaccurately representing your items period. By putting that in the title -- even if you explain later in the description-- you are manipulating the search engines and misrepresenting the item in your titles. I guess the discussion is over-- latest (possibly last) reply:

latest response-- he is standing his ground: My response: You cannot seem to understand that CGC is a grading brand name and you are representing the item you are selling as being associated with that brand name. That is not accurate. If I list some knockoff Zippo lighters as NOT ZIPPO in the title-- those ads still get pulled. You cannot use the name of the company if they didn't process the books and grade them-- you can not represent yourself as "using CGC grading standards" because frankly-- your titles do not say that. They imply these items are CGC and give a grade. You are not CGC and are inaccurately representing your items period. By putting that in the title -- even if you explain later in the description-- you are manipulating the search engines and misrepresenting the item in your titles.

every book he is selling are raw except one that is CGC

no worries-- the right thing to do would have been to adjust the title. I was trying to give him a heads up so that he wouldn't have to relist each of those items. As we have seen in the past-- this board doesn't like inaccurate eBay listings and has reported them into oblivion in the past. Not that I am calling for us to do this to all but ONE of the listing this user has BUT basically-- they are selling only one TRUE CGC slab -- the rest are his "expert graded" raw opinions.

BUT wait-- there's more.... so I respond with this: "The reason people have a problem with your freaking description is that it FALSELY REPRESENTS YOUR ITEM AS BEING A CGC GRADED/SLABBED COMIC BOOK. Which regardless of your background, it clearly is NOT. " to which they reply with this: so I fire back yet again: "Ironic-- you cannot seem to understand that putting the words CGC in your title is the problem as it influences peoples search engines who are looking solely for CGC slabbed books. NO ONE cares if you did or didn't work for CGC at some point or that your grade is accurate. They do find your title misleading-- it is just that simple. If your item is NOT CGC -- you should not put the words CGC in the title at all." I don't know why I am doing this at this point. I don't care about the situation this much but the guy has some seriously warped ideas of how things can be listed on eBay.

I sent them a note that they might want to edit that title. well -- what do you know--- I got a reply to my friendly heads up. Apparently this guy has a canned response to anything resembling this type of "criticism". Never mind the fact that I wasn't the person who gives a or wrote the dang post. Nope-- why get all concerned about the FREAKING DETAILS of what is going on. this guy is just pure classic _________ --- well judge for yourself. they replied: Hey hammerhead--- the reason people have a problem with your freaking description is that it FALSELY REPRESENTS YOUR ITEM AS BEING A CGC GRADED/SLABBED COMIC BOOK. Some people don't get it. Avoid.

I think the writers will do a good job just like they did with the first season. You have to trust them to a certain extent. While Gladiator was in season one-- it was really just the origin of him if anything-- he isn't even fully fleshed out. Bottom line is good writing can accommodate a lot of characters-- just look at how well they did with The Flash so far-- and with many more characters being thrown into the mix. I have faith.

That would be the "no Number" #1? That book is rather common,so it carries a 50-100% premium outside of nosebleed grades. should this have been issue #37?

I sent them a note that they might want to edit that title.

the thing that pops out to me looking at the ad and the numbering is that they are using the last two digits as a year reference and the numbers before that to indicate the issue of their reprint series. so you should have a 171 through 1071 as seen in the ad somewhat. I think they kept using those sequential numbers moving forward based on other issues I saw with similar markings but replaced the 71 with a 72 --- as you will see a 4672 and so on. I just found the thread through the other thread and was instantly fascinated by it. I had to read the whole thing though before offering this response since it happened several pages (and years) before and I wanted to be sure no one else had already made that connection of the numbering.