VintageComics

Only slightly correct, when customers switch printing plants (usually cause they got a better price) the new plant will want to impress the new customer with a higher quality product so they'll beef up the color to make a good impression. all that is true, but the visual difference has less to do with any extra efforts with inks or printing quality assurance than to the paper stock used on the covers that changed. The new paper handled gloss better. Hold a Captain Marvel against any earlier 60s Marvel and the difference is clear. I think that once Marvel came out of their restrictive 11 books a month restriction imposed in the late fifties when they moved to DCs distributor, (I forget what exactly happened there) and they started adding vigorously to their list of titles, they made a better deal with the new printer to handle the load and get a better deal with their new clout in the industry. Yup. 1950's and early DC's were very different than Marvels from the same era. It's possible that the DC paper didn't age as gracefully as Marvels (I think White page Marvels from 1962 in particular are not uncommon) but white page DCs seem to be tougher. But the DC paper stock seemed much stronger than Marvel's 'newsprint' interiors and thin cover stock. Marvel inks also seemed inferior during this era. I think the above reasons are why Marvels and DC's from the same era are graded slightly differently.

It's correct that in 1968 the quality of inks and paper changed dramatically, but early 1960's Marvels still had a lot of variation in ink and gloss quality. People say that early 60's Marvels are more scarce in high grade because people didn't collect them, but IMO early 60's Marvels are more scarce in high grade because the production quality was so poor you had a harder time finding a comic that a) didn't have Marvel chipping b) had a glossy cover that didn't smudge inks (inks smudged like bad on early Marvels and late Atlas books) 1961/1962 Marvels feel very different than 1964-1967 Marvels do. I think 1963 (or somewhere thereabouts) was a transition year where something changed, but I don't know what. I just know there was less Marvel chipping and glossier covers from 1964 on. Although some months did indeed have specific production defects like more Marvel chipping than others and some books are very well known for their respective production defects. DD #7 and JIM #112 being the two books that come to mind first.

Marvels also have varying paper stocks. For example, white paper is not uncommon for some Marvel books but very uncommon for others from the same era. Sometimes it just comes down to quality of the paper supply and which roll they used in a given month when those books were printed.

That`s simply not true. It's my personal opinion that CGC is tough on DC PQ. I sub a lot of raw books and while I'm pretty good with calling PQ on Marvel books, CGC always seems to be tighter on PQ on DC books I submit. I agree it's harder for DC books to get a White page designation from CGC. I've submitted SA DCs that had what I considered to be snow white pages, better than SA Marvel that I had gotten W for, and they came back OW-W. Mysteriously, when I sold them and they got resubbed by the buyer, they all came back as W. Having said that, in my opinion DC used better paper stock than Marvel, so I think OW or better is the norm, not C-OW. DC used thicker and stronger paper stock in the SA than Marvel, for sure, but the two different papers also change color differently, which is why CGC probably designates them differently.. DC books in the SA almost feel like early GA books in hand - the pages are bigger, the paper is thicker and the books are heavier.

There are two distinct chips from the interior lying at the bottom of the slab. To me, that indicates the pages are starting to get brittle. There are at least a half dozen chips off the bottom of the Back cover. Obviously, whoever owns it is afraid to send it back in for fear of a downgrade. In this case, the scans are not exaggerating anything. It is not a strong 8.0, more like a weak 7.5 . I would not be happy with this book at 20K. I don't know if people realize it but "Marvel chipping" is actually very common on 1960 and 1961 DC books (it seems to plague their back covers from what I've observed). That's probably what that chipping is.

That`s simply not true. It's my personal opinion that CGC is tough on DC PQ. I sub a lot of raw books and while I'm pretty good with calling PQ on Marvel books, CGC always seems to be tighter on PQ on DC books I submit.

You and greggy are my favorite groupies.

Just listed this beauty for sale in the SA/GA selling forum.

Yep, most big peds like the Big Apple Ped and the Crippen's as well were impossible to store in one place so books vary in shape (include smell). There were some extremely nice run books from the Savannah.

Vinnie from Metro sent me this video. https://www.facebook.com/thattickledme/videos/1185855618112498/

Pedigrees draw interest for various reasons. Some people are drawn to the backstory, some to the condition, some to just owing a Pedigree for any reason. And not all Peds are judged by the same criteria. The Allentown had a very small number of books (about 135 comics) but most were earliest keys and extremely high grade, so it was given the designation based on that criteria. Other Peds may not have as many high grade copies or as early of a selection but then breadth and depth are considered. The Savannah ped was a monster collection that IIRC I believe contained about 80,000 comics in total, so breadth and depth were weighed more than actual condition was. In the end, it's still an impressive collection. It's just not for grade snobs (although once you moved away from the earliest books the collection did have high grade runs).

I saw most of the key books from the Savannah collection when they first appeared. Shelton (from Heroes in Charlotte, NC) had told me about the collection when he first found it. He brought a couple of boxes of books for people to see in NYC that year. The BB #28 and the Showcase #22 were extremely nice.

You're not my type.

he goes to the south side we'll be reading about him in the obituaries. take him down around 49th & Cottage for a world tour. I should go and ask if someone wants to play a fun round of pickup basketball. I know where some big courts are on Ashland. Trouble is, they only way they'll be able to identify you is from dental records. Only 40 shot and 5 dead last weekend in Chi Town. I'll stick with playing with old comic geeks.

he goes to the south side we'll be reading about him in the obituaries. take him down around 49th & Cottage for a world tour. I should go and ask if someone wants to play a fun round of pickup basketball.

Is this some newfangled language I need to learn to be hep? (No-prize to anyone who knows the reference? )

I didn't say he was wrong. Only that a specific grade on the holder doesn't guarantee a specific price. Bringing the same book back on the market is really the biggest factor IMO. It happens with any book. If it keeps coming around and around people wonder why and lose interest.

Really? Most books have eye appeal and page quality (plus other qualities) as well as grade factored into the price. Would this one be any different? Strong books sell for strong numbers. That's always been the case.

I never realized I was in that video.

Jay, right now I don't know how / when we're getting in to set up so I can't promise anything. I was going to bring a small Zoom recorder with decent audio / video recording to record the set.

Or maybe the fact that the same book keeps coming back to auction over and over and over? Or maybe the fact that the back cover has several chips missing?

That and maybe gain a few pounds? Maybe....

Army boots and a tutu? Army boots, kilt and bare chested, Axl Rose style. I can handle GnR. Any 'Imagine Dragons' and I'm throwing recalled CGC slabs at you guys. Don't worry. I'm quite confident that you will like every song in the set.

Army boots and a tutu? Army boots, kilt and bare chested, Axl Rose style.