VintageComics

Those files are both dated 8/29/2005, So I was right close!

I know that this is a common theory but it's far to simplistic to explain what actually happened. The 'collapse' (and I wouldn't call it that, I'd call it a correction) happened over several years but was most apparent in 2008 and without question there was more than one factor involved. Supply alone didn't affect prices. It was perception of supply as people were introduced to pressing. There was also a global economic crash in 2008 of literally biblical proportions and an increase in unemployment that nobody foresaw a) bringing more collections to auction as people needed to sell out of necessity b) reducing disposable income as jobs disappeared Additionally, there were several pedigrees and large collections found all within a short period of time (Rocky Mountain, Sucha News, Mound City and later the Twin Cities). Finally, there were several large collectors moving out of the SA and BA markets, some of which brought to market multiple copies of the same books mostly in higher grades. And all of these books were funneled through the new auction houses that Comiclink and Comic Connect and recently formed at the time, further increasing supply. So it was sort of a 'perfect storm' of several factors IMO.

Even when Ewert was pressing most people weren't. The first I'd heard of it was late summer 2004 (I remember the incident specifically) and the boards were not talking about it much if at all. I didn't hear about it on the chat forun. It was about 2005/2006 when it began to be discussed and known about more openly and then the NOD was formed in early 2006. THAT is when it busted wide open. By then, Ewert was out of the picture. I'm pretty sure the first time I saw those pics posted was after 2005 and some time circa NOD arguments all over the boards.

As a parallel thought, the Silver Surfer is about as iconic a person as you can get without ever becoming a true superstar. I get more compliments on my Silver Surfer #1 cover t-shirt than I do on any other article of clothing I wear, hands down. People recognize him and love the character and personally he's one of my favorites (as is the 1968, 18 issue run) and yet he had a hard time carrying a series. Interesting thought.

And you'd be pretty wrong. Back in the day, pressing was used almost exclusively in tandem with cleaning, or perhaps to realign a spine roll. The sole action of pressing for appearance was a real rarity. CGC gave pressing its lift-off and happily sanctioned it (even though it was considered throughout the industry as restoration) with Blue label validation. And why wouldn't they? It was an additional income stream for them as the $$$s started stacking up for those 'in the know' and the CPR cycle got really going. While it wasn't mainstream, in the decades before CGC we do know for a fact that at least 2 big time dealers (Marnin Rosenberg and .... - darnit his name escapes me - ) who brought 2 Pedigrees to market were pressing (and not pressing and trimming) books for profit.

Yup, and I stated the same when the entire NOD thing initially started. As much as their movement was a dislike and anti-pressing, all it did was increase awareness and therefore increase incidence of pressing. Like wildfire.

It's in a previous thread.

Wow, when I was like, 14 I used to think that was a great song and a great band.

I just want to say that I feel bad for ever pushing to give this guy a second chance. Unbelievable.

Hasn't it been common knowledge that Mark has been a consultant for CGC for several years now?

Ditto. (thumbs u

If if he is entirely innocent his life will never be the same again.

Supposedly a kid is sexually abused over a two year period from what the reports are showing so far. That's not even funny to joke like that. Hopefully the facts come out in this case, and whoever is guilty pays the price. Ouch. Just read this. Hopefully the truth comes to the surface.

Got a bunch of GA books in my selling thread including... A mid-high grade Baker cover, higher grade Funny Frolics #2 (Timely), a gorgeous Venus #13 and I'll have some pre code Atlas horror in mid grades tomorrow. (thumbs u

But without seeing the book in hand, it is indeed a hard thing to do. The poster made the comment that he did not like what he was winning in online auctions and would only buy books that he can see in hand. This makes sense to me. ? There's definitely things you can only tell about a book by seeing it in-hand (cover gloss, any NCB dents or creases, sometimes light water rippling) but I am thinking about flaws that some deem unacceptable or acceptable at a given grade level, that are easy enough to detect from a scan, like an ugly cut/miswrap, a noticeable dust shadow, that sort of thing. I'd add that although you can make mistakes on Clink and Pedigree because the scans are small and back covers are not offered, I'm curious as to why Comic Connect and Heritage were referenced because they offer ginormous scans and any defects that keep a book from 9.8 would be readily apparent in the scans (front and rear are offered). Additionally, loss of cover gloss, NCB dents and creases and water rippling would not be allowed in 9.8 grades (or at not to any degree that you could see with the naked eye through a CGC holder).

What do you base your opinions on? I often get into in person discussions about a slabbed book and hear comments like "That's not a 9.4" or "That's not a 9.8" and invariable most people expect a 9.4 or a 9.8 book to be absolutely flawless but they are not and never have been from 1999 up until now. I will agree that there are loose and tight examples of books that fall to either extreme (and you're going to have that with 3 MIL graded books) but for the most part, there is a reasoning or a rationale as to why a book is in a 9.4 or a 9.8 holder and it's extremely rare in my experience to see a 9.4 in a 9.8 holder. 9.6 'tweener' possibly, but not a dead 9.4. Do you have any scans of books that you feel are over graded 9.8's? If I asked you to describe the differences between a 9.4 and 9.8 would you? I assume you would. If I asked CGC the same question would I get an answer? I assume I wouldn't. I would describe what I think CGC allows in 9.4 and 9.8 holders. How does that relate to loudstone's opinion that CGC 9.8's look like 9.4 books in 9.8 holders?

What do you base your opinions on? I often get into in person discussions about a slabbed book and hear comments like "That's not a 9.4" or "That's not a 9.8" and invariable most people expect a 9.4 or a 9.8 book to be absolutely flawless but they are not and never have been from 1999 up until now. I will agree that there are loose and tight examples of books that fall to either extreme (and you're going to have that with 3 MIL graded books) but for the most part, there is a reasoning or a rationale as to why a book is in a 9.4 or a 9.8 holder and it's extremely rare in my experience to see a 9.4 in a 9.8 holder. 9.6 'tweener' possibly, but not a dead 9.4. Do you have any scans of books that you feel are over graded 9.8's?

Yup, whether intentionally or unintentionally (I think it was just a misunderstanding). Wolverine was definitely a star by the early 1980's and not just an ambiguous relatively new character like Human Fly but he was not a household name until the late 1980's / early 1990's. I don't think anyone was arguing that.

Well for Wolverine, it would be two, his series + the X-Men, but his popularity grew differently than characters in the 70's - He was a huge success in the early 90's X-Men cartoon and the video games and then the movies... There are kids who love that character today who've maybe never even read a comic. Deadpool is still a niche in comics. A HUGE niche. But one that Marvel exploits in a number of other ways (across the entire line variants, stop and start series). His popularity came about at a time when the way comics are published have changed. Plus I would imagine It's difficult to incorporate that character into regular continuity, because of his... Because of the way he's written. Remender did a good job with it in 2010's X-Force series, but I imagine it's a challenge. My point still stands though, that both characters are currently wildly popular (as in white hot) and they still can barely carry a single series each (two if you include Wolverine's team appearance in X-men although I believe he also had some short stories in the Marvel ?_?_?_?_? series (can't remember the name) in the late 1980's / early 1990's). So that does not seem to be the measure of a character's popularity any longer.

How many titles to Deadpool and Wolverine carry successfully (or have they carried successfully in the past)? To my knowledge Wolvie could only really carry one title at a time (and it restarted several times) and yet he is without question a world recognized character at this point in time. Same with Deadpool. I talked to a store owner in my travels and he said Deadpool carries his whole store. How many titles is Deadpool in? Honest question. I think that the rules that applied to Spidey in the 1970's and early 1980's didn't apply to anyone else.

Because comics were different back then, and there was none of this "mass overexposure to make a quick buck" that we saw in the late-80's and 90's. Marvel actually worried about ruining Wolverine by putting him in too many books and there was a moratorium on doling out his origin - keep him mysterious. In the 90's that all changed, and you're making the big mistake of using a 90's speculator mindset to judge a character in the early-1980's. That's what I think and why I said what I did (and asked what I asked earlier in the thread). I think.

Well Spider-man obviously.... had three new story monthly titles... wait, four if you count MTU... plus Marvel Tales reprints... Then... they had a SECOND Avengers monthly book (West Coast) before they ever took a chance on a Wolvie monthly series. They had a Punisher monthly book a year BEFORE Wolvie had a monthly book (and even started a SECOND Punisher book that coincided with Wolvie's monthly #1) Marvel had begun the process of milking it's characters. Wolverine just wasn't one of it's first choices. Cool, that's how I remember it too. I always thought it was crazy that Spidey had 5 titles at one point...but there were no other 'break out' characters up until that point. Gotcha. And yes, once the late 1980's hit it was mania all over the place.

Rogue was popular acc. to my memory but not most popular. That's how I remember it as well. Yes, Rogue was just another reason why the 1983 X-Men spiked in sales, not the only reason. She was hot tough. Avengers Ann. #10 became a key really quickly if I remember.

You people in the NW are always strange. Dude, this was in the Northeast - in NYC. My friend Richard and I who collected comics were big Wolverine fans by the time X-Men 100 hit the stands. I remember him lending me his Hulk 181 and X-Men 94 and me lending him my Giant Size X-Men 1. I'm just razzin' you. And time to buy the wife some more shoes. I'm going to send you a picture of her shoe racks in the closet. I think it's time to start raffling some off! I think we can have a garage sale with just the shoes mine has never worn.

I have a question... Was there another character that was exploited before the mid 1980's the way Wolverine and Punisher were (and Deadpool, Venom and Carnage later) by putting them in nearly every comic in existence at the time? If there were I'm not sure I remember them being pre mid 1980's. Is it something about the direct market or the way they received feedback that changed the way they marketed characters and supersaturated the market in the 1980's and 1990's that didn't happen pre 1985?