VintageComics

We've tried for years. Inevitably someone will start another thread.

I hope ASM 2 crashes and burns so that they don't get rewarded for putting out a junk product. It's not difficult to put out a quality product. Marvel is proof of that.

Bad science. The movie sucked.

Goodness, I missed the significance of the clock.

Fully agree. I actually had tears in my eyes when Gwen passed, even though I knew it was going to happen. They still should have had it happen on the bridge. It made no sense that they went from the bridge to a building out of Tim Burton's Batman for that scene. It was like they were wanting to of the fans. The whole movie was a wasted opportunity. I did have a few 'throwback moments' in the movie where I felt like the director was trying to pay homage to the 1989 Batman movie. I can't remember which scenes but yeah, I was sure I spotted a few things.

Fully agree. I actually had tears in my eyes when Gwen passed, even though I knew it was going to happen. They still should have had it happen on the bridge.

Sure, if your idea of lame is beautiful women. Her look is not my type honestly. Mainly though my comments were geared to how lame she was a mutant. Rather have seen a real relative bad mutant we have all heard about. Thing is that not all mutants can have an amazing, special power much like all people are different. I thought it was actually reasonably balanced to have some mutants who don't have the ability to move the earth or destroy a stadium.

The problem is that the seller did not give a reasonable effort into this statement (which he made of his own volition). Yes, he could have dropped the negotiation after the first PM exchange but he didn't. He could have dropped it after the 2nd PM exchange but he didn't. He dropped the negotiation (which he had committed to) as soon as someone else stepped up. That's like a slap in the face. Personally (and I'm not a lawyer so anyone involved with contract law can speak up although I think at least one lawyer chimed in) I think in a court of law you could actually show that the seller did not honour his stipulation to hold the book until they could try to find an agreement. And I agree, it was a learning experience.

Agreed, and at this point the discussion is geared more towards how to prevent this in the future than to penalize anybody.

Sure, if your idea of lame is beautiful women.

I'm already on the record for saying DOFP is going to be good. I stand by that. My gut is generally pretty good at choosing movies.

GR 2 was on TV and I scanned a few of the scenes and then turned it off. Trash.

First class was amazing, except for that stupid pixie winged worthless girl mutant. She was the lamest character on screen ever. She should have just remained a stripper as her role in life would have made more sense. Are you talking about Zoe Kravitz?

The secret is to go into a movie and not compare it word for word with comics but instead look at it as an alternate universe.

Whenever I am at a convention, inevitably most dealers have multiple stacks of books set aside because they are 'On Hold" for so and so. We all know so and so doesn't buy all the books, they are just setting them aside to prevent others from buying them. I would hate to see this same technique employed in a sales thread. In this specific case I think the seller should have stated the book is Sold, not On Hold. There is a difference. You're talking about two very different things and you're bringing emotion into the discussion when it's clear cut that there was a written contract. We're not privy to why books are being held at shows or on the forum. Some are held as committed purchases. Some are held because people want to flip through the books, etc. Here are the rules as posted by the OP: In this case, based on the PM exchange posted, quadman78 was obviously fully committed to the purchase as he was willing to pay the full $10K. The only purpose of the hold was to a) figure out how to get that money to the seller b) how to get the book to the buyer. He was willing to pay outside of Paypal He was willing to have the book shipped to a US address. You'll note that the seller even encouraged discussion on payment / shipping / pickup options. Those negotiations were cut short unfairly IMO because both buyers were willing to fulfill those conditions. It just took a little longer with quadman78 - and based on the book being on hold, I'd have figured that quadman78 should have had a reasonable amount of time t speak his peace before being shut out. And again, it's important to note that the seller was the one that instituted the hold based on negotiation and the seller didn't fully explain. If the seller removes the hold before negotiation is complete it's a cheesy move in any negotiation, whether it's real estate, comics or anything else.

Except he did not decide to proceed because he was unsure, he decided to proceed because there was another sale waiting in the wings. Ultimately, quadman78 was willing to meet any terms necessary - that was the point of the hold and negotiation. The negotiation broke down as soon as the seller decided it was easier to take Rick's offer - which ultimately ended up being the same as quadman74's offer. In that case, the book wasn't actually held. It was just 'kind-of-but-not-really-held". Based on the fact that the seller was willing to negotiate, and that the buyer was willing to agree to almost anything the seller wanted (remember, price was not an issue they were simply discussing payment and shipping options), what would have been the right thing to do is to go to quadman78, tell him that he has an unconditional sale pending with shipping in the US and no Paypal and whether quadman78 could meet those conditions. That's what I would have done (and have done when in a position where more than one person wants an item). And again, this all happened because the seller stated that the book was being held to finalize a deal. If he hadn't stated he would hold the book then GAtor would have been the better choice. Without question I would have sold the book to Quad too and I disagree with the seller's decision. Of course I have but what does me being involved in 3rd party negotiations have to do with this case? As long as there are no conditions to a sale / negotiation it's open to anything. The seller placed the condition of a hold. He is obligated to hold the book based on his word until the buyer agrees that he can not meet the seller's conditions. The entire discussion pivots on the seller's commitment to 'hold the book while they try to meet terms'. As far as I can tell, based on what we know, there wasn't a real effort to meet on terms...if there was, the seller would have ultimately had the same terms from either buyer.

I get the gut feeling that this movie is going to be great, just like First Class.

The seller has every right to sell whom he wants to but the seller's word is binding. When he said this: He should have held the book until quadman78 couldn't meet his terms. That never happened. And it worked well. We just seem to see it differently. Quadman posted but he shouldn't have. He did need to work out details and didn't. Using a 3rd party is not "normal" by anybody's definition. Regardless of the likelihood of success it is still messier than a direct sale. The problem is that quadman78 was amenable to any terms the seller wanted. Those terms just weren't clear and the seller pulled the rug out before quadman was given an opportunity to agree to anything that trory140 said. quadman78 seemed to be willing to bend over backwards to accomodate trory140. trory140 couldn't be bothered to discuss it any further once there was another potential buyer in the house, took the book off hold (contradicting what he said about holding it until terms were agreed upon) and took the easy sale. If he hadn't put the book on hold, it would be an easy answer. It's the fact that the seller put the book on hold until an agreement was made that separates this scenario from any other.

I very rarely sell on the forums but isn't the right to refuse a sale to an interested buyer an understood stipulation across all sales threads here? The problem is that 'normal rules apply' is up to interpretation. What is normal to one person may not be normal to another person. I'm going to actually use a template to cover my selling rules from now on so that there is no grey area. It saves heartache for both sides and keeps the machine running smoothly.

correct The difference here is that the seller said that the book was place on hold (click the link) by the seller. Nobody forced his hand. It was done of their own volition. Selling/buying negotiations are always fluid until either one side or the other puts a 'stop' to negotiations. A stop can mean an "i'll take it", an agreement in terms, a hold or taking the book off the market. The way I see it, if a seller states something is 'on hold' then that is literally what it means. The book (and negotiations) are held. To me there is no grey area there.

I have a hard time understanding how 'on hold' can mean anything else other than the book is on hold. If something is on hold, it's unavailable, whether it's underwear on layaway or real estate. To me 'on hold' = temporarily unavailable. The seller had no obligation to hold the book but he did and so those words are binding. Or does someone disagree?

You say the movie stank, but gave it a 6? A 6 is passing in my book. It was an entertaining movie, and I am sure once people see it either a second time or watch it on TV they will come back ,and say jeez it wasn`t that bad or as bad as they say it was. I now look forward to your X-Men: Days of Future Past review, as I would be interested to see if you think that will be a better movie then ASM 2. Why? Because your point of reference I bet is much higher for X-Men because your a much bigger X-Men fan than a Spider-Man fan from what I gather. I want to see if this point of reference idea process has something to do with liking a superhero movie or not. A 6 is barely a pass and the only thing it had going for it was some of the web slinging, and of course Gwen. I was an X-men fan but my point of reference is not my like or dislike of the characters. I hardly knew any of the characters in First Class but thought it was a terrific comic movie. Spidey 2 was campy. Whenever I was watching Max Dillon I thougt I was watching a 1990's Batman movie. The story was not great (too many moving parts but not particularly well done), some of the special effects were cheesy (I thought Electro looked poor and there were a few instances where Spidey looked like a video game) and the science in the movie was cheesy. Overall, this move will do great for the younger demographic / teenage market but IMO that's about it. I might watch it again just to see if my opinion holds up but I have little desire to see it again. I'd put it a shade above Ghost Rider, which I have never seen.

Ok, that movie stank. Just sat through 2.5 hours of and cheesy -script. There were a few good action sequences but I wouldn't have gone to see it if I knew it was going to be like this. The Rhino blew chunks. Electro blew chunks (Batman Bale voice anyone?) and the Goblin blew chunks. Sorry guys, I'd love to love it but this movie was written with 17 year olds in mind. 6/10 (5.0/5.5 if unpressed)

Dynamic Comics #8 for sale.

That should be a 'must watch' before you can ever sign into an account for the first time. We also need a training on 'how to properly embed' - even for the older posters...., :think: Oh, I know how to embed. I did it that way on purpose as it takes up band width and slows the loading of the page down when it's quoted multiple times.